2006
DOI: 10.1504/ijceell.2006.008917
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards flexible learning object metadata

Abstract: This paper outlines the research we are doing in acquiring, describing and using learning object metadata. Instead of the IEEE LOM and other standardised metadata schemes, we argue for a more flexible approach to both defining and associating metadata with learning objects. This approach, which we call the ecological approach, sees metadata as the process of reasoning over observed interactions of users with a learning object for a particular purpose. Central to this approach is the notion that Semantic Web en… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
26
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In ALOCOM [9] ontologies have been introduced successfully to enhance reusability, whereas in another system the LOM was extended with ontology-based semantic annotations for meaningful interactions with learning objects [8]. Semantic technologies were also used to promote a process-oriented approach to metadata; reasoning over learner-LO interactions was seen as a basis for adaptive environments [1].…”
Section: Metadata and Semantic Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In ALOCOM [9] ontologies have been introduced successfully to enhance reusability, whereas in another system the LOM was extended with ontology-based semantic annotations for meaningful interactions with learning objects [8]. Semantic technologies were also used to promote a process-oriented approach to metadata; reasoning over learner-LO interactions was seen as a basis for adaptive environments [1].…”
Section: Metadata and Semantic Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has now become evident that the effective deployment of LOs is dependent on the availability of relevant and effective metadata categories. As a result, most of the recent efforts in LO management point to the need for common structures for representing different types of metadata, including metadata related to learning experiences [1]. One significant feature of the LO lifecycle is that the transitions between its stages are facilitated by the use and generation of metadata.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Variable time length learning objects were used. A total time of instruction of 20,000 time units was used and each learning object ranged from 30 time units to 480 time units 10 …”
Section: Simulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 illustrates TANGRAM's architecture and depicts the ontologies it uses. These ontologies are concisely described in the following subsections 1 . Additionally, to annotate content units in TANGRAM, we defined a profile of the IEEE LOM RDF Binding specification 2 .…”
Section: Ontologies For Dynamic Assembly Of Personalized Contentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent study by Brooks et al [1] has shown that current e-learning standards and specifications (such as the IEEE LOM standard) are rather restrictive in terms of the variety of metadata they capture and imprecise in expressing the structure of such metadata. Moreover, few of the metadata fields proposed by such specifications are actually used in learning object repositories (LORs) to annotate the LOs, which reduces the possibility for agents to retrieve the LOs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%