Open Source Software for Learning Object Repositories

1
Open Source Software for Learning Object
Repositories

• A Study Commissioned by the
• OnCore Blueprint Project
• Florida Distance Learning Consortium

2
Open source software is free!

• Not as in free beer

3
Open source software is free!

• But as a free kitty!

4
Todays presentation

• Brief overview of open source software
• Components of the study
• Typology of LOR implementations
• The platforms/applications
• In the trenches implementors views
• Final thoughts

5
You are using open source

• Apache
• HTTP server
• Lucene
• Perl
• Tomcat
• Linux
• Operating system
• MySQL
• Database system
• And more

6
Cathedral vs BazaarProprietary vs Open
Eric S. Raymond. The Cathedral the Bazaar
Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental
Revolutionary. 1999.
7
What is Open Source Software?

• Several characteristics
• Free to download and use
• Access to and ability to modify source code
• Licenses that govern use
• Free software is software that is distributed
  with a license that authorizes its users to run
  the software for any purpose, to redistribute
  copies of, and to examine, study, and modify the
  source code.
• http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PortalFree_Software

8
Open source definition

• Open Source Initiative provides a definition
  focused on ten criteria http//www.opensource.org/
  docs/osd
• Free Redistribution
• Source Code
• Derived Works
• Integrity of The Author's Source Code
• No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
• No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
• Distribution of License
• License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
• License Must Not Restrict Other Software
• License Must Be Technology-Neutral

9
For our purposes, OSS

• Is software that is available free of charge to
  download and use
• Provides access to the source code and allows
  modifications to the code
• Use and reuse of software and derivative work are
  governed by licenses
• Unfortunately, the license landscape is not
  simple
• See http//www.opensource.org/licenses/category

10
The study

• A review and assessment of open source software
  for use in learning object repositories
• Purpose
• Identify open source software (OSS) applications
  and platforms that are currently being used for
  learning object repositories (LOR) or could serve
  as a platform for such repositories, and then
  review and assess those OSS options according to
  a range of criteria.

11
The project team
Jill Siewert LIS Masters student
Samuel Muwanguzi Information Science Ph.D. student
Cadi Lusk LIS Masters student

• Background using open source software
• Using DSpace for a learning object repository for
  the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
• http//txcdk1.unt.edu/THECBLOR_v3/

12
Methodology

• Identified OSS platforms/applications to review
• Drupal
• DSpace
• eduCommons
• EPrints
• Fedora
• Plone
• Rhaptos
• Used publicly available information to develop
  reports on each
• Implementor interviews

13
Assumptions

• LOR landscape was straightforward
• Each platform/application would be used in
  multiple implementations of LORs
• Good instances of LORs using the platforms could
  be identified
• People associated with the platforms would
  readily review our compiled information for
  accuracy
• Relatively easy to solicit time with implementors

14
Learning object repositories
An E-Learning repository is a database that
contains useful teaching and learning information
that is available via the Internet. Users are
allowed to query the database in an attempt to
locate information that can help to explain and
clarify various topics. Tomer, 2008
15
Four core functions

1. An interface for adding content (actual objects
   and metadata) to the system
2. An interface for searching/browsing/retrieving
   content
3. A database for storing content
4. An administrative interface to facilitate
   collection management, configuration,
   preservation, and other activities

16
Four major components

1. A server, typically using Unix/Linux or Windows
   as an operating system
2. A web server (e.g., Apache or IIS and related web
   application tools)
3. A relational database (e.g., MySQL, DB2, Oracle,
   Postgres, SQL server)
4. Repository software

17
Typology of LOR implementations

• Digital repository application
• DSpace, EPrints, Fedora
• Content management system (CMS)
• Drupal
• Plone
• Hybrid
• eduCommons
• Rhaptos

