LR and LRI for learning objectives frameworks?

[Jim G]

(cross post from LRMI)

I've been thinking that The Learning Registry and Learning Registry Index could be one way of providing a proxy digital representation of learning standards framework items when a standardized digital representation isn't available from the publisher.  This is an emerging need for states to publish variations to CCSS, standards in non-core subjects (e.g. NASPE standards, CTE, etc.), and professional frameworks like Danielson that are not available a standard machine-accessible form from the publisher. 

Thoughts? 

[Steve Midgley]

Hey Jim,

I think this would require a standard way of describing a curricular standard? Am I missing your intent?

For example, we'd need a standard way to depict a CCSS standard item? I know SETDA and ASN