Nathan Yergler at 00:17, 19 April 2010

2010-04-19T00:17:38Z

Nathan Yergler at 19:46, 27 January 2010

2010-01-27T19:46:20Z

Nathan Yergler: Created page with '=== OER search and discovery meeting === ==== July 10, 2009 ==== ==== [http://www.flickr.com/photos/cclearn/sets/72157621380443915/ Pictures] ==== === Round table discussion of …'

2010-01-27T19:45:24Z

Created page with '=== OER search and discovery meeting === ==== July 10, 2009 ==== ==== [http://www.flickr.com/photos/cclearn/sets/72157621380443915/ Pictures] ==== === Round table discussion of …'

New page

=== OER search and discovery meeting ===
==== July 10, 2009 ====
==== [http://www.flickr.com/photos/cclearn/sets/72157621380443915/ Pictures] ====

=== Round table discussion of OER search and discovery needs, specs, considerations: ===
* OER are diverse in form and origin.
* OER are difficult to define universally.
* Are metadata sufficient to improve search, or are there bigger issues at play?
* Are we addressing ''educational search'' generally, or are we only addressing ''OER search''?
* What is the user experience that informs any search solution?
* There is a lingo issue - teachers want to use OER but don't realize that's what they want.
* How much should we expect users to understand in order to use the tool effectively?
* How do we get users to contribute to improving the information?

If we build a search engine, what type of engine do we want (what categories of engine are there)?

Can we create a publication protocol for OER-creators to enhance discoverability?

Are there schemas for illustrating permissions associated with resources which are easy to understand and easy to implement (e.g., traffic light)?

=== [http://discovered.creativecommons.org/search/ DiscoverEd] demo: ===

* Built to illustrate first principles (above).
* Key was to presume nothing about the quality/extent of the data or the specific nature of the OER in question. Open to any self-described ''curators'' of educational resources.
* Is it a problem that it also archives non-CC-licensed works?

=== [http://www.globe-info.org/ GLOBE] demo: ===

* [http://lreforschools.eun.org/LRE-Portal/Index.iface LRE]: interface for school teachers
* [http://ariadne.cs.kuleuven.be/AriadneFinder/ ariadne]: facetted search
* [http://portal.mace-project.eu/ MACE]: tabletop and other visual interfaces

=== [http://oerrecommender.org OER recommender] demo: ===

* Take the tools to the content, rather than waiting for the content-creators to make the content available to the tools.
* Greasemonkey script.
* How do users understand this ''service''? In Cnx, there is a problem with users presuming that the author of the referring resource is the person who created the related resources.
* Next iteration: Folksemantic.com

We also briefly discussed some other tools that are using similar developments, such as Google Rich Snippets, Yahoo BOSS, and others. These various tools should share the same databases.... a quick discussion led to some agreement that this coding was sane and achievable within a year, with some additional resources.

=== Attempt to categorize the different ''flavors'' of search tools that are out there: ===

Altavista-like
* Look at the content of the resource in isolation.

Google-like
* Look at content in isolation but add link structure.
* Low-cost for data extraction.

Facebook-like
* Leverages identified social interaction (people known to the user).
* Built on trusted relationships.

Youtube-like
* Leverages comments from people unknown to the user.
* Really easy to contribute information.

Google-scholar-like
* Content is published by specific entities (curators).
* ''Curation'' occurs prior to contribution.
* Uses structured metadata.

Wikipedia
* Remixing occurs on site. Drives to a single outcome.
* Benefits from distributed collaboration on search queries.
* ''Curation'' occurs after contribution.

=== Can we set some initial priorities and plans of action? ===
# Minimum publishing style guide
# Registry linking
# Catalog of enhanced features (e.g., new metadata fields)
# Promotion/Adoption

=== Looking ahead: ===
What UI is needed to get integration into existing OER sites?

* Toggle between ''my site'' versus ''all OER''.
* Plug-in for Moodle, Sakai, LAMS, etc.
* Basically, how do we get the tools of Open Ed into the workspaces people use every day?

=== List of major production tools for educational resources and possible contacts: ===
'Note: In most cases, having some initial code in hand will help a lot.'

* Microsoft
** see [http://www2.cs.kuleuven.be/~hmdb/alocom/ ALOCOM] for ARIADNE plugin
* LAMS
** see [http://www.screencast.com/t/rpxpbw1xU screencast] of GLOBE plugin
* Moodle
** see [http://www.ariadne-eu.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=78 ARIADNE plugin]
* Sakai
* Blackboard
** see also Vandepitte, P., Van Rentergem, L., Duval, E., Ternier, S. & Neven, F. (2003). Bridging an LCMS and an LMS: a Blackboard Building Block for the ARIADNE Knowledge Pool System. In D. Lassner & C. McNaught (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 423-424). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/13794
* Open Office
* Google docs
* Wordpress
* Mediawiki

=== Other places we should target for the search integration: ===
* School web sites
* Professional society pages
* Government and district sites
* Library websites

=== Stages of action: ===
* Would you be interested?
* Can we get some help if we have a detailed technical question in your environment?
* What would it take to integrate?
* Letter (tweet) of support?
* Solicit external funding?
* Deliver.

=== Who should be part of this effort? ===
How do we identify those orgs that want us to represent them in this space?

Two levels of commitment:
# the resources are included, or
# the organization involved is committed to development in this space.

=== We need to develop a statement of support: ===
Some sort of statement seems necessary. Perhaps a paragraph that captures the goals of OER search/discovery and why orgs would be interested in having such a tool baked into the tools that people actually use. Should then get signatures.

Can enhance OpenEd (opened.creativecommons.org) site to host.

=== Can we adopt a common set of metrics? ===

* <nowiki>#s of resources (divided by attribute).</nowiki>
* <nowiki>#s of people using.</nowiki>
* <nowiki>#s of downloads.</nowiki>
* <nowiki>#s of actual implementations.</nowiki>
* Others?

=== Additional questions for the group: ===
* What research is out there about the barriers regarding search?
* To what extent do teachers actually search for things on the Web?
* What orgs should be involved in the broader effort?
** OCWC
** Merlot
** Globe
** ccLearn
** ??

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-[[Category:DiscoverEd]]
+[[Category:OER Search]]
 === OER search and discovery meeting ===
 ==== July 10, 2009 ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:46, 27 January 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[Category:DiscoverEd]]
	=== OER search and discovery meeting ===		=== OER search and discovery meeting ===
	==== July 10, 2009 ====		==== July 10, 2009 ====

OER Discovery 2009 Notes - Revision history

Nathan Yergler at 00:17, 19 April 2010

Nathan Yergler at 19:46, 27 January 2010

Nathan Yergler: Created page with '=== OER search and discovery meeting === ==== July 10, 2009 ==== ==== [http://www.flickr.com/photos/cclearn/sets/72157621380443915/ Pictures] ==== === Round table discussion of …'