1. Learning Object Repositories: a learner centered perspective Julià Minguillón Universitat Oberta de Catalunya EdReNe – 4 th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

2. Table of contents Learning Objects and Repositories LOR for Statistical resources Virtual Learning Environments Idealizing a LOR Our reality: DSpace Improving learner’s experience Open issues J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

3. Repositories Learning Objects Computer Science Pedagogy Information Science

4. J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain METADATA CONTENT Learning Objects (digital)

5. Learning Objects Main goals: –Help learners to acquire and develop a competence, skill, ability, … –Help teachers (and learners) to create new LOs Desired characteristics: –Small to medium granularity –Described according to educational purposes –High level of connections between LOs J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

6. Learning Objects LOs are diverse: –CoursesSCORM, LD, HTML, … –ExercisesPDF, QTI, … –ExamplesPDF, PPT, ODP, … –Multimedia elementsJPEG, MP3, MOV, … –SimulationsApplets, Flash –Source codeC, Java, … –DataXLS, SPSS, … –EquationsLaTeX, MathML, … –OtherCML, XML, … J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

7. Learning Object Metadata Proposed metadata scheme: IEEE LOM –9 categories including Technical, Educational, Relation and Classification –No required fields but plenty of them (> 70) –Can be “reduced” to unqualified Dublin Core But, what the □ □ □ □ is “5.4 Semantic density”? Who will fill out over 70 fields? What is the title of an exercise? J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

8. Describing LOs Only fill out fields that: –…can be automatically filled –…are needed for preservation purposes –…will be used for retrieving (i.e. author?) Establish two or three levels of metadata: –Minimum, mandatory fields –Desirable –Complete J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain Progressive

9. Repositories Two main goals: –Ensure preservation (keep the mummy) –Promote reutilization (show the mummy) These goals are somehow contradictory! (even if the mummy is digital) Institutional top-down position prevails J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

10. Traditional perspective Library centered: –Books, journals, works, …(mostly textual) Everything has a unique title Everything has one or more authors Everything has a creation date Everything has a source Almost everything is a PDF file Main goal: easily finding a resource by using a minimum set of common descriptors J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

11. Repositories Several possibilities: General purposeThematic Top-downBottom-up Institution drivenCommunity driven ContentLinks to content No discussion: open access J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

12. Case of study: LOR on Statistics Why Statistics? –Basic competences for the Information Society –Compulsory course for several degrees –Thousands of students each semester (≈ 4000) –Large collection of heterogeneous resources Known problems: –“There are too many resources” –“I don’t know how to start” –“I can’t link concepts and tools” J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

13. Our proposal From a teaching perspective: –Build a thematic open LOR on Statistics –Bottom-up approach (teachers) –Integrate the LOR into the learning process –Engage learners into using the LOR From a research perspective: –Learning by doing –Create better user interfaces for LORs –Analyze user behavior J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

14. Key factors for LOR success Three dimensions (McNaught, 2006): – Resources: what? – Actions: how? – Users : who? Why? (Margaryan and Littlejohn, 2008) User Centered Design methodology J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

15. Key factors for LOR success Genuine need of a community Enthusiastic promoters Clear direction and focus Feedback from the community Good management processes Open access Easy addition of new resources Critical mass Suitable granularity J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain ↑↑≈↑≈↑↓↓↑↑↑≈↑≈↑↓↓↑

16. Adopting E-Learning Three dimensions (Bates, 2005): –Methodological –Technological –Organizational Not completely orthogonal: interconnected LORs are basic infrastructure of VLEs J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

17. Virtual Learning Environments E-Learning is de facto web-based learning VLEs enable learner centered models Contents Servi- ces Users Learning Process J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

18. LO Learning Object Repository VLE User Interaction Data Mining J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

19. LD+ player user profile default itinerary LOR ontologies personalized itineraries LOs itineraries evidences Learning Process J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

