Wilbert QTI Profile

599 views
547 views

Published on

Wilbert Kraan of JISC CETIS discusses profiling IMS QTI for UK HE and FE.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
599
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Wilbert QTI Profile

  1. 1. Defining a pragmatic QTI profile
  2. 2. Introduction Goals of a CETIS QTI profiling workgroup • Assessment system infrastructure • The role QTI plays in the infrastructure • Ways and methods to determine a profile • Means of testing a profile • The choice • 2
  3. 3. Goals of a CETIS QTI profiling WG In order of priority:  1. Determine production profile(s) for UK education (HE? FE + HE? All ?) 2. Enabling IMS QTI 2.1 public release by producing a testable profile 3. Help determine a new QTI profile for IMS Common Cartridge 3
  4. 4. Assessment system infrastructure 4
  5. 5. Assessment system infrastructure Institution owns  everything Easy coordination of all  interoperability points (in theory) Few resources to make  that coordination happen (in practice) Very difficult to meet all  subject communities' needs 5
  6. 6. Assessment system infrastructure Third party owns  everything but content Easy coordination of all  interoperability points Enough resources to  make that coordination happen Enough resources to  meet all subject communities' needs Politically impossible /  unlikely 6
  7. 7. Assessment system infrastructure Compromise:  Subject centre bank  Institutional learning  system 3d party delivery  Doable coordination of  most interoperability points Good spread of  resource load Still a few potential  bottlenecks 7
  8. 8. Assessment system infrastructure Therefore, for greatest interoperability:  Inverse relation between the complexity of the data  exchanged, and the variation in applications that process that data Hand responsibility for component to party with greatest  interest For profiling this means  Subjects set requirements for rich profile (assuming  compromise or centralised infrastructure) Else: lowest common technical denominator profile  8
  9. 9. The role QTI plays in the infrastructure QTI as exchange format across the system  + Consistent semantics  - Difficult profile coordination problem between systems and  over time QTI as intermediary format between systems  + Supports legacy systems now  - Semantic roadblocks (unacceptable degradation between  authoring and use) For profiling, this means:  Intermediary format suits lowest common technical  denominator profile Exchange format suits rich subject profiles  9
  10. 10. Ways and methods to determine a profile Community requirements led  + surest means of achieving fitness for purpose  + surest means of getting uptake  - can lead to profiles that are technically very difficult to realise  - size of group v. consensus building delicate  Implementation led  + process of determining a profile is quick and easy  + near instant implementation  ± accurately reflects current practice  - likely to be unfit for purpose (danger of balkanisation)  For profiling, this means  Community led is better, but time-consuming and expensive  Implementation led is quick, cheap but may not meet needs  10
  11. 11. Means of testing a profile Formal testing  + reliable  - may well not be valid  - v. expensive, continuously (particularly for content)  Self-service testing  ± good enough reliability and validity  + cheapish  Reference implementation  + reliable  + valid  + cheapish  - may cause political ructions  11
  12. 12. The choice Compromise (mostly) institutionally   infrastructure owned infrastructure QTI as an exchange QTI as an intermediary   format format Community led profiling Implementation led   profiling Reference  implementation Self-service testing  Rich, subject specific Small, lowest common   profiles denominator profiles IMS QTI test profile IMS CC profile   12
  13. 13. Thank you! Wilbert Kraan  w.g.kraan@ovod.net  13

×