Canadian Core Learning Resource Metadata Application Profile

1
Canadian Core Learning Resource Metadata
Application Profile

• Norm Friesen
• norm.friesen_at_ualberta.ca
• www.cancore.org

2
Overview

• What is Metadata
• Rationale for CanCores development
• CanCores place in standards evolution
• Understanding of Learning Objects
• Repositories, Alliances and Support
• Future of CanCore

3
What is Metadata?

• Data about data
• A way of structuring and sharing descriptions

4
A new vision for Educational Applications

• "stand-alone applications are incompatible with
  typical production, distribution, and usage
  patterns for educational software."
• J. Roschelle, et.al.

5
Educational Object Example

• Content

• Pedagogical purpose to augment learning about
• Paris
• 1839
• Urban environments
• Architecture
• Daguerre
• Photography
• Daguerreotypes

Granularity an object can be a course, unit,
lesson, image, Web page, exercise, image,
multimedia clip but it must have a specified
pedagogical purpose
6
Approaches to Learning Objects

• Context provided by technical specifications
• SCOs (SCORM)
• RLOs (Cisco)
• Context provided by pedagogical practice
• CAREO
• MERLOT

7
CanCore and Repositories

• CAREO and Alexandria Repositorieshttp//careo.net
  era.ca
• Alberta Learning Portalhttp//www.edusplash.net/
  
• POOL/Splashhttp//www.edusplash.net/
• MERLOT http//www.merlot.org

8
Rationale

• Repository projects in Canada and elsewhere
• Realize economy of scale by coordinating the
  implementation and interpretation of metadata for
  learning objects (and other e-learning
  specifications)
• Canada population of California in the country
  with the 2nd largest land mass used to working
  together

9
Rationale Simplicity

• IMS leading educational metadata specification
• IMS Metadata Model too complicated for effective
  implementation
• Many vendors have expressed little or no
  interest in developing products that are
  required to support a set of meta-data with over
  80 elements
• Best Practices and Implementation Guide, IMS,
  2000

10
Rationale Simplicity, cont

• Solution core set of IMS elements most important
  for exchangeable resource descriptions
• Mid-way between structuralist (IMS) and
  minimalist (Dublin Core) approaches to metadata

11
Rationale Specificity

• Effective implementation requires a consistent
  interpretation of each elements purpose and use
• Best accomplished through
• Close consultation with development community
• guidelines document

12
Rationale Examples

• IMS Element 5.4 Semantic Density subjective
  measure of the learning object's usefulness as
  compared to its size or duration
• omitted in CanCore
• IMS Element 1.2 TitleLearning Object's name.
• Word order, subtitles, multilingual titles,
  series/episode titles
• IMS Classification Element Group Description of
  a characteristic of the resource by entries in
  classifications.
• CanCore seeking coordinated definition of
  classification uses, purposes, and vocabularies
  e.g. for object granularity, accessibility

13
Rationale Semantics

• E-learning specifications community is largely
  concerned with syntax and technical
  interoperation
• Effective metadata requires semantic
  specification and consensus
• Incorporate best practice from library and
  heritage communities
• No other body is doing this across e-learning
  projects

14
CanCore Element Groups Numbers

• General (7)
• LifeCycle (4)
• Metametadata (6)
• Technical (7)
• Educational (5)
• Rights (3)

• Relation (2)
• Annotation (omitted)
• Classification (7 x 2)
• Discipline (i.e. subject)
• PedagogicType (i.e. granularity)

15
Rationale Overview
Complexity decreases
IMS Metadata Information Model appx. 80
elements, little interpre-tation
Implementation CanCore - CAREO
Specificity and Interoperability increases
16
CanCore as an Application Profile

• Data elements drawn from one or more
  specifications optimized for particular
  implementations
• Emphasis on tighter constraints on definitions
  and acceptable values, and on re-use of
  specification work
• Rachel Heery, UK
• Makx Dekkers, EU, Dublin Core
• Jane Hunter, Australia

17
Approaches to Learning Objects

• Context provided by technical specifications
• SCOs (SCORM)
• RLOs (Cisco)
• Context provided by pedagogical practice
• CAREO
• MERLOT

18
Educational Object Example

• Content

• Pedagogical purpose to augment learning about
• Paris
• 1839
• Urban environments
• Architecture
• Daguerre
• Photography
• Daguerreotypes

Granularity an object can be a course, unit,
lesson, image, Web page, exercise, image,
multimedia clip but it must have a specified
pedagogical purpose
19
Learning Objects Granularity

• Smaller
• Easier reusability and adapability
• More difficult discovery and metadata creation

• Larger
• Easier discovery and metadata creation
• More difficult reusability and adaptibility

20
CanCore and ADL-SCORM

• Different definitions of educational objects
• Many specifications referenced and combined vs.
  just metadata
• Public education vs. training emphases

21
CanCore and Repositories

• CAREO and Alexandria Repositorieshttp//careo.net
  era.ca
• Alberta Learning Portalhttp//www.edusplash.net/
  
• POOL/Splashhttp//www.edusplash.net/
• MERLOT http//www.merlot.org

22
Support

• Industry Canada (via the Netera Alliance)
• CAREO (Campus Alberta Repository of Learning
  Objects)
• Alberta Learning
• TeleCampus.edu
• Electronic Text Centre at UNB

23
CanCores Future

• Completion and Promotion of CanCore guidelines
  document
• Hope to provide similar (implementation)
  assistance to implementers in other
  specifications work (e.g. metadata harvesting)
• Looking internationally for collaboration
  opportunities
• Looking to establish a permanent office, possibly
  in Canadas National Research Council

24

• Find out more about
• CanCore at
• www.cancore.org