Sarah, et al
re:
4. Use of further IEEE LOM
elements in the DC-Ed AP. The working draft has a table listing
relevant LOM elements and giving information about them. Do any of
these look like properties you would wish to describe for educational
resources? Have we missed anything important?
The draft AP maps Audience educationLevel to LOM 5.6
Educational.Context
I think this mapping is not really accurate & fits much better with
LOM 5.7 Educational.TypicalAgeRange, but even then is not a great fit.
The semantics that I interpret from LOM Educational.Context are to do
with educational "setting" (k-12, university or higher
education, & vocational training). It may be true in some examples
that these settings could be described in terms of "level" but
I really think it's wrong to do so.
Having said that, I think that LOM 5.6 Educational.Context is a very
useful element. For example, in an Australian profile of SCORM known as
"Vetadata", there is a default value for LOM 5.6
Educational.Context (= training) -- this automatically groups Vetadata
resources as being useful within the vocational education & training
(VET) sector.
So, I'm wondering whether we need a new refinement for Audience that maps
more directly to LOM 5.6 Educational.Context?
Jon
At 04:49 AM 13/08/2007, Sarah Currier wrote:
Dear all,
The Dublin Core Conference 2007 in Singapore is fast approaching.
The next face-to-face meeting of the DC-Ed Community will take place
there.
Diane Hillmann, Stuart Sutton and I have been working hard to get draft
materials related to the proposed DC-Ed Application Profile ready for
this meeting. We would like to disseminate the results of this work
prior to the meeting so that anyone who can't attend can give feedback
and input. We'd be very grateful if you could spend some time
having a look and feeding back to us. Discussion on this list is
particularly welcome. If you only have time to look at the areas
that particularly interest you, that's fine! I have tried to
delineate the different areas we'd like feedback on below, to make it
easier for you.
We now have a wiki page linking to a new draft Application Profile
document:
http://dublincore.org/educationwiki/Working_20Draft_20of_20DC_2dEd_20Application_20Profile
This draft gives an overview of the background and purpose of, and
requirements for, the AP. It lists the metadata elements for
inclusion in the AP, along with IEEE LOM correlations, and notes aiming
to make a start on guidance for use of the elements involved.
It also includes a list of additional IEEE LOM elements related to
educational use of resources, and outlines a workplan and community
acceptance plan for taking the AP forward.
Any feedback gratefully received. Here are some particular areas
you may like to look at:
1. Expression of the AP using the DCAM Description Set Profile. A
draft of this document is available at:
http://dublincore.org/architecturewiki/DescriptionSetProfile.
Volunteers to help with this would be very welcome.
2. Best practice guidance notes for the properties covered within the
AP. NB: There are comments for many of the properties in v0.3 of the
AP, which are noted in the new working draft- do these meet your needs /
seem reasonable / useful? Any further suggestions?
3. Conforming to educational achievement standards. Stuart Sutton
has done some valuable work on the use of conformsTo as a
refinement of the Relation property. NB LOM users:
conformsTo is not in the core DCMI vocabulary used in the LOM
Relation fields- it is a more recent refinement of this element.
The intention of conformsTo in the DC-Ed AP is to support relating
of educational resources to curricula, competency frameworks, learning
objectives and the like. See Stuart's notes at
http://dublincore.org/educationwiki/Correlation_20Resource for
ideas about how to express the closeness of fit of a resource to a
particular educational achievement standard.
4. Use of further IEEE LOM elements in the DC-Ed AP. The
working draft has a table listing relevant LOM elements and giving
information about them. Do any of these look like properties you
would wish to describe for educational resources? Have we missed
anything important?
5. Vocabularies for Type and Instructional Method. After
taking on board discussion and feedback on the DC-Ed Community email
list, and at the DC-themed meeting of the JISC-CETIS Metadata SIG earlier
this year, we now have an updated wiki page summarising the approach of
DC-Ed to recommending vocabularies for the AP, including a page on the
four draft criteria for recommending vocabularies:
http://dublincore.org/educationwiki/Vocabularies
We also have a document listing all of the vocabularies we have so far
identified, along with notes on how they meet the four draft criteria
discussed earlier. This is available here:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhbqfq9m_0f6mdc2 (NB: It is also
linked to from the DC-Ed wiki vocabularies page).
If you have a vocabulary that isn't listed, or if you have further
information on any of the vocabularies listed, please let me
know.
Equally, if you have any further ideas on recommending vocabularies in
the AP, please let us know.
6. Workplan and Community Acceptance Plan. These are noted
near the end of the AP document, and are admittedly a bit sketchy.
If anyone is of a particularly administrative frame of mind and has
feedback/suggestions, we will be interested to hear them.
Many thanks all. Please disseminate this email to individuals or
fora you know of that may be interested, and do encourage people to join
the DC-Education list as well.
Best wishes,
Sarah
--
Sarah Currier
Co-Moderator, Dublin Core Education Community
Product Manager, Intrallect Ltd.
http://www.intrallect.com
2nd Floor, Regent House
Blackness Road
Linlithgow
EH49 7HU
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 870 234 3933 Mob: +44 (0)7980855801
E-mail:
[log in to unmask]
--
--
Sarah Currier
Product Manager, Intrallect Ltd.
http://www.intrallect.com
2nd Floor, Regent House
Blackness Road
Linlithgow
EH49 7HU
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 870 234 3933 Mob: +44 (0)7980855801
E-mail:
[log in to unmask]
--
