Openess and Portfolio Technology

485 views

Published on

Webcast for the WCET eduTools project, April 2006

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
485
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Openess and Portfolio Technology

    1. 1. Openess and Portfolio Technology Darren Cambridge George Mason University
    2. 2. Overview <ul><li>Open content: Multimedia </li></ul><ul><li>Open architecture: Integration </li></ul><ul><li>Open standards: Interoperability </li></ul><ul><li>Open services: Distribution </li></ul>
    3. 3. Open Content <ul><li>Portfolio pedagogy and assessment practice values </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Student ownership and control </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Authentic evidence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Diverse evidence </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Implies a wide variety of file formats and authoring tools </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Challenging to support </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. Supporting Open Content <ul><li>Portfolio studios </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clemson University </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LaGuardia Community College </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Multimedia writing centers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>University of Michigan </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Archival formats for long-term storage </li></ul><ul><ul><li>PDF-A </li></ul></ul>
    5. 5. Open Architecture <ul><li>Portfolio systems are integrative </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can make use of data from multiple academic and administrative systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can provide data to same systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ease of integration depends on both systems </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Increased openess decreases complexity of integration </li></ul>
    6. 6. Degrees of Openess <ul><li>Closed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dependent on a single vendor for integration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Requires relationship between vendors if products from different companies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Offers APIs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Some data and functions exposed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Documentation may an issue </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Depends on proprietary decision on both ends </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Supports open standards and specifications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Less dependent on both ends </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Open source </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fully customizable </li></ul></ul>
    7. 7. Open Source Software <ul><li>Open source software (OSS) programs are </li></ul><ul><ul><li>applications that are distributed with their source code, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>giving users the freedom </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to run the program for any purpose, </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to study and modify the program, and </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to freely distribute copies of the original or modified programs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>You probably use OSS everyday </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Email = sendmail </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web server = Apache </li></ul></ul>
    8. 8. Drivers of OSS in Education <ul><li>Tight budgets (Coppola and Neely) </li></ul><ul><li>Desire for freedom from vendor control </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of innovation </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration technology that enables virtual teamwork </li></ul><ul><li>Development technologies that support modularity and interoperability </li></ul><ul><li>Proven business models </li></ul><ul><li>Coherence with academic culture </li></ul>
    9. 9. In Search of a Better Model… Community Source Projects Partnering Organizations Higher Ed Coordination Open IP Objective…sustainable economics and innovation for satisfied users … for how we pay and what we get. Software is not free. Bundled IP & Support Creating Software Sustaining Software Licensing Fees Maintenance Fees Commercial Coordination Closed IP Unbundled IP & Support + Commercial Support Options
    10. 10. OSS as Scholarship <ul><li>OSS has the three characteristics of scholarship </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Made public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subjected to peer review </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Available for reuse (Shulman) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OSS is part of a larger movement to reconceive teaching and learning as scholarly work </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment is also part of this movement </li></ul>
    11. 11. Open Standards and Specifications <ul><li>Social software specifications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS, Atom </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Friend of a Friend (FOAF) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social software APIs </li></ul></ul><ul><li>eLearning specifications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IMS ePortfolio </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IMS Tool Portability </li></ul></ul>
    12. 12. Portfolio as Digital Composition <ul><li>An ePortfolio is a digital composition </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A message in a rhetorical situation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The product of the author’s agency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integral </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Not just a repository </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Arrangement and design matter </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Explains and predicts </li></ul></ul></ul>
    13. 13. Social Software Specifications <ul><li>Lightweight and flexible </li></ul><ul><li>Excellent support for </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Atomization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distribution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Aggregation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Little support for </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Synthesis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contextualization </li></ul></ul>
    14. 14. IMS ePortfolio <ul><li>Final version 1.0 approved by IMS Technical Advisory Board June 20, 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>Captures the essential elements of an ePortfolio discussed earlier </li></ul><ul><li>Accommodates diverse purposes </li></ul><ul><li>Complicated </li></ul><ul><li>Will require development of application profiles </li></ul>
    15. 15. Scope <ul><li>Focus on portability of portfolios as integral wholes </li></ul><ul><li>Services out of scope </li></ul><ul><li>Integrates and expands on existing specifications </li></ul><ul><li>XML binding </li></ul><ul><li>Revisions anticipated based on evidence from actual practice </li></ul>
    16. 16. Components of a Portfolio <ul><li>A collection of heterogeneous parts </li></ul><ul><li>Associated with an owner </li></ul><ul><li>A set of relationships between the parts </li></ul><ul><li>Views </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Selections of parts and relationships for a purpose </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Presentations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Instructions on how an audience experiences a view </li></ul></ul>
    17. 17. Portfolio Part Finally Other LIP:Relationship Activity Competency Goal Product Accessibility FROM LIP … .. etc ACCLIP New Assertion Reflexion Participation (Data model in binding – based on Enterprise Services Group) Rubric Rubric Cell (uses RDCEO)
    18. 18. Relationship Types <ul><li>Basics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>shows-up </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supplements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supports </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>precedes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Assessments and Evidence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Attests </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Evaluates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Evidences </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Commentary </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reflects-on </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Showcasing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Presents </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Motivation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>aims-at </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(Categorization by CETIS) </li></ul>
    19. 19. Packaging <ul><li>Uses Organisation/Title to identify resources for </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Views </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Presentations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Owners </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relationships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>portfolioParts </li></ul></ul>
    20. 20. Packaging Example Naming Convention for content-types Title
    21. 21. Implementing IMS ePortfolio <ul><li>Chris Arnett, Open Source Portfolio Initiative </li></ul>
    22. 22. IMS Tool Interoperability <ul><li>Enables use of external tools and services within a learning environment </li></ul><ul><li>Simple demonstrator at Alt-I-Lab 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>Initial release Fall 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>ePortfolio community should generate requirements for further development </li></ul>
    23. 23. From Scott Wilson’s workblog http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/scott/blogview?entry=20050603020705
    24. 24. Open Services <ul><li>Service Orientated Architectures to support portfolio development and use </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Skills Profiling Web Service </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web Services for Reflective Learning </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Challenge: Integrity </li></ul>
    25. 25. Sharing Goals Through 43 Things <ul><li>Easy to share goals to and from a portfolio using RSS and 43 Things API </li></ul><ul><li>Such sharing divorces the shared goal from its relationships to other objects and the portfolio as an integral whole </li></ul><ul><li>Portfolio services must contextualize information within synthesized composition </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.43things.com/ </li></ul>
    26. 26. Keep In Touch <ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Blog: http://ncepr.org/ncepr/drupal/blog/1 </li></ul>

    ×