Extending the Scope of the Current Discussion on Metadata Towards Situated Models Heidrun Allert, Christoph Richter, Wolfgang Nejdl Klikk.

Extending the Scope of the Current Discussion on Metadata

Towards Situated Models

Heidrun Allert, Christoph Richter, Wolfgang Nejdl

Klikk

What this talk is about

Not: Proposing a set of metadata

But: A modelling approach for metadata dealing with valuable diversity in learning.

Heidrun Allert | June 17th, 2003 | CSCL2003@Bergen, Norway

Standards and Specifications: Current Focus

• Search, Exchange and Re-Use of Learning Objects(mainly learning material)

• Seperating Learning Management System from Content• Ensure Interoperability• Search, Exchange and Re-Use of ‚Units of Studies‘,

Scenarios, Methods


Assumptions - „Axioms“ – (almost) not questioned

• „Learning Objects are decontextualized“ (questioned by e.g. Polsani)

• „Learning Objects are neutral with regard to learning theory“

• „Learning Management Systems are neutral with regard to learning theory“(questioned by Schulmeister, Albrecht)


...

• Platform + Content = Learning Solution• When they say „Course“ they mean course content

content activity


The pedagogical perspective?

Requirements for standards result from• organizational• economic• technicalperspectives.


Approaches on the Continuum of Contextualization

learning asdecontextualized

learning assituated/contextualized

Instructional Design

(Receptive Learning)

•Presentation and delivery of knowledge pieces

•Textual references to context

Situated Approaches•Co-construction of knowledge and development of competences

•Dealing with real world problems (ill-structured problems)

Humanistic Approaches•Focusses on Self-reflection

•Learner is part of the context

•Development of personality

Situated Approaches•Co-construction of knowledge and development of competences

•Dealing with real world problems (ill-structured problems)

Humanistic Approaches•Focusses on Self-reflection

•Learner is part of the context

•Development of personality

Distinguishing Instructional Design from Situated Approaches (Jonassen)Heidrun Allert | June 17th, 2003 | CSCL2003@Bergen, Norway

Use for Metadata for Situated Approaches

• Agents within the semantic web (cp. scenario of Berners-Lee et al)

• Internal representation of agents about educational settings (not only knowledge domains)

• Peer-to-peer systems supporting learning communities• Group formation• A community of practice annotates an knowledge asset as

‚best practice‘• A learner searches for a specific community of practice

(informal learning)• Mature lifelong learners

reflecting on what and how they want to learn


Valuable Diversity: Learning Theories and Models

Different assumptions on learning, mind and knowledge• Epistemological Foundation

Information Processing Theory Situated Cognition

• Metaphor of learning and knowledge Acquisition metaphor (Sfard) Knowledge-creation metaphor, knowledge advancement

metaphor (Sfard, Paavola) Moving from peripheral to full membership (Lave,

Wenger)


Metadata Schemas, Standards: Modelling

• What is their modelling approach? The representational purpose of mind?

• What do they aim at?• How do they deal with diversity? With epistemplogical

differences?


LOM: Standard for Learning Object Metadata

• The modelling approach Absolute, definite description of an object The object itself comprises any information

Learning ObjectAttributes (Categories, Sub-categories)

•General•LifeCycle•Meta-Metadata•Technical•Educational

•Interactivity Level•Semantic Density•Difficulty Level•Typical Learning Time•Learning Resource Type•…

•Rights•Relation•Annotation•Classification

„A Learning Object is any entity, digital or not ...“ (LOM)


LOM: Standard for Learning Object Metadata

• LOM aims at Describing learning material (mainly used in LMS) Vision of automated instruction Building consitent learning sequences

• How does it deal with diversity? Aims at being unspecific/neutral with regard to learning theories



This is a cartoon!

LOM: Designing for Change?

LOM is not neutral/unspecific with regard to learning theories: implicitely it reflects an acquisition and transmission metaphor of learning and the learning situation learner – material.

From the philosophy of science we concluded: One cannot be neutral when specifying categories (Lakoff, Luhmann, Kant: apriori)

One cannot be neutral with regard to epistemological foundation when specifying educational categories

One cannot be neutral choosing a modelling approach.


IMS Learning Design

• IMS-LD aims at Exchanging ‚Units of Studies‘ Describing learning processes, including social interaction How is a resource used?

• How does it deal with diversity? Building a ‚Pedagogical Metamodel‘: What is in common with any

learning theory

• Modelling approach Information model: modelling aspects, which are relevant within

an educational setting Prescriptively describe learning process (well-structured

processes)Heidrun Allert | June 17th, 2003 | CSCL2003@Bergen, Norway

IMS Learning Design: Information Model


IMS Learning Design: Designing for Change?

