No problem - thought it made sense to share.

I don't feel it's for me to comment on Jorum's API, but feel that an API solves half of the issue. The API allows technical people to spread content about, but it doesn't help the average user. Most of the Xpert searches today have been from the wordpress plugin - and that's solely being used by the Triton project at Oxford / Cambridge so far.

So an API is a great step, but it helps extend the search engines function, but perhaps it does not alter the deployability of the search engine (and content) to new places. Xpert's stuff is not perfect in this regard - but simple ways of getting content deployed are vital.

-----Original Message-----
From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Suzanne Hardy
Sent: 09 March 2011 12:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: New blog on OER Searching

Great post, Pat, thanks.

I found the API search vs single user search stats particularly interesting. And would therefore encourage anyone on this list (or elsewhere - forward to school/faculty learning technologists and developers pls! )who hasn't already to contribute to the requirements wishlist for Jorum API further development at http://jorumapi.pbworks.com/w/page/36018998/API-Wishlist

As I said yesterday in the 2nd Tuesday session, our tie up with dynamic learning maps (https://learning-maps.ncl.ac.uk/) at Newcastle in trialling pushing resources out just in time and right at the point of need in curriculum delivery should throw up some interesting possibilities for further work. I will be especially interested to see if we get engagement with OERs from people who would otherwise never consider even looking for openly licensed content, never mind reusing it.

<shameless plug>There are several papers due to be presented on these topics at eLearning in health: collaboration, sharing and sustainability in the current environment, 27-28 Jun 2011, Aston Conference Centre, http://www.medev.ac.uk/funding/workshops/243/view_workshop/ </shameless plug> (NB 95 abstracts submitted! Wheeee!)

I will also be intrigued to see if we manage to encourage NHS Evidence (http://www.evidence.nhs.uk) and NICE guidance (http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/) to provide APIs enabling deep embedding of their content too.

Are others exploring deep embedding of OERs? I know that there was some cursory discussion on Twitter with Nicola Osborne from EDINA  for example....


Suzanne


--
Suzanne Hardy
Senior Advisor (Information)
Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for 
Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine
Newcastle University

email: [log in to unmask]
tel: +44 191 222 5888
fax: +44 191 222 5016
blog: www.medev.ac.uk/blog/suzannes-blog/
web: www.medev.ac.uk/
Twitter: twitter.com/hea_medev
Skype: glitt3rgirl

direct line: 0191 246 4550
mobile: 07790 905657

Visitors please come to 1-2 Claremont Terrace, NE2 4AE
_________________________________

eLearning in health conference: collaboration, sharing and sustainability
in the current environment 27-28 Jun 2011
http://www.medev.ac.uk/funding/workshops/243/view_workshop/





On 9 Mar 2011, at 10:51, Patrick Lockley wrote:

> Hi all
> 
> http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/learningtechnology/2011/03/09/a-tale-of-the-un-xpert-ed-the-distributed-search-engine/
> 
> Apologies for jagging my own post but it has some interesting stats on Xpert searching and APIs.
> 
> Partially supports mine and Suzanne's argument that providing OER in situ with existing services is perhaps more important than a site to merely search the data set.
> 
> Unfortunately you can't comment on the blog unless you are UoN staff.
> 
> Pat Lockley
> IS Learning Technology, Kings Meadow Campus
> 
> ext 68882
> 0115 84 68882
> 
> 
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
> 
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.