Www.cetis.ac.ukDublin Core Metadata Initiative Conference,3-6 Oct. 2006 Vocabularies for describing pedagogical approach in e-learning: a scoping study

www.cetis.ac.uk Dublin Core Metadata Initiative Conference,3-6 Oct. 2006

Vocabularies for describingpedagogical approach in e-learning:

a scoping study

Sarah Currier, Intrallect LtdSheila MacNeill, CETIS, University of Strathclyde

Lisa Corley, CETIS, University of BoltonLorna Campbell, CETIS, University of Strathclyde

Helen Beetham, JISC Consultant


Outline• Acronym soup• Overview of project (2)• Scope of project (2)• Emerging needs in e-learning (5)• Summary of requirements (1)• Current landscape (12)• Developing vocabularies (2)• Recommendations (2)• Since the project finished (1)


Acronym soup: JISC & CETIS

• Joint Information Systems Committee

• Centre for Educational Technology & Interoperability Standards


Overview of project (1 of 2)

• Short review only: Aug.-Dec. 2005• CETIS Project with expert Working Group• Project Manager- Lorna Campbell; Senior Research Fellow- Sarah Currier• 24 Dec. 2005: 2 reports completed with recommendations to JISC


Overview of project (2 of 2)Scoping the potential for development and use of one

or more pedagogical vocabularies for the UK post-16 educational communities:

1. Reviewing existing vocabularies relevant to the UK post-16 and HE education sectors

2. Reviewing technologies for capturing, developing and managing vocabularies, including relevant standards and specifications, tools, and methodologies

3. Making recommendations on:• further development work in this area• how further work could be linked with related JISC work,

e.g. e-learning and pedagogy strand


Scope (1 of 2)

Pedagogy = “The art, occupation, or practice of teaching. Also: the theory or principles of education; a method of teaching based on such theory.”

Vocabulary = “The range of language of a particular person, class, profession, or the like.”

- OED 2005


Scope (2 of 2)• This project was NOT developing a pedagogical

vocabulary• Broad review, gathering information in one place

for those for whom vocabularies are NOT their area of expertise

• Not JUST an inventory of controlled vocabularies; reviewing all vocabularies used to describe pedagogy, including informal, because:

Controlled vocabularies for interoperability must reflect vocabularies in informal use

in teaching and learning


Emerging needs in e-learning (1 of 5)

1. The learning object economy

- International interest in the sharing, reuse and repurposing of learning objects …- … in describing and sharing information about the sequencing of learning objects, the educational context within which they are used, and the educational purpose that they may fulfil ... - … also from the angle of describing, specifying and sharing interoperable learning activity designs.



2. Learning design and IMS Learning Design (1 of 3)

- ‘Learning design’ has brought focus on learner activities, rather than on content or administrative aspects of e-learning- IMS Learning Design: XML specification for expression of learning activity designs, so that they may be delivered and shared across a range of platforms - A number of systems supporting ‘learning design’ and IMS Learning Design have been in development …-Emergent need for vocabularies to describe designs




Vocabularies for ‘learning design’ and IMS LD must:a) Focus on learning activities, rather than on broad approaches to or theories of learning;b) Identify and articulate (at least) the following elements:

- Type of learning activity- Desired learning outcomes - Learning systems or services required in the

activity- Other aspects of the learning environment- Roles of participants in the learning activity.

c) Reflect common usage among those educational practitioners who are likely to be developing and exchanging learning designs.




“These requirements make clear the need for new conceptions of learning object meta-data, and new ways of using repositories—not just for search and retrieval, but as a living, growing body of shared practice.” – Philip and Dalziel, 2003.



3. Teachers as stakeholders

- … need to describe common practice so that resources can be shared across their communities …- … tools must reflect the real needs of teachers.

However:-The models of practice used by e-learning specialists do not necessarily relate to models used by teachers.-Many teachers do not describe their teaching approaches with the formal terms used by educational researchers.


