Semantic Technologies in HE Seminar - Learning Societies Lab

  • 656 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
656
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
25
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • issues with agreement on ontologies, changes to ontologies, mass annotation, etc...
  • WEB 2.0 HAS SIGNIFICANT IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATION; PARTICIPATION, COLLABORATION
    WEB 2.0 HAS GIVEN US IMPLICIT STRUCTURE AND LIGHTWEIGHT KNOWLEDGE MODELLING - BUT IT CANNOT BE USED BY MACHINES TO DO SEARCHING, MATCHING, LET ALONE ADDRESS INTEROPERABILITY AMONG DATA SOURCES
  • student retention, employability, curriculum alignment, student recruitment, accreditation, course design, group formation...

Transcript

  • 1. Perspectives on Semantic Technologies for Education 6+1 topics Thanassis Tiropanis, Hugh Davis, Dave Millard, Mark Weal, Su White, Gary Wills Asma Ounnas, Marcus Ramsden, Faith Lawrens, Heather S. Packer, Daniel A. Smith www.semtech.ecs.soton.ac.uk
  • 2. SemTech • JISC-funded project working with CETIS • Objectives: Survey of semantic tools and services Current adoption of semantic technologies in the UK higher education Roadmap of semantic technology adoption in the next 5 years • www.semtech.ecs.soton.ac.uk
  • 3. Acknowledgements The SemTech team: The JISC CETIS Semantic The SemTech workshop Hugh Davis Technology Working Group: participants: Sheila MacNeill (CETIS) Colin Allison (University of St. Faith Lawrens Andrews) David Millard Lorna Campbell (CETIS) Chris Bailey (University of Bristol) Phil Barker (CETIS) Asma Ounnas Helen Beetham Liliana Cabral (Knowledge Media Heather S. Packer Institute, Open University) Simon Buckingham-Shum (Open Patrick Carmichael (University of Marcus Ramsden University, UK) Cambridge) Daniel A. Smith David Davies (University of Warwick) Tom Franklin (Franklin Thanassis Tiropanis Michael Gardner (University Essex) Consulting) Mark Weal Tony Linde (University of Leicester) David Kay (Sero Consulting) Wilbert Kraan (CETIS) George Magoulas (London Su White Knowledge Lab, Birkbeck College) Sue Manuel (University of Gary Wills Loughborough) Uma Patel (City University) Learning Societies Lab Alex Poulovassilis (London Lou McGill Knowledge Lab, Birkbeck College) Graham Wilson (LT Scotland) John Scott (University of Essex) (ECS-University of Robin Wylie (LT Scotland) Southampton) David Kernohan (JISC)
  • 4. What are semantic technologies?
  • 5. semantic tech in edu scenario? Agreed Ontologies learning content discovery Metadata personalisation & adaptation Learning Content A top-down approach
  • 6. semantic tech in a web 2.0 world • Soft semantics ‣ Meaning in formats that humans can process ‣ Lightweight knowledge modelling in Web 2.0 applications • Hard semantics ‣ Meaning in formats that machines can process ‣ Processing is independent of domain specific schemas
  • 7. What is the value of Semantic Technologies in HE?
  • 8. Is it time to re-think the value of semantic technologies in HE? • Web 2.0 promise for content generation annotation • Value of lightweight knowledge modelling and reasoning • The HE institutional challenges • The learning and teaching challenges • Linked data movement and the Web of data
  • 9. HE institutional perspective • Visibility of degree programmes and research output of HE institutions • Curriculum design • Recruitment and retention of students • Efficiency of accreditation • Collaboration across departments and institutions through workflows • Integration of knowledge capital, cross-curricular initiatives • Transparency of data held by educational institutions
  • 10. learning and teaching perspective • Course creation and delivery workflows • Group formation for learning and teaching activities • Critical thinking and argumentation support • Personal and group knowledge space construction • Assessment, certification and addressing of plagiarism
  • 11. What semantic technologies are there?
  • 12. surveyed semantic technologies semtech-survey.ecs.soton.ac.uk Collaborative Searching and Authoring and Matching Annotation Infrastructural Repositories, VLEs Technologies for and Authoring tools Linked Data and Semantic Enrichment
  • 13. Collaborative Authoring and Annotation Tools Mymory Unobtrusive user observation Meaning co-ordination Annotation of resource sections Compendium Visualisation of arguments Collaborative domain modelling Real time meeting capture
  • 14. Searching and Matching tools Arnetminer Find experts Associations between experts Mining RDF from existing repositories LUISA Discovery, selection, negotiation and composition of LOs Annotation techniques Use of Semantic Web Services