• Situated learning processes are ill-structured process• We can not predict what will happen step by step• Situated learning processes are poorly structured

processes


Modelling Social Systems: Learning Roles

LR aims at: • Modelling coherent social systems• Explicitely modelling differences/context

Organizational context Learning theory, epistemoloical foundation (appreciating

epistemological differences)


Theory of Social Systems (Luhmann, Willke)

• Activities are related• Roles are related• Shared expectations• Reducing Complexity• In an educational context: Changing an entire Setting,

not only introducing new technology


Theory of Social Systems (Luhmann, Willke)

• A Person does not belong to a system, but to its environment (Luhmann).

person

system 1 system 2

the accusedfather

fills rolefills role

sonjudge

environment

the attestor

pictureindication

souvenir

sonthe attestor

judge


Concept ‚Role‘ in Formal Languages

Natural Type/Class Role

•Static•An instance of a class once and forever belongs to that class. It cannot change it without loosing its identity•Well-known concept in object oriented modelling

•Dynamic (Dynamic classifying)•Founded (has context and relations) •Not semantically rigid – does not lose its identity when leaving the role [Guarino 1992]•Relevant in context modelling


Modelling Social Systems: Learning Roles

Explicitely modelling learning theories and social systems• Each Learning Role is based on an epistemological

foundation• Has specific roles (e.g. person roles)• Shares a specific metaphor of learning and knowledge• Is agreed on by a community

What are relevant constituents? Agree on relevant types Agree on which role a type can fill What quality a type needs to have to be able to fill a role?


Defining Relevant Aspects, Constituting Elements (Agreed on by the Community)

Example 1: Characteristics of Communities of Practice (CoP)

Person Strategic Intent Knowledge Asset

•Community Coordinator (Local, Global)•Community Leader/Expert•Core Member•Active Member•Peripheral Participant

•Helping Community•Best-practice Community•Knowledge-stewarding Community

•Best Practice•Innovative Knowledge •Lesson Learned


Distinguishing Types from Roles

Relevant Types

Person

vCard

Knowledge Asset

DCReduced LOM

Technology Arrangement Activity Service

LOM without the categories Educational and Rights(The technical category remains e.g.)

CSCL ontologies


Example 1: Model ‚Communities of Practice‘

M0

M1

M2

Person

vCard

Knowledge Assets

DCReduced LOM

used by

Best-practice Community

SpaceMeeting

CoPMeta-Role

attributes

Peripheral Participant

-identifies importantissues-plannes meetings-...

Community Coordinator

Core Member

attributes

Technology

attributes

Learning Arrangement

attributes

Walter: Person•Fills role Community Coordinator in CoP Arctic Biologists•-Fills role Core Member in CoP xy

- vCard- plannes meetings-identifies important issues- attributes of Core-Member

Mary: Person•Fills role Peripheral Participant in CoP xy

- vCard- attributes of Peripheral Participant

CoPCommunity

Theory of CoP,Epistemological

Foundationdescribes reflects

InnovativeKnowledge

Community: Arctic Biologists

-Community Coordinator: Peter-Core Members: Eric, ...-Peripheral Participants: Mary, ...-Meetings: Date, Time, C-Space

Activity

attributes

Peer Tutoring

Co-constructinginnovative knowledge


Example 2: Model ‚PBL ill-structured‘

PBLIll-structured

Theory ofIll-struct. PBL

Ill-struct. PBL

Community

Person

vCard

Technology

attributes

Learning Arrangement

attributes

Knowledge Asset

DC, reduced LOM

ProblemSolverattributes

ProjectCoordinator

attributesKnow-ledgeBase Project

Report

Case

describes reflects

used in

Structured Chat: Technology

Fills role Support Facility for discussing argumentsFills role Support Facility for identifying possible strategies

...

Tim: PersonFills role Problem Solver

vCardAttributes of Problem Solver

Interview with patient: Knowledge Asset

Fills role Case

DCAttributes of Case

M2

M1

M0

Support Facility

Reflecting Process of

Cooperation

Group discussion:Activity

CSCL Ontology...

ProblemSituation

Activity

CSCL Ontology


Relations between Roles

person activity environment

propertydocument

outcome

performs >

creates >

-properties-goals

•Modelled by a common activity model

•Conform with IMS-LD

•‚Engaging with‘ environment (situated approaches)

uses >

engaging with >


Procedure

• Community oriented approach: Shared conceptualization(as ontologies are)

• Which Learning Roles will exist? Acquisition metaphor + Knowledge-creation metaphor? CoP, Expository Learning, PBL ill-structured, PBLwell-

structured? Depends on the communities!

• Defining relevant aspects, components, constituting elements (agreed on by the community)


Too Complex?

It is complex to annotate a problem situation (of an ill-structured problem) with ‚Difficulty Level‘.

It is complex to annotate a Community of Practice with ‚Semantic Density‘.


Practical Implications

• Static and dynamic role-based attributes. One entity within different settings.

• Prescriptive? The one/the group who plans or initiates an educational setting specifies roles (selected from one or more Learning Roles). Therefore the intended models are explicit, open to reflection, discussion, change, and extension.

• Metadata of Use: How an entity has been used is intended to be used

• Instructional units within problem solving


Thank you for your attention. Questions?

[email protected]@[email protected]

http://www.learninglab.deThis work was fundet by the Wallenberg Global Learning Network WGLN



Static and Role-Based Attributes

Person

vCard

Community Coordinator

Learner


Example 3: Model ‚CSCL‘

CSCL Epistemological Foundation o

CSCL

CSCLCommunity

Shared space

describes reflects

M2

Knowledge Construction

Awareness Coordination

Knowledge Externalization


Further Work

• Extending the work towards CSCL-user profiles• Building an underlying activity model• Coordinating the communities setting up Learning

Roles


Extending the Scope of the Current Discussion on Metadata Towards Situated Models Heidrun Allert, Christoph Richter, Wolfgang Nejdl Klikk.

Documents

learning material

decontextualized learning

learning processes

learning solution

norway slide

learning object metadata

cognition metaphor of

polsani learning objects