Hi there,
Quick mail to follow on from the useless/unused elements volunteered by Phil,
Juanita and Kate. Four of these elements; semantic density, interactivity level,
intended end user role and difficulty; are take from the LOM/IMS "educational"
subset. Phil, Juanita and Kate's comments don't surprise me but I still find this
very worrying. Given that the LOM was created primarily to describe learning
objects I think it is of significant concern that it is so weak or impractical in
the very area it purports to describe. This is something I've been aware of for some
time. Users adopt IMS because they know it is designed to describe educational
resources but then when they implement the spec the frequently discover that the
educational fields are less than appropriate, to say the least. I can't offer any
solutions to this problem but I think it is a serious issue that the SIG should
highlight and report back to CETIS and ultimately IMS.
Bye
Lorna
Phil Barker wrote:
> Hello All,
> I meant to follow up on this last week but didn't have time, so apologies for
> the delayed reply.
>
> I think that it is important we find out some information on what isn't being
> used and why, as Juanita suggests. But it is also quite difficult: a simple
> list of all the elements in IMS (with a tick box next to each and space for a
> line of explanation) would run to several pages. I shall, however include a
> question asking whether the respondent could provide us with a mapping of their
> element set to IMS, which would allow us to extract this information.
>
> We could focus our attention on a few elements and ask whether they are being
> used. I think this would complement Aida's suggestion of asking for an estimate
> of how many are used and which group they come from.
>
> So a quick question: are there any elements in IMS that you suspect are not
> being widely used?
> I'll lead with semantic density.
>
> I look forward to hearing any other suggestions.
>
> Regards, Phil.
>
> Dawn Holland wrote:
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > I think Aida' s suggestions for more precise information on which IMS
> > elements are being used or not is a good idea.
> >
> > However I have a vague recollection from the CETIS meeting in November (and
> > please correct me if I am wrong!) that going further and actually collecting
> > the individual elements not being used was suggested.
> >
> > For example, if the survey showed that x% of respondents didn't use the
> > Educational Element "semantic density", this information could then be
> > passed to IMS as evidence to suggest alternations or changes to the overall
> > schema.
> >
> > What does anyone else think?
> >
> > Dawn
> >
> > Dawn Holland
> > Metadata Project Officer (Maternity Cover)
> > The Jennie Lee Library
> > The Open University
> > Walton Hall
> > Milton Keynes
> > MK7 6AA
> >
>
> --
> Phil Barker Learning Technology Advisor
> ICBL, Department of Computing and Electrical Engineering
> Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
> Tel: 0131 451 3278 Fax: 0131 451 3327
> Web: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/
--
Lorna M. Campbell
Research Fellow
Centre for Academic Practice
University of Strathclyde
0141 548 3072
[log in to unmask]
|