  • 15. Repositories, VLEs, Annotation tools Freebase Collaboratively authored, open repository of structured topics Topics mined from other repositories Accessible via open APIs SKUA Distributed network of semantically aware shared annotation services in the form of RDF stores Support for user-facing applications
  • 16. Infrastructural Technologies RKBExplorer D2R Server Konduit Virtuoso
  • 17. What is the value of semantic technologies, really?
  • 18. questions following the survey • Where are the education specific users in these applications? • What is the use of ontologies in surveyed applications? • Where is the value of reasoning in surveyed applications? • What is the value of semantic technologies in practice?
  • 19. surveyed semantic tech use Wiki • Actors: Tagging Blog/Electronic Journal Teacher Shared Bookmarking Student RDF Assessor/Examiner University Administrator OWL System Administrator FOAF Other Administrator Program/Module Co-ordinator SKOS Admissions Team Automated System Triple Store Researcher Ontology/Taxonomy Archive/Repository
  • 20. surveyed learning activity use • Collaborative activities • T&L activities involving the Team Building individual Computer Mediated Information Gathering Discussion Information Handling Computer Mediated Experimentation Role Play Information Publishing Content Creation Simulation Content Annotation Experiments
  • 21. Deliberation
  • 22. insights • Most of the identified HE challenges can be addressed by querying across institutional repositories (databases, web pages, VLEs) • Significant learning and teaching challenges can be addressed by accessing resources across departments, schools, institutions • Argumentation and critical thinking could benefit from advanced reasoning over a large scale of resources • Could we adopt a bottom-up approach starting from linked data which can be related to (layers of) ontologies later in the context of specific applications? ➡ VALUE IN A LINKED DATA FIELD ACROSS HE
  • 23. breadth vs. depth • The value of semantic technologies on a large scale needs to be investigated - In addition to the value of reasoning using ontologies • Mapping a critical volume of linked data to expressive ontologies can be promising • Encouragement for community-agreed ontologies can be more effective and flexible • Expressive semantics to enable pedagogy-aware applications over a large volume of linked data can be meaningful in a Web 2.0+ world
  • 24. The road ahead?
  • 25. a roadmap of sem tech adoption
  • 26. a roadmap of sem tech adoption • Stage 1 ‣ Exposing internal repositories as linked data, Performance optimised triple stores ‣ Searching across repositories, matching students, teachers, curricula, research interests • Stage 2 ‣ Advanced searching and matching, argumentation and critical thinking applications ‣ Mapping linked data to application-wide or community-wide agreed ontologies • Stage 3 ‣ Collaborative semantic enrichment of linked data relevant to communities ‣ Pedagogy aware reasoning applications and services
  • 27. the network effect • HE institutions exposing relational databases, VLE material, Web pages as linked data ‣ Relevant technologies: RDF, RDFa, VLE plugins ‣ Starting from information already available in (X)HTML! • Applications that use exposed linked data across institutions ‣ Curriculum design or alignment ‣ Inline recommendation of resources or people ‣ Applications that map linked data to community agreed or idiosyncratic ontologies for critical thinking, argumentation, ...
  • 28. The first 100 weeks?
  • 29. first 100 weeks? • HE institutional, learning & teaching challenges: • What information has been/can be used to address them? • Where can this information be found in institutional repositories? • How does this information differ across disciplines? • Can this information be aligned across the HE sector? • Can this information be related to other open repositories? • What are the institutional barriers?
  • 30. first 100 weeks? • Requirements of a linked data infrastructure for HE? • Affordances of linked data repositories for the scale of HE? • Query language requirements to support relevant queries? • Interoperability with institutional repositories • databases, VLEs, web pages, XML documents, ... • Authenticity and integrity of HE resources? • Confidentiality requirements? Anonymisation? • Interoperability with existing open repositories, knowledge models
  • 31. Thank you! Thanassis Tiropanis - tt2@ecs.soton.ac.uk The project: semtech-survey.ecs.soton.ac.uk The survey: www.semtech.ecs.soton.ac.uk The workshop: www.semhe.org