Published on

Ontology-Dialogue Mashup for MATURE

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment


  1. 1. Ontologies, dialogue and knowledge maturing: Towards a mashup and design study A. Ravenscroft1, S. Braun2, J. Cook1, A. Schmidt2, J.Bimrose3, A. Brown3 & C. Bradley1 1. Learning Technology Research Institute, London Metropolitan University, UK 2 FZI Research Center for Information Technologies, Germany 3 The Institute for Employment Research, University of Warwick, UK http://mature-ip.eu
  2. 2. Overview of talk <ul><li>Learning as knowledge maturing </li></ul><ul><li>Why this design study? </li></ul><ul><li>SOBOLEO and ontology maturing </li></ul><ul><li>Ontology maturing and dialogue </li></ul><ul><li>Dialogue games and InterLoc </li></ul><ul><li>Dialogue games for knowledge maturing (KM-DG) </li></ul><ul><li>A proof of concept scenario: Careers guidance </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion/key issues/way forward </li></ul>
  3. 3. Learning as knowledge maturing <ul><li>MATURE: Large-scale European research project (FP 7, started April 2008) </li></ul><ul><li>“ Continuous social learning in knowledge networks” </li></ul><ul><li>Aim: Investigate and realise learning as knowledge maturing in the workplace </li></ul>
  4. 4. Learning as knowledge maturing <ul><li>Key aims: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Personal Learning and Maturing Environment (PLME) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Organisational Learning and Maturing Environment (OLME) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Investigate and develop: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The knowledge maturing model </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Technological approaches to the continuous development of social software and knowledge networks. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Why this design study? <ul><li>federated set of studies that are examining different aspects of the (large-scale) knowledge maturing enterprise </li></ul><ul><li>This Ontology-Dialogue Design Study aims to: </li></ul><ul><li>Explore and develop the relationship between knowledge maturing (SOBOLEO) and social learning (Dialogue Games/InterLoc) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>… esp. Ontology maturing and collaborative learning dialogue </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… both approaches established through papers etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Test technical integration issues related to the creation of suitable mashups (also ‘conceptual mashup’) </li></ul><ul><li>Explore the role of collaborative dialogue (generally) in the continuous development of knowledge networks </li></ul><ul><li>Validate against a concrete scenario demonstrating knowledge maturing </li></ul><ul><li>… so very much wip! </li></ul><ul><li>Also try out some evaluation methods </li></ul><ul><li>- Scenario based evaluation </li></ul><ul><li>- Other empirical methods (modelling, comparative studies etc.) </li></ul>
  6. 6. Ontology maturing and SOBOLEO <ul><li><add Simone’s / Andreas’s slides here> </li></ul>
  7. 7. Annotation and ontology editing
  8. 8. Ontology development and dialogue <ul><li>Can the introduction of a specially designed dialogue: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Improve the way Ontologies are developed, refined, used and generally understood? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Support the phases of knowledge maturing? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Support collaborative and social learning around Ontology development and use? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… With this in mind we considered incorporating work into digital dialogue games and the InterLoc tool that realises them </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Dialogue games (DGs) and InterLoc <ul><li>Address pressing need to reconcile learners developing digital literacies and practices with the well-established requirements for reasoned and purposeful learning dialogues (critical and creative thinking) </li></ul><ul><li>InterLoc is an attractive, inclusive and pedagogically derived web-technology that is easily deployed and used to address relatively generic learning problems and opportunities. </li></ul><ul><li>DGs are serious social games: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>realise engaging and structured rule-based interactions that are performed using pre-defined dialogue features (such as dialogue moves and a model of turn-taking) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>specifically designed to foster thinking and learning in ways that are popular with users </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Key features of Dialogue games (DGs)c <ul><li>Structured and engaging rule-based interaction to scaffold thinking </li></ul><ul><li>and collaborative argumentation </li></ul><ul><li>(Currently) synchronous multimodal dialogues (4-6 players) </li></ul><ul><li>Roles: player, facilitator, learning manager </li></ul><ul><li>Pre-defined dialogue features that promote thinking </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Moves: Inform, Question, Challenge , etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sets of Openers to perform each move: “I think…”, “I disagree because…”, “My evidence is…” etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Content generated as an Active Document (or knowledge asset) </li></ul><ul><li>Dialogue Games can be edited – so can produce a Knowledge Maturing Dialogue Game (KM-DG) </li></ul>
  11. 11. Playing a dialogue game
