Erik, I agree with Jon's points 1-3. While I cannot speak
for EdNA, I can say that the questions you pose have been
pondered (repeatedly) by the communities currently addressing
metadata for educational objects. As for Jon's answer to
point 4, I'd only add that the US lacks a cohesive, national,
cross-sectoral initiative like EdNA. Even with the efforts
of GEM and IMS during their developmental stages, the US
education metadata community remains largely fragmented.
However, groundwork has been done to established appropriate
cross-sectoral US input by GEM, IMS and others. It is my hope
that this WG will provide a forum for more expansive US input
than has yet been achieved by GEM and IMS. As membership in
the WG expands over the next few weeks, we'll need to seek
additional input from cross-sectoral, international
communities.
Stuart
---------------------------------------------------------------
Stuart A. Sutton (206) 685-6618 (Voice)
Associate Professor (206) 543-1794 (Fax)
University of Washington [log in to unmask]
School of Library and Information Science
328 Old Electrical Engineerng Bldg. Box 352930
Seattle, WA 98195-2930
---------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Mason [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 11:02 PM
To: 'Jul,Erik'; [log in to unmask]
Cc: 'Jon Mason'; 'Stuart Sutton'
Subject: RE: Working Group for a DC Educational Materials Profile
Erik, et al,
your questions are helpful. Stuart may have other ideas about this, but
here's my views at this stage:
1. I certainly interpret the scope of the WG to look at both digital &
non-digital educational materials.
2. Resource discovery of educational materials is an activity that would
normally include all those you have identified. I agree with you that
audience is of critical importance here. I would hope that the WG will
attract input from representatives of major stakeholder groups.
3. As yet I don't have a strong view on exclusion. I'd prefer to approach
the task as inclusively as possible. I don't think commercial interests
should be a problem - to the contrary, such interests would inevitably
help
the long term deployment. They are clearly catered for in the stakeholder
mix associated with the IMS specifications.
4. As far as ensuring sufficient input from "national education
communities
and cross-sectoral communities" I can certainly ensure that there will be
from EdNA (Education Network Australia) which can be characterised as a
national cross-sectoral collaboration focused on the Internet and
education.
regards,
Jon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jul,Erik [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 1999 1:04 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc: 'Jon Mason'; 'Stuart Sutton'
> Subject: RE: Working Group for a DC Educational Materials Profile
>
> Stu et al.:
>
> Just some questions that I will leave to the experts:
>
> Do you mean to include educational materials of all formats (print,
> CD-ROM,
> video recording, streaming video, image, multimedia, kits,
remote-access,
> other)? If so, you might want to state. This seems to be a matter of
> scope.
>
> If the purpose is the purpose "... enhancing resource discovery" of
> educational resources, I would ask By whom? Professional educators,
> curriculum developers, administrators, students? These different
> audiences
> are likely to have different needs. Should the expected target
audiences
> be
> specified? Will these audiences be represented by the WG?
>
> Do you intend this to include formal and informal education, degreed and
> non-degreed, commercial (for profit), industrial education/training? No
> limitations? Again, any need to draw boundaries, specify what's in and
> what's out.
>
> What steps will the WG take to ensure that sufficient "national
education
> communities and cross-sectoral communities" are included?
>
> Thanks for the opportunity to respond, and I hope these questions are
> helpful.
>
> --Erik
>
> Erik Jul
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
