Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The LEAP2A approach to portfolio interoperability

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Login to see the comments

The LEAP2A approach to portfolio interoperability

  1. 1. The LEAP2A approach to portfolio interoperability <ul><ul><li>Simon Grant </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>JISC CETIS and independent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SALTIS meeting, Coventry </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2008-10-09 </li></ul></ul>
  2. 2. Key messages <ul><li>LEAP2A is a relatively simple specification covering information owned by learners </li></ul><ul><ul><li>developed with developers and practitioners </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>has been implemented with relative ease </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>The LEAP approach is based on a relational model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>not a hierarchical model like IMS specs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ready for Semantic Web </li></ul></ul><ul><li>LEAP2A is under development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>It is a good time to get involved </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to ensure that one's requirements are covered </li></ul></ul></ul>
  3. 3. What's different from IMS eP? <ul><li>Emphasis on developer-friendliness from the start </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ensured through direct involvement and trial </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Relational, not hierarchical </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IMS eP uses IMS LIP with complex structures </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Relates to Semantic Web & Dublin Core ideas </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reuses established practice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>links to many current and future developments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>but developers not forced to change mind-set </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Uses familiar formats </li></ul><ul><ul><li>LEAP2A based on Atom (as other specs have done) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Much easier to merge with other information </li></ul>
  4. 4. What's still the same? <ul><li>Takes over basic good ideas in IMS LIP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>and carried through UKLeaP and IMS ePortfolio </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Still designed to support information transfer </li></ul><ul><ul><li>between systems when moving to new one </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(but also intended to support transfer of small pieces) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Information that supports and records </li></ul><ul><ul><li>CV building </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PDP, CPD </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>several employer interests </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>but not admin processes in general </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>unless there is a learner involvement </li></ul></ul></ul>
  5. 5. The LEAP 2.0 vision <ul><li>From CETIS Portfolio SIG meeting, December 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Community wanted something that was </li></ul><ul><ul><li>simple in concept </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>easy to implement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>modular and extensible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>now &quot;... aims to provide a sound basis for practical interoperability between portfolio tools, and other tools dealing with the same kinds of information.&quot; </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
  6. 6. Relational portfolio information <ul><li>Small elementary parts of portfolio information </li></ul><ul><ul><li>smallest that can be used independently </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Semantic Web RDF blobs and arrows (“triples”) </li></ul><ul><li>A very few examples: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>achievement – has evidence – resource (dissertation) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>activity (course) – supports – achievement (good grade) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>achievement – is evidence of – assertion (my statement) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>assertion – claims – ability (learning outcome of course) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>meeting – attended by – person </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Does not build them into fixed complex structures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>because the patterns are changeable </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. A small corner of blobs and arrows course (activity) outcome (ability) achievement (good grade) assertion is evidence of has outcome supports claims personally defined resource (essay) has evidence
  8. 8. Is your information relational? <ul><li>Well, is it really hierarchical? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Is there one obvious way of making a tree structure out of the portfolio information of interest to you? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Really? That obvious? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>well then, see if it's the same as other peoples'... </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. PIOP – from December 2007 <ul><li>“Portfolio InterOperability Prototyping” </li></ul><ul><li>Involve developers centrally from the outset </li></ul><ul><ul><li>uptake means everything for a standard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>developers are vital for implementation </li></ul></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Chose to work with the Atom Syndication Format </li></ul><ul><ul><li>an XML format similar to RSS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>how you would expect to represent a blog feed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>in Atom, everything is an entry </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>suggested by several people </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Worked out the basics of LEAP2A </li></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>These are the Blobs </li></ul><ul><li>Based on established usage within partner portfolio systems </li></ul><ul><li>More have been sketched out in LEAP 2.0 for future consideration </li></ul><ul><li>Entry is used as itself for any general pieces of writing </li></ul><ul><li>Graceful degradation </li></ul><ul><li>“ plan” includes goal </li></ul>LEAP2A types of information <ul><li>entry </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>achievement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>activity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>meeting </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>person </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>resource </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>selection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>plan </li></ul></ul></ul>
  11. 11. LEAP2A relationships & inverses <ul><li>relation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reflects on </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>has part </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>has ordered part </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>supports </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>has evidence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>has agenda </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>has outcome </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>attended by </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>has reply </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>author (no inverse) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(inverse ones) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reflected on by </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>is part of </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>is ordered part of </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>supported by </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>is evidence of </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>is agenda of </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>is outcome of </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>attends </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>in reply to </li></ul></ul><ul><li>more in LEAP 2.0 for future consideration </li></ul>
  12. 12. Information about entries / items <ul><li>Entries have authors </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Atom allows plain text name, e-mail, URI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>in LEAP2A, URI can relate to separate person entry </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>but we haven't yet decided how to cover personal details </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Records created, modified at certain times </li></ul><ul><li>Achievements, plans each have one date of completion </li></ul><ul><li>Activities, meetings have start and end dates </li></ul><ul><li>Things happen in locations </li></ul><ul><li>These things are recorded “literally” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>rather than by a relationship to another item “blob” </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Abilities are of great interest <ul><li>(skill, competence, learning outcome, etc.) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>People aim to acquire them through learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>They are assessed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>People claim to have them </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Qualifications relate to them </li></ul></ul><ul><li>An ability itself is an impersonal definition </li></ul><ul><ul><li>the subject of goals, claims, assertions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>can be built up into skills frameworks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ability can be represented in LEAP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ideally as an external definition, with just a link to it </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>also possible to define within the portfolio information itself </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. PIOP project achievements <ul><li>3 initial partners </li></ul><ul><ul><li>University of Newcastle </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pebble Learning (ex Wolverhampton) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>University of Nottingham </li></ul></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>first implementations... </li></ul><ul><ul><li>demonstrate exchange of substantial information </li></ul></ul><ul><li>project now being extended to others </li></ul><ul><ul><li>carefully adding whatever else is necessary for them </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>maintaining agreement of all involved </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. LEAP future <ul><li>LEAP2A widening to encompass any portfolio tools </li></ul><ul><li>Related systems are welcome to join in as well </li></ul><ul><ul><li>if they deal with similar information </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Develop LEAP2A transform to LEAP RDF </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RDF seen as a higher level of interoperability </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Relate to other specifications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IMS ePortfolio (negotiations in progress) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>HR-XML (relevant parts only) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>others </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Greater interoperability without coercion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>people can keep their own way of doing things </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Summary <ul><li>LEAP 2.0 is a simple, powerful interoperability framework based on a relational model of portfolio information </li></ul><ul><ul><li>this relates naturally to Semantic Web concepts </li></ul></ul><ul><li>PIOP project ensures developer interests are fully taken into consideration </li></ul><ul><li>LEAP2A is the first implementation, based on Atom </li></ul><ul><li>Thanks for your attention </li></ul><ul><li>Time for discussion and questions? </li></ul>