18
Digital repository approach
19
CMS approach
20
Hybrid approach
21
DSpace

• http//www.dspace.org/
• Developed for institutional repositories
• Released 2002
• Current release 1.5.2 (2009)
• Operating System Unix-like OS (Linux, UP/UX,
  Solaris) or Microsoft Windows
• Database PostgreSQL or Oracle
• Web Server Apache
• Applications Server Apache Tomcat 4.x , Jetty,
  or Caucho Resin
• Programming Language Java, Perl
• Other Tools Apache Maven 2.0.8 or later, Apache
  Ant 1.6.2 or later
• Texas Course Redesign Repository
• http//txcdk1.unt.edu/THECBLOR_v3/

22
EPrints

• http//www.eprints.org/
• Developed for institutional repositories
• Released 2000
• Current release 3.2 (2009)
• Operating System Linux, Unix-like OS (such as
  OSX), Vista or XP
• Database MySQL
• Web Server Apache
• Programming Language Perl
• Language Box
• http//languagebox.eprints.org/

23
Fedora

• http//www.fedora-commons.org/
• Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository
  Architecture
• Released 2003
• Current release 3.2 (2009)
• Operating System Unix, Linux, OSX, or Windows
• Database MySQL, Oracle, or PostgreSQL
• Application Server Tomcat 5.5.26 (included), can
  also be run on any application server that
  implements Servlet 2.4/JSP 2.0 or higher such as
  Jetty or Jboss
• Programming Language Java
• Other Tools Apache Any 1.7 or higher
• The National Science Digital Library (NSDL)
• http//nsdl.org/

24
Drupal

• http//drupal.org/
• Developed for creating web sites and web
  publishing
• Released 2001
• Current release 6 (2008)
• Operating System Unix, Linux, BSD, OSX, or
  Windows
• Database My SQL 4. 1 or higher, PostgreSQL 7.4
  or higher
• Application Server Apache 1.3, 2.x or Microsoft
  IIS
• Programming Language PHP 5.2 or higher
• Joining Educational Mathematics
• http//jem-thematic.net/
• Penn State University Open Educational Resources
• http//open.ems.psu.edu/

25
Plone

• http//plone.org/
• Developed as a usability layer to work with the
  Zope Content Management Framework
• Released 2000
• Current release 3.2 (2009)
• Operating System Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, or
  Solaris
• Database Zope Object Database (built in)
• Application Server Zope 2.10.x
• Programming Language Python 2.4 or 2.5
• Open Educational Resources (OER) Commons
• http//www.oercommons.org/

26
eduCommons

• http//educommons.com/
• Designed to facilitate the creation and
  maintenance of OpenCourseWare projects
• Released 2001
• Current release 3.1 (2009) (3.2 coming soon)
• Operating System Linux or OSX
• Database Zope Object Database (built in)
• Application Server Zope 2.10.5
• Content Management System (CMS) Plone 3.0.6
• Programming Language Python 2.4.4
• Open.Michigan Educational Resources
• http//michigan.educommons.net/
• University of Notre Dame OpenCourseWare
• http//ocw.nd.edu/

27
Rhaptos

• http//rhaptos.org/
• Created to facilitate the creation and
  publication (both digitally and in print) of
  learning materials and scholarly works
• Released 2005 (although under development and
  implementation for longer period)
• Current release 2.0
• Operating System Linux (Debian or Ubuntu)
• Database PostgresSQL 8.2 and/or CVS Repository
  (to be phased out in future development)
• Application Server Zope
• Content Management system (CMS) Plone 2.5
• Programming Language Python
• Connexions
• http//cnx.org/

28
Technical features inventory

• Discovery
• Personalization
• Community and Evaluation
• Meta Tagging
• Content Upload Management
• Aggregation and De-aggregation
• Digital Rights Management
• Presentation

• Integration and Interoperability
• Installation and Support
• System Considerations and Specifications
• Platform Profile
• Desktop Requirements
• Training
• Documentation/Help
• Scalability

Primary and Secondary Categories
29
Technical features reports

• For each platform/application
• Overview narrative
• Technical features inventory
• Technical features comparison report
• Report structure can be used as guide
• Identifies salient features to consider
• Provides a structure for you to use to document
  your information gathering on OSS options

