IEEE FIE 2008 Saratoga Paper 1197

372 views

Published on

Authoring educational content based on abstraction layers

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
372
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • No podemos saber qué es un recurso para otro. La relación que tiene es que está enlazado, pero no podemos comentar nada más.
  • IEEE FIE 2008 Saratoga Paper 1197

    1. 1. Providing Instructional layers of abstraction in Authoring Tools for Engineering Education Content Frontiers in Education Conference Saratoga Springs, NY (2008) Miguel R. Artacho, UNED University (Spain) [email_address]
    2. 2. Authoring tools <ul><li>Aggregate content based on LT specifications </li></ul><ul><li>Low level of abstraction </li></ul><ul><li>Mostly driven by the LT tags </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Proposal of an abstract layers stack and a design model </li></ul>
    3. 3. <ul><li>Knowledge domain  </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional template (Learning Design Model) </li></ul><ul><li>Conceptualization </li></ul><ul><li>Instantiation </li></ul>An ortogonal view for authoring
    4. 4. An ortogonal view for authoring <ul><li>Conceptualization </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge domain ontology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Learning design abstract model (visual languages for LD) or instructional templates </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Instantiation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Topic map based on a given ontology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LT-based content with references to LOs </li></ul></ul>
    5. 5. Ontologies in e-learning <ul><li>Entities and relationships within knowledge domain </li></ul><ul><li>Axioms, rules and constrains of the entities of the ontology </li></ul><ul><li>Allow content interoperability at a “knowledge level” ( A. Newel, 1982 ) </li></ul>
    6. 6. Ontology An educational domain modelization (Scientific domain)
    7. 7. Instance
    8. 8. Structure vs. Knowledge domain <ul><li>Knowledge domain </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Based on instructional ontologies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Growable and maintainable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… Ready for Web 2.0! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Structure and Learning Design </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Different templates for different purposes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integrate activities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Content retrieved using high level queries </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Levels of abstraction <ul><li>Content level : retrieve, embed or links to the appropriate LO. We consider only a low granularity component at this level. </li></ul><ul><li>Structure level : provide hierarchical decomposition of the learning environment. This level provides an explicit description of the table of contents that can be incorporated to the information model. </li></ul><ul><li>Task level : definition of learning processes, collaborative activities and grading type. </li></ul><ul><li>Sequencing level : Scheduling of modules and tasks, time restrictions and instructional dependencies between modules. </li></ul><ul><li>Management level : considers interoperability issues between learning content and virtual learning environment (VLE). </li></ul>
    10. 10. Structural design
    11. 11. Authoring model for educational content LT specification based content Instances Instantiation level Ontologies Instructional templates Conceptualization level Learning Design Model Cognitive Design Model
    12. 12. Authoring educatinal content student Knowledge domain instance Authoring Web-based learning environment link link link link unit of study or PALO file
    13. 13. Structure edition
    14. 14. Sequencing modules PALO-IMS QTI CORRESPONDENCE simulation daylight jme latex uploadInteraction file choiceInteraction test extendedTextInteraction text IMS QTI PALO
    15. 15. Describing tasks <ul><li>Tasks depeding on the kind of outcome (text, file, jme, latex,..) </li></ul><ul><li>Not yet collaborative tasks </li></ul>
    16. 16. Some conclusions <ul><li>Authoring educational content can be improved by means of abstraction </li></ul><ul><li>A 2-axis based abstraction model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Modelling instructional knowledge domain </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Modelling instructional template (learning design) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Some future work is possible… </li></ul>
    17. 17. From web to semantic web SOURCE: W3c Consortium (2002)
    18. 18. Integrating SW for e-learning with web 2.0 <ul><li>Domain models and instances are growable by the social web </li></ul><ul><li>Content material can keep semantic labels form conceptualizations </li></ul><ul><li>Social rating can provide metadata </li></ul>
    19. 19. SW based authoring Paper on Workshop SW-EL ’06: http://www.win.tue.nl/SW-EL/2006/camera-ready/15-CDK+MRA-SWEL06-reduced%20FINAL%20v4.pdf unit of study SW Authoring SW enriched Web learning environment exercise involve Is_hint Conceptualization of content matter CONCEPT PROBLEM THEME HINT student SW based knowledge acquisition & inference CONCEPT HINT CONCEPT EXTERNAL CONTENT DYNAMICALLY BINDED
    20. 20. Providing Instructional layers of abstraction in Authoring Tools for Engineering Education Content Frontiers in Education Conference Saratoga Springs, NY (2008) Miguel R. Artacho, UNED University (Spain) [email_address]

    ×