How to make mathematical eContent travel well


Published on

Electronic resources, that is eContent, produced for education ‘’travels well’’ when it can be reused across national borders and in different curricular frameworks. In this talk, we discuss what features of mathematical eContent contribute to making it travel well. In particular, we will talk about semantic markup such as Content MathML and OpenMath, and about metadata descriptions of the learning resources. We will look into ways of producing mathematical eContent and how it can be converted to ad-hoc formats, including those that are accessible.
Publication_details: ICTCM 2009, New Orleans.
Author(s): O. Caprotti, M. Seppälä, M. Pauna
Type: Slide presentation
Date: 2009/03/14

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

How to make mathematical eContent travel well

  1. 1. How to make mathematical eContent travel well Olga Caprotti*, Matti Pauna*, Mika Seppälä University of Helsinki *Work funded by the JEM Thematic Network ECP-038208
  2. 2. travelling eContent Electronic resources and, more in general, eContent produced for education ‘’travel well’’ when they can be reused across national borders and in different curricular frameworks ...on a variety of devices
  3. 3. In this talk features of mathematical eContent that make it travel well: semantic markup such as Content MathML and OpenMath, metadata for learning resources producing mathematical eContent and convert it to ad-hoc formats multilingual mathematics
  4. 4. JEM-Joining Educational Mathematics EU-funded thematic network of 20 nodes in 10 countries promote eContent in mathematics education eContent from the partners HAS to travel well
  5. 5. Characteristics of the traveling resource Learning resources travel well if they are high quality and in addition if they do not rely on written or spoken language, use alternative representations, avoid jargon used in country of origin, are highly visual, are modular, clearly state the IPR
  6. 6. Mathematics is universal but not all formats are created equal may or may not support localization of notation to place and subject (communities of practice) may or may not support alternative modalities: e.g. aural or braille presentations even font scaling can become an issue
  7. 7. What format then?
  8. 8. Comparative Chart Format Server Interactivity Notation Authoring Alternative support Formulae GUI representation SWiM, STeX, OpenMath/ OMDoc pantha-rei, Y Y OQMath, XHTML+MathML C-MathML ActiveMath jEditOQMath OpenMath/ mathdox- limited, via XHTML+MathML, MathDox Y LaTeX/ - player xslt PDF, LaTeX MathML XHTML+MathML, CNXML N Y C-MathML LaTeX, Word PDF PDF, PPTX?, DOCX, OOXML N N N OMML MS Office DOC
  9. 9. Multilinguality The WebALT mathematical grammar library, released under GPL, allows to generate problem statements in several languages from a unique representation in OpenMath.
  10. 10. CMS for mathematics ActiveMath, MathDox, ActiveMath2
  11. 11. Editors MathDox formula editor jEditOQMath LaTeXML web-based produces for OMDoc documents for those familiar with LaTeX OpenMath used in ActiveMath faithful emulation of TeX's integrated into HTML easy input syntax of behaviour pages mathematical formulae extensibility by packages intended for interactive pages preservation of both semantic and presentation cues WIRIS OpenMath toolS support good Presentation java applet MathML, in future Content MathML and OpenMath. moodle integration sTeX conversion CNX, C-MathML, OMDoc, Dublin-Core, and PhysML
  12. 12. Making eContent known Once produced, such material is very valuable. Learning repositories allow to share resources. Use standards for describing learning resources, e.g. LOM (IEEE learning object metadata, 70 fields in 9 categories) for federated searches across repositories (OAI)
  13. 13. Metadata descriptions Entered manually by author in a form e.g. interactivity type (active,expositive,mixed), e.g. learning resource type (exercise, simulation, lecture, graph, questionnaire, diagram, figure, index, slide, table, narrative text, exam, experiment, problem statement, self assessment) Automatically produced by online services SAmgI (Simple AMG Interface)
  14. 14. JEM Learning Repository
  15. 15. The problem of time traveling resources
  16. 16. Course-ware development occurs during years: lecture notes, slides, podcasts, mobile-maths OUR CASE: interactive exercises Electronic archival issues: no one knows anymore what is there multiple authors, locations, versions non-uniform naming tailored for several specific use cases
  17. 17. MapleTA Exercise Collection Organized into classes Poor metadata support Poor search support Ad hoc classification (depends on the author)
  18. 18. Reorganize! agree on a meaningful naming scheme: e.g. Topic information encoded in the QB name: 010202 for Fractions easier to locate questions topics are smaller maintain one version
  19. 19. Metadata generation Structure: Atomic Format: application/ mapleta Interactivity type: Active Learning resource type: Exercise Intended end user role: Learner
  20. 20. Managing MapleTA exercises Search & browse: question text algorithm hints solution LOM fields
  21. 21. Summary Choice of format for eContent will impact how well the material can travel to places, and through time The richer the format, the more involved the authoring process Choosing to author using a semantic markup now is possible
  22. 22. Thank you!