30
Technical features reports issues

• Used publicly available documentation
• OSS documentation problematic
• Typically no Sales Rep to send an RFI to
• Moving target of version releases
• Difficulty in getting reviews of our reports from
  key people in the development community
• Mixed results from the implementors we
  interviewed to review the reports

31
Talking with the implementors

• DSpace
• Wiseplus
• Drupal
• JEM
• Penn State Open Educational Resources
• eduCommons (Plone)
• Open Michigan
• NotreDame
• Eprints
• Language Box

32
Focus and function vary

• Storing and describing learning materials
• Storing metadata about learning materials
• Digital workspace for
• Storing and describing
• Authoring and publishing
• Reuse in new materials

33
Focus and function vary

• Continuum of content

Discrete Learning Objects/Assets
Full Courses

• Intended users
• Content creators
• Instructors and instructional designers
• Students
• Others

34
OSS choice drivers

• Mandate
• Funding agencies encouraged/required
• Personal/organizational preference
• Pilot project
• Quick and low-cost way to get started
• Flexibility and customization
• Financial priorities
• Allocate funds to course development rather than
  system
• System already implemented

35
Benefits of OSSNote Some platform specific

• No annual license/maintenance fee
• Community of developers
• Being able to follow what is in the pipeline
• Problems often well-documented
• Assistance when needed
• Solutions often quickly developed
• Access to the code
• Functionality can be expanded
• Modularity for extensions

36
Is OSS for you?

• OSS is free, but not as in free beer!
• Low-cost for out-of-box implementation
• Openness to open source
• Organizational attitude
• Central IT attitude
• Customizing and enhancing
• From simple configuration sys admin, look and
  feel, metadata choices
• To adding functionality -- programmer

37
Where are we with LORs?

• Do we know the problem(s) we are trying to solve?
• Are we identifying and understanding the problems
  as we do our implementations?
• Who are we serving?
• Do we make assumptions about potential users
  without really understanding what they want?
• These are questions that go beyond OSS

38
Final thoughts

• Options available
• Requirements should drive decision
• More projects than production systems
• Problem space still evolving
• OSS offers flexibility to address evolving
  understanding
• Sakai-like approach for a LOR-specific OSS
  solution?

39
Platforms/Applications

• DSpace http//www.dspace.org/
• EPrints http//www.eprints.org/
• Fedora http//www.fedora-commons.org/
• Drupal http//drupal.org/
• Plone http//plone.org/
• eduCommons http//educommons.com/
• Rhaptos http//rhaptos.org/

40
Implementations

• DSpace
• Texas Course Redesign Repository
• http//txcdk1.unt.edu/THECBLOR_v3/
• Wiseplus
• http//wiseplus.exp.sis.pitt.edu8080/dspace/
• Eprints
• Language Box
• http//languagebox.eprints.org/
• EdShare
• http//www.edshare.soton.ac.uk/

41
Implementations

• Drupal
• Joining Educational Mathematics
• http//jem-thematic.net/
• Penn State University Open Educational Resources
• http//open.ems.psu.edu/
• Plone
• OER Commons
• http//www.oercommons.org/
• Teach Sustainability
• http//www.teachsustainability.com.au/

42
Implementations

• eduCommons
• Open.Michigan Educational Resources
• http//michigan.educommons.net/
• University of Notre Dame OpenCourseWare
• http//ocw.nd.edu/
• Rhaptos
• Connexions
• http//cnx.org/
• Fedora
• The National Science Digital Library (NSDL)
• http//nsdl.org/
• Open Learning Exchange Nepal
• http//www.olenepal.org/about.html

43
References

• Susan W. Alman Christinger Tomer. Building
  Repositories for Digital Learning Objects
  Challenges, Issues, and Opportunities. 2008.
• http//www.sloanconsortium.org/conference/proceedi
  ngs/2008/1225838630264.pptx
• Eric S. Raymond. The Cathedral the Bazaar
  Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental
  Revolutionary. 1999.
• http//www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar
  /cathedral-bazaar/