20. Critical issues in LOR design Methodological: (Wiley, 2007) –Learning is more than just content Technological (back-end + user interface): –Learning is more than just browsing and searching LOs Organizational: –Workflow, licenses, metadata, policies, … J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

21. What users want from a LOR More exercises and examples (55.7%) More simulations and interactive LOs (36.7%) Submitting questions about a LO (50.6%) Ranking LOs (43.0%) Correcting small mistakes (41.8%) Adding the LO as favorite (36.7%) by using: –delicious (11.4%) –Other (51.9%) –None (26.6%) Nothing: just browsing and searching (16.4%) J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

22. Ideal LOR Basic premise: the act of browsing and/or searching for resources should be a learning experience in itself –LOs are not isolated pieces –“Developing” requires knowing “from” and “to” –Users should be able to organize LOs –Connectivism (Siemens, 2005) Ideal UI: conceptual map + “social layer” J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

23. Ideal LOR Basic premise: once a LO has been found, learners should be able to –Rate –Make comments / questions –Make favorite –Share –Subscribe The LO becomes part of learner’s context J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

24. System architecture Social layer PIM LOR PIM UI J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain LO Services

25. Enhancing DSpace Main idea: –Use DSpace as an invisible back-end –Access LOs through persistent handles –Create a new user interface –Add 2.0 functionalities, maybe 3.0 –Gather and analyze usage data Goal: allow learners to take control over LOs without using DSpace directly J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

26. DSpace pros and cons Pros: –Solid, stable –Large community –Persistent handles –Preservation –Customizable –OAI PMH –API, RSS Cons: –Ugly user interface –1.0 philosophy –Dublin Core –Multilingualism –Intricate –Mainly for e-prints Why DSpace? → already in use at UOC J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

27. Improving interaction Avoid Google-like searches Contextualized browsing Refine search results while being built Return only a few relevant LOs Visualize related LOs Allow learners to use web 2.0 services Widget-ize available services J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

28. Three complementary elements: –List of competences –Tag cloud of keywords –Visual taxonomy Additional filters: –Resource type –Language LO New user interface Ontology LO J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

29. mean variance proportion LO Student’s t test box-plot LO test J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain To compare two means To choose a test To compute a coefficient... x□ □□ □x x□ □ □ □□□□□

30. Open issues IEEE LOM vs Dublin Core and OAI PMH Filter and then find vs find and then filter Use of upper ontologies for describing LOs Combining thematic repositories Multilingualism: UI, content and metadata Usability, accessibility and mobility issues Ideas, people and funding are welcome!!! J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

31. References and bibliography Bates, A.W. (2005). Technology, E-learning and Distance Education, Routledge. Margaryan, A. and Littlejohn, A. (2008). Repositories and communities at cross-purposes: issues in sharing and reuse of digital learning resources. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 333-347. McNaught, C. (2006). Are Learning Repositories Likely To Become Mainstream In Education? In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies, Setubal, Portugal, 11-13 April, IS9-IS17. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 2(1), 3–10. Wiley, D. (2007). Content is infrastructure. Terra incognita. Available at http://blog.worldcampus.psu.edu/index.php/2007/10/03/content-is-infrastructure/ McGreal, R. (2004). Learning Objects: A Practical definition. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(9). Monge, S.; Ovelar, R.; Azpeitia, I. (2008). “Repository 2.0: Social Dynamics to Support Community Building in Learning Object Repositories“. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects (formerly IJKLO), 4. Thomas, A. and Rothery, A. (2005). Online repositories for learning materials: the user perspective. Ariadne, 45. Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue45/thomas-rothery/ J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain

32. Thank you! Contact information: Julià Minguillón jminguillona@uoc.edu CC-BY-NC-SA http://www.slideshare.net/jminguillona J. Minguillón EdReNe – 4th Strategic Seminar, March 24th - March 26th 2010, Barcelona, Spain