  12. 12. Towards a mashup for knowledge maturing, SOBOLEO-InterLoc <ul><ul><li>Why?...means to populate, clarify and refine the Ontologies that are produced. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E.g. dimensions such as Appropriateness, Social Agreement and Formality could be negotiated, and therefore better understood through suitably designed dialogue games. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How? be achieved through replacing or supplementing the Chat component of SOBOLEO with a specially designed dialogue game, or number of games, for Ontology maturing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>To stimulate users to have a dialogue with and about the developing Ontologies to specify, clarify and refine the semantic features or degrees of certainty about their classification. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Achieved through specifying the pre-defined Moves and Openers of the dialogue game in terms of the semantic relations and classifications that are implicit in SOBOLEO or provided through the dialogue of a user community. </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Towards a mashup for knowledge maturing, SOBOLEO-InterLoc <ul><li>Why? …essentially – both individual users and the community could have a dialogue with and about the ontology, to construct more understandable and meaningful representations. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Should catalyse knowledge maturing and social learning in relation to the domain and the users who are continuously developing their understanding of it. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Or, having a structured dialogue about the development and use of the ontology should actually help to ‘bring it to life’ and make it more useful </li></ul>
  14. 14. A proof of concept scenario: Careers guidance <ul><li>How such a mashup would work in a hypothetical yet authentic user scenario </li></ul><ul><li>A Personal Advisor (P.A) working with a young female interested in becoming a plumber </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In this situation the P.A. would need to perform a number of knowledge maturing processes to research and mediate Labour Market Information (LMI) in a meaningful way </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How could they use this ‘engine’ of a (continuously developing) knowledge representation plus various dialogue facilities to support a range of activities associated with the development and application of knowledge for advising and problem solving in this situation? </li></ul>
  15. 15. A proof of concept scenario: Careers guidance <ul><li>To summarise, through combining a flexible ontology development and learning dialogue technology, a range of knowledge maturing services could be provided that include: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1. knowledge acquisition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2. personal knowledge refinement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3. collaborative knowledge refinement and negotiation of meaning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4. informal learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>5. collaborative learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>6. support for advising and problem solving; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>7. reflection and meta-cognition about the domain and its application; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>8. re-representing domain knowledge for different audiences and purposes. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Or summarising all this, arguably, as hypothesise: having the potential continuously to develop a personal and community Ontology about LMI combined with the means to have a specialised and scaffolded dialogue about it, will potentially make the domain more understandable and the application of the ontology more powerful. </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Discussion/key issues/way forward <ul><li>… a prototype validation and evaluation of the knowledge maturing model, an orchestration of tools that realise it and how this might work in practice </li></ul><ul><li>Conceptual validation, of ‘conceptual mashup’ (this article) </li></ul><ul><li>Test the current mashup against other user scenarios and findings from the ethnographic studies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>… Exemplary (what we can do) and Critical (what we can’t do) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Conduct technical integration (+ semantic wiki wrapper?) </li></ul><ul><li>Involve users </li></ul><ul><li>Harmonise with other design studies of knowledge maturing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>… evaluation matrix </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g. harmonise conceptual and technical emphasis from Ontology-Dialogue study with usability and acceptability emphasis in other design studies (e.g. semantic wiki) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… Front end mock-ups and back-end mashups: towards integrated methodologies for MATURE </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Why would anyone use this mashup? <ul><li>Why take time and commit to collective improvement in knowledge and understanding  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Participate in organisational understanding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Re-use developed knowledge structures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Better personal understanding through active participation and dialogue, and participate in and understand process of abstraction (cornerstone of much understanding and learning) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What if we don’t do this sort of thing? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Less empowered workers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Constant misunderstandings and miscommunications because no shared understanding of basic concepts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Would the credit crunch have happened if more key members of financial institutions had a better shared and negotiated understanding of core economic principles and the relations between them!? </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Ethnographic reality!? <ul><li>Innsbruck's work: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How accommodate different worker/user styles? (Sally, Igor and Aisha) - Optional participation vs. instructed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… being instructed to do something valuable to the organisation or community? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Do we accommodate different learning styles or aim to transform them into ‘better’ ones? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accommodation more doable so more personalised tools or personalised interfaces to organisational tools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Individuation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li> In-form-ation </li></ul></ul>