Post on 03-Jul-2015
description
Openess and Portfolio Technology
Darren CambridgeGeorge Mason University
Overview
• Open content: Multimedia• Open architecture: Integration • Open standards: Interoperability• Open services: Distribution
Open Content
• Portfolio pedagogy and assessment practice values– Student ownership and control– Authentic evidence– Diverse evidence
• Implies a wide variety of file formats and authoring tools– Challenging to support
Supporting Open Content
• Portfolio studios – Clemson University– LaGuardia Community College
• Multimedia writing centers – University of Michigan
• Archival formats for long-term storage– PDF-A
Open Architecture
• Portfolio systems are integrative– Can make use of data from multiple academic
and administrative systems– Can provide data to same systems – Ease of integration depends on both systems
• Increased openess decreases complexity of integration
Degrees of Openess
• Closed– Dependent on a single vendor for integration– Requires relationship between vendors if products from different
companies
• Offers APIs– Some data and functions exposed– Documentation may an issue– Depends on proprietary decision on both ends
• Supports open standards and specifications– Less dependent on both ends
• Open source– Fully customizable
Open Source Software
• Open source software (OSS) programs are – applications that are distributed with their source
code, – giving users the freedom
• to run the program for any purpose, • to study and modify the program, and • to freely distribute copies of the original or modified programs
• You probably use OSS everyday– Email = sendmail– Web server = Apache
Drivers of OSS in Education
• Tight budgets (Coppola and Neely)
• Desire for freedom from vendor control• Lack of innovation• Collaboration technology that enables virtual
teamwork• Development technologies that support
modularity and interoperability • Proven business models• Coherence with academic culture
In Search of a Better Model…
CreatingSoftware
SustainingSoftware
CommunitySourceProjects
PartneringOrganizations
Higher EdCoordination
Open IP
LicensingFees
MaintenanceFees
CommercialCoordination
Closed IP
Objective…sustainable economics and innovation for satisfied users
…for how we pay and what we get. Software is not free.
Bundled IP & Support Unbundled IP & Support + Commercial Support Options
OSS as Scholarship
• OSS has the three characteristics of scholarship– Made public– Subjected to peer review– Available for reuse (Shulman)
• OSS is part of a larger movement to reconceive teaching and learning as scholarly work
• Assessment is also part of this movement
Open Standards and Specifications
• Social software specifications– RSS, Atom – Friend of a Friend (FOAF) – Social software APIs
• eLearning specifications– IMS ePortfolio– IMS Tool Portability
Portfolio as Digital Composition
• An ePortfolio is a digital composition – A message in a rhetorical situation– The product of the author’s agency – Integral
• Not just a repository• Arrangement and design matter• Explains and predicts
Social Software Specifications
• Lightweight and flexible • Excellent support for
– Atomization– Distribution– Aggregation
• Little support for– Synthesis– Contextualization
IMS ePortfolio
• Final version 1.0 approved by IMS Technical Advisory Board June 20, 2005
• Captures the essential elements of an ePortfolio discussed earlier
• Accommodates diverse purposes• Complicated • Will require development of application
profiles
Scope
• Focus on portability of portfolios as integral wholes
• Services out of scope• Integrates and expands on existing
specifications • XML binding • Revisions anticipated based on evidence
from actual practice
Components of a Portfolio
• A collection of heterogeneous parts • Associated with an owner• A set of relationships between the parts• Views
– Selections of parts and relationships for a purpose
• Presentations– Instructions on how an audience experiences a view
Portfolio PartActivity 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)
Finally Other
LIP:Relationship
Relationship Types
• Basics– shows-up– Supplements– Supports– precedes
• Assessments and Evidence– Attests– Evaluates– Evidences
• Commentary– reflects-on
• Showcasing– Presents
• Motivation– aims-at
(Categorization by CETIS)
Packaging
• Uses Organisation/Title to identify resources for– Views– Presentations– Owners– Relationships– portfolioParts
Packaging Example
Naming Convention for content-types
Title
Implementing IMS ePortfolio
• Chris Arnett, Open Source Portfolio Initiative
IMS Tool Interoperability
• Enables use of external tools and services within a learning environment
• Simple demonstrator at Alt-I-Lab 2005• Initial release Fall 2005 • ePortfolio community should generate
requirements for further development
From Scott Wilson’s workbloghttp://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/scott/blogview?entry=20050603020705
Open Services
• Service Orientated Architectures to support portfolio development and use
• Examples:– Skills Profiling Web Service– Web Services for Reflective Learning
• Challenge: Integrity
Sharing Goals Through 43 Things
• Easy to share goals to and from a portfolio using RSS and 43 Things API
• Such sharing divorces the shared goal from its relationships to other objects and the portfolio as an integral whole
• Portfolio services must contextualize information within synthesized composition
• http://www.43things.com/
Keep In Touch
• dcambrid@gmu.edu• Blog: http://ncepr.org/ncepr/drupal/blog/1