Excellent point re Project 1 Pat- I had assumed going in that there would need to be analysis in this project around the issue of what metadata fields and vocabularies managers had included and what they'd wished they could've included; how they've felt impeded by software or by the metadata standards available- that was kind of the approach taken when we were gathering use cases to develop a new DC Education Application Profile, to find out not only what folk are doing but what they wish they could do.

I would also like to do a bit of analysis around how and why they made their decisions (e.g. actual user consultation of any kind, instinct, past experience, etc.).

I suspect given the scope of the project, these are things that would need to be touched on via a survey, possibly with supporting interviews, but it looks like the main bit of research required is what metadata is *actually* created, so this may also be a recommendation for more in-depth checking in a further project once the data is in.

Re Project 2- I see what you're saying with that, but I think it would be nice just to have a big fat bit of data with analysis *just* on search to start with (maybe browse as well for repositories or sites that offer that as a way in).. since we're looking for what people are looking for, regardless of whether they can actually find it. I think your suggestion is a useful but different bit of investigation.

S.

On 5 April 2011 12:52, Pat Lockley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

(Please note I am now subbed from my personal email address, so I can
comment with added Winston)

Bid 1 - "that collection managers deem to be important" - that worries
me a little, as collection managers are often hamstrung by what their
system can do. I've got a half side project with two repository
managers / support staff looking at an ideal feature wish list. One of
the key things that's come up (and I share for free) is whether
content will work on a mobile device / level of supported platform
independence  (and if not, is there an alternative piece - i.e.
content negotiation and then, possibly, controlled content
degradation). There is no support for this in either of the system's
they use at present.

So if I start with the metadata these collection managers present,
that does not seem equal to "deem to be important".

Bid 2 - Wonder if going to / stopping at search logs in enough.
Searched then visited, searched then tweeted. Not all repos have
enough content to merit a search facility?

Be interesting to know which repositories had agreed to share for bid 2?

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Sarah Currier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Friday is looming: the deadline for sharing our proposals for the 3 JISC OER
> technical mini-projects. I've been wondering how others are approaching
> this. I'm facing this innovative open approach to bidding with some
> trepidation- for me, it's my livelihood, so it seems counter-intuitive to
> put ideas out there where the people I might be be competing with for
> funding can see them. A tension that echoes right across the open education
> domain I guess.
>
> On the other hand, mini projects (1) and (2) are so dear to my heart that I
> can't but press forward! To me the intent behind them represents the
> culmination of work that many of us have been trying to do for some years
> now. Well, it's a culmination and, I hope, the start of a new, more
> productive level of research in this area. If *someone* does it and does it
> well, I'll be very happy even if I'm momentarily grumpy that it's not me!
>
> I am talking with another independent consultant, Dr. Ian Piper at Tellura,
> about possible approaches to all 3 mini-projects. Ian and I have been
> working together for the past year (and Ian was around a lot longer than
> that) on a large-scale schools-level initiative developing 10s of 1000s of
> openly available resources for teachers.
>
> We are both very keen on building on that project's work in open
> vocabularies; quality assurance for metadata; and content and metadata
> frameworks that are linked data- and Semantic Web-friendly.
>
> Ian's history is (among other things) within the English schools and FE
> sector, while I've been involved for some years in HE educational metadata,
> as well as being involved in the Dublin Core Education Community. In DC-Ed
> we tried gathering use cases to see what folk were doing with educational
> metadata on the ground (not just OER use cases), but it was clear to me then
> that a larger-scale survey like mini-project (1) would be useful.
>
> I know Ian has a great idea for the 3rd, open mini-project: to further
> develop his openvocabs tools: http://openvocabs.org/ - in order to ensure
> they meet the requirements of those developing and working with OERs. (Ian
> is at a meeting today so he agreed I could mention him in passing- he's on
> this list and will be able to answer questions himself). However, we're both
> sure that there will be a bunch of excellent ideas and tools coming forward
> for the 3rd mini-project.
>
> For me, I am keen on the first 2 mini-projects, and Ian has the technical
> tools and expertise to help me with that side of those (I'm the semantic
> analysis person). On the other hand, there could be someone out there
> planning an excellent approach to the first 2 projects, and it would be more
> feasible for me to collaborate with them, if needed?
>
> Anyway, I just thought it would be an idea to put this out there and see
> what comes back. Is everyone else preparing perfectly formed bids that they
> are going to post on this list on Friday? Is anyone looking for a
> collaborator or two? Or is everyone thinking "I hope someone else will bid
> for this because this work needs doing?".
>
> In any case, I look forward to discussion on this over the next couple of
> weeks once proposals are in.
>
> Best wishes,
> Sarah
> --
> Sarah Currier
>
> Sarah Currier Consultancy Ltd.
> EdTech | Resource Sharing | Web 2.0 | Metadata | Repositories
>
> w: http://www.sarahcurrier.com/
> e: [log in to unmask]
> t: +44 (0)7980855801
>
> LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/sarahcurrier
> Skype: morageyrie
>
> ________________________________

--
Sarah Currier

Sarah Currier Consultancy Ltd.
EdTech | Resource Sharing | Web 2.0 | Metadata | Repositories

w: http://www.sarahcurrier.com/
e: [log in to unmask]
t: +44 (0)7980855801

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/sarahcurrier
Skype: morageyrie

---