1 / 11

Updates from mEducator Technical Reference Group

Updates from mEducator Technical Reference Group. Daniela Giordano, University of Catania Evangelia Mitsopoulou, St.George University of London Stathis Konstantinidis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. www.meducator.net.

peony
Download Presentation

Updates from mEducator Technical Reference Group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Updates from mEducatorTechnical Reference Group Daniela Giordano, University of Catania Evangelia Mitsopoulou, St.George University of London Stathis Konstantinidis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki www.meducator.net MEDBIQUITOUS Learning Object Working Group meeting, September 2, 2010

  2. Introduction • Goal: update Medbiquitous LO WG on mEducator work on metadata Schema for sharing learning resources • The work presented is meant to be of restricted access, since it is still work in progress • It is Meducator strategic plan to pass any result through Medbiquitous • To this extent we are sharing and discuss this material in this conference call. 2

  3. mEducator approach to schema development • Focus on the conceptual model • Semantics, multiplicity, mandatory, vocabularies • Mapping to existing standards - metadata reuse • Definition of Meducator application profile and RDF schema • Meducator application profile editors 3

  4. mandat. mandat. mandat. URL Language Date URN OkkamID IPR lic Citation Author Title Quality Stamp many many many mandat. Keywords Description May require many Rating Resource (content) type Technical instruction Comments has Tags can be of many Repurposed to/from Learning Resource deals with Topic many many Associated to Is for intended Educational Context many Initial conceptual model of mEducator schema Metadata lifecycle is implied (author, creation_date, language) For whom? Where? Prerequisites? How is it used? Is suitable for has supports has Educational (goal) objective (Learning) Educational outcome Pedagogical model (strategy) Learning Assessment method many many many

  5. …Current status… • Most basic fields taken into account in the RDF schema • Content type classification proposal defined in SKOS and circulated 5

  6. Properties Transition to RDF Conceptual Model RDF Some of them need also the defintion of Classes Who? Those ones that can be described by a controlled Vocabulary In the end… We create Instances of the Classes

  7. Sample RDF Graph

  8. To be done 1/2 • “topic”/keywords field: keywords handled by drawing BOTH from controlled vocabulatories (MESH) and from free user input open issue: MESH - SNOMED support (e.g., a mashup to support term selection?) • Modeling for educational context: Discipline: draw fromMesh health profession (multiple) Specialty: draw from Mesh health occupations (multiple) - and change name of field accordingly; Educational level (drawn from HLOM or DC) 10

  9. To be done 2/2 • Educational goal/outcomes to be dealt with as controlled vocabularies based on the analysis of current taxonomies • (awaiting input from mEducator Pedagogical Reference Group,cross mapping of various outcomes taxonomies completed, term selection to be done) • Pedagogical model could be added as optional field (with controlled vocabulary) to supplement info about how the resource could be used - next iteration 11

More Related