1. Metadata for OBJECTS or metadata for LEARNING? Tom Boyle Learning Technology Research Institute (LTRI) London Metropolitan University Metadata Workshop Leuven Feb 7 2008

2. A user’s perspective on metadata

3. How (future) metadata might contribute to improving the effectiveness of learning The ultimate concern from the users’ perspective The human users – Teachers, Learners Managers Designers of learning events/resources

4. User’s perspective What does metadata promise? What does metadata deliver? – Claims/aspirations made for first generation metadata – Critique of present metadata especially on ‘learning’ dimension – What might metadata do in the future? – What should be represented and how? Who needs to be involved?

5. A major problem in the past is that metadata has been primarily about objects – not about learning learning object metadata will always be limited unless we have a more sophisticated understanding about learning that can be and is captured in metadata

6. UK LOM Core - example UK LOM Core - May 2004 (CETIS) Educational metadata section “This category describes the key educational or pedagogic characteristics of this learning object.” “ This is the pedagogical information essential to those involved in achieving a quality learning experience. The audience for this metadata includes teachers, managers, authors and learners”

7. Interactivity Type “Until the vocabulary for this element is used more widely by educators it will remain relatively obscure and therefore can not be mandatory. Further work is required to develop an understanding of this element and its common usage”. Learning Resource Type “Use of the LOM…vocabulary is problematic” Interactivity Level “Until the vocabulary for this element is used more widely by educators it will remain relatively obscure and therefore can not be mandatory.”

8. Semantic Density “At the moment it is difficult to see how this element could be used effectively” “Until the vocabulary in this element is used more widely by educators it will remain relatively obscure and therefore can not be mandatory. Work is required to develop an understanding of this element and its common usage. Difficulty “At the moment effective use of this element is problematic…”

9. UK LOM Core “ This is the pedagogical information essential to those involved in achieving a quality learning experience. The audience for this metadata includes teachers, managers, authors and learners”

10. Not very useful The educational metadata is not very useful and even if it was It is not very accessible, e.g. “Language This is distinct from 1.3 General. Language. For example, in a metadata record describing an object designed to support the teaching of French to English speakers, 1.3 General. Language would be 'fr' and 5.11 Educational. Language would be 'en-GB'. That is, it is a resource in French designed to be used by a student whose first language is English.” Usefulness and accessibility

11. We need metadata that is … more educationally meaningful and more accessible to “users”

12. We also need authors who are more interested/concerned about how to make their resources reusable. They need to be prepared to make the effort to make their resources accessible to others and not just to the person/group who created it in the first place. We need a dialogue that goes in both directions… Example: demo from RLO-CETL repository

13. Critique: a case study – JORUM  JORUM – UK National Repository –not well used –very variable quality –no community of practice (CD-LOR project)  IPR barriers  It fails to achieve the vision

14. What might metadata do in the future?

15. The power of the meta-verse Photosynth and Seadragon Blaise Aguera y Arcas

16. Why is this possible?  Camera (machine, essentially a computer) produces metadata  People produce metadata  An underlying conceptual representation of the world than enables the linking of information to create emergent properties and entities

17. People produce metadata  Social tagging and folksonomies  The long tail phenomenon  CoPs –but traditional repositories have not been very successful in this (e.g. CD-LOR project)  Contextual metadata - metadata about use and integration  Need to make this ‘natural’ and provide as much (unobtrusive) machine help as possible

18. Underlying conceptual representation – a preliminary view An underlying conceptual representation of the world than enables the linking of information to create emergent properties and entities  Need to create a dialogue between different traditions  Traditional formal, content oriented approaches  Learning design oriented approaches  Need a rich dialogue but some suggested linkage points are …

19. A preliminary view: mapping the learning object space ObjectPattern Complex Base Raw Packaged The Learning Object Cube - LOC

20. Undifferentiated “learning objects” Packaged Instance Pattern Base Holo Raw Def: “a learning object as any entity that … may be used in learning” …. IEEE LOM

21. Articulating the vertical dimension- different levels of learning …….

22. Packaged Instance Pattern Base Holo Raw Content aggregation models

24. Learning content aggregation models Alocom Aggregation Larger objective Single objective Content objects Content fragments

25. Articulating the vertical dimension- different levels of design …….

26. Layered learning design? Course Session Activity Learning object Each layer provides services to the layer above JISC D4L (2007)

27. Layering correspondence? Assets Design Courses Sessions Aggregation Larger objective Single objective Content objects Content fragments Content ? Learning object Component

28. Relationship on IMS LD to learning objects There is a shortcircuiting of the design space Generative learning object layer Develop layering model of design space Explore correspondences between design layers and content aggregation levels IMS Learning Designs Learning objects

29. Some fundamental challenges  Develop a comprehensive and sophisticated articulation of the conceptual space  Explore the relationship between content aggregation models and layered learning design (part-of, component-of relationships)?  Treat objects as instances of learning designs ( is-a relationships)  Begin to develop a meaningful representation of the learning object/entity/design space Raw ObjectPattern Holo Base Packaged

30. Summary What needs to be captured? –meaningful information on ‘learning’ as well as ‘objects’ –This is a significant challenge Who needs to be involved? –Metadata experts –Users: teachers and learners –Learning design experts  What can be achieved?  How can it be done – open for further discussion