Summary of requirementsRequirements for pedagogical vocabularies are clearly broader than the need for good quality

metadata:a) Application and tool developmentb) Personalisation - of content, tools, and teaching and learning environments according to pedagogical preferences, styles and principles. c) Articulation – shared pedagogical vocabularies can help teachers and learning technologists to reflect on their practice and discuss it in coherent terms.d) Cross-domain communication –bridge between system developers, learning technologists, educational developers, teachers and learners. e) Resource description and discoveryf) Conceptual modelling for learning design domain


Devil’s advocate slide

“The 121 pages that comprise the first two survey reports […] seem hardly to justify the tepid seven-page ‘Recommendations’ document that follows. Study study study, disseminate more study, pilot a bit, repeat. Sorry guys, I wish I could be more enthusiastic about this; I want to take succour in the belief we can control the growing chaos, find sense through old patterns and methods, but you know what, I can’t do it any more, I have seen the light, and this is not it.” – Scott Leslie, EdTechPosthttp://www.edtechpost.ca/mt/archive/000738.html

http://www.edtechpost.ca/mt/archive/000738.html


Current landscape (1 of 12)Metadata standards and pedagogical

vocabularies1. IEEE LOM - Has element category: 5. Educational, includes 5.2

Learning Resource Type, which has some pedagogical vocabulary terms such as “lecture”.

- Has element category 9. Classification which supports the use of controlled vocabularies; could be used for pedagogical approach but isn’t much used in this way at present.

2. Dublin Core- DC-Ed AP has element Instructional Method, which

recommends use of a controlled vocabulary; looking at defining GEM educational vocabularies including Teaching Method.


Current landscape (2 of 12)IMS Learning Design and pedagogical

vocabularies

- IMS LD provides elements within which relevant vocabularies could be recommended or specified.

- Some projects have used or adapted existing pedagogic vocabularies, others have set out to develop and test their own.

- Difficulty identifying existing vocabularies that meet the requirements noted previously.

- IMS LD elements focus on learning activity as the basic unit of description; implies a logical structure to the description of learning that differs from the rationale behind many existing vocabularies.


Current landscape (3 of 12)KOSs for education as subject/discipline in UK

- UK DfES simultaneously reviewed controlled vocabularies for the education sector

- British Educational Thesaurus recently carried out strategic development and planning work

- However, it is not yet clear how, or even if, any pedagogical vocabularies developed within e-learning will relate to subject vocabularies covering education as a discipline

- Mutual communication across these groups is already in place.


Current landscape (4 of 12)Inventory of pedagogical vocabularies (1 of 9)

1. Descriptions of models of educational theory and practice;

2. Knowledge organization tools for education as a discipline;

3. Universal vocabularies with significant educational sections;

4. Assessment vocabularies;5. Medical education vocabularies;6. Folksonomies.



- Vocabularies described using schema derived from Section 4.4: Use of LOM for Describing Vocabularies from CEN Working Agreement 14871 (schema described in paper and in full report);

- Used information immediately available; not much time for in-depth research!;

- Some vocabularies in first section are not KOSs so the schema was not used to describe these (e.g. Bloom’s Taxonomy);

- This paper focuses on the first three groups.



1. Models of educational theory and practice

- Not controlled vocabularies in traditional sense

- Developed to help practitioners and/or researchers make sense of a context-dependent and complex set of human practices

- Different models focus on different aspects of these practices

- However, controlled vocabularies may be based on these models




(NB: These are models important in the UK).- Bloom’s Taxonomy- Laurillard- Paulsen- Salmon- Shuell- Patterns and pattern languages+ references to a number of more in-depth

reviews of educational models (including learning styles).




- Inventory of a number of projects developing vocabularies for use with learning activity design and IMS LD

- Most based on models noted, especially Bloom’s

- DialogPlus (UK); 8LEM (Europe); LearningMapR (UK); R2R Learning Design (Canada); SMART Learning Design Framework (Australia); LAMS Community (Australia)



2. KOSs for education

- Includes traditional vocabularies (subject descriptors) and vocabularies developed for use in metadata elements other than subject.

- Line between them is not clear in practice.- Eighteen controlled vocabularies relating to

education were catalogued in this section of the report.

- ERIC Thesaurus was only ‘traditional’ vocab that had many pedagogical terms; little use in UK



2. KOSs for education: pedagogical coverage (1 of 2):

- AERS and TLRP (UK: for describing educational research items for 2 DSpace repositories);

- CELEBRATE Learning Resource Type; Learning Principles (UK: for LOM AP);

- DLESE Resource Type; Teaching Method (US: LOM AP, latter drawn from the GEM vocabulary);

- GEM vocabularies (US: Assessment; Grouping; and teachingMethod; referenced by DC-Ed AP);



2. KOSs for education: pedagogical coverage (2 of 2):

- HEA Pedagogy; Learning Resource Type (UK: LOM AP);- Learning Federation Metadata Application Profile

Vocabularies (Australia/NZ: for schools);- SeSDL Taxonomy (UK: detailed pedagogy coverage;

developed in 2000 for use with IMS Learning Resource Metadata in the Classification element);

- SOURCE RESLI vocabularies (UK: includes a Pedagogy vocabulary that is not particularly detailed).



3. Universal subject vocabularies with education sections

- Includes, e.g. DDC, LCC, etc.- None had any significant pedagogy coverage.


Developing vocabularies (1 of 2)Clearly:

- Little that would be appropriate for adoption or development for wide use in the UK

- A number of innovative projects that should be monitored

- Education is a problematic domain for vocabulary development:- Highly heterogeneous across cultures, countries,

and educational sectors- Subject to rapid changes in political, cultural and

research trends under-pinning vocabularies- Teacher practitioners don’t use specialist

vocabularies


Developing vocabularies (2 of 2)Eliciting user knowledge

Would be useful to investigate:

- Domain analysis- Card sort and/or cluster analysis- Folksonomies / collaborative tagging / social tagging


Recommendations (1 of 2)The blindingly obvious:

JISC should fund research into:

- Support for the use of vocabularies across the JISC community;

- Pedagogical vocabularies and learning designs;- Vocabularies, reference models and the eFramework;- Semantic web technologies;- Usage and mapping of existing controlled vocabularies

within the domain of e-learning;- Community generated vocabularies;- Vocabulary creation resources and guidelines.


Recommendations (2 of 2)The less obvious:

JISC could fund:

- Gathering use cases and scenarios of vocabulary usage- Evaluation of how vocabularies are used in different

domains and sectors, and what they are used for- Examination of the relationships between the language and

terminology used by teachers, learners and learning technologists.

- Identifying the key characteristics that need to be described to enable the reuse of resources.

- Investigate the applicability of “domain analysis” to e-learning.


Since the project finished

Lisa and Sheila have disseminated and gathered further input on social tagging

JISC are currently funding projects:

- Examining the relationships between the language and terminology used by teachers, learners and learning technologists.

- Identifying the key characteristics that need to be described to enable the reuse of resources.

See JISC Design for Learning Programme:http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning_pedagogy/elp_designlearn.aspx

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning_pedagogy/elp_designlearn.aspx

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning_pedagogy/elp_designlearn.aspx


Links1. S. Currier, L. Campbell and H. Beetham. JISC

Pedagogical Vocabularies Project Report 1: Pedagogical Vocabularies Review. JISC/CETIS, 2005.

2. S. Currier and L. Campbell. JISC Pedagogical Vocabularies Project Report 2: Vocabulary Management Technologies Review. JISC/CETIS, 2005.

Both at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/elp_vocabularies.html

Sarah Currier: [email protected] MacNeill: [email protected]

Lisa Corley: [email protected]

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/elp_vocabularies.html



mailto:[email protected]




Documents

Www.cetis.ac.ukDublin Core Metadata Initiative Conference,3-6 Oct. 2006 Vocabularies for describing pedagogical approach in e-learning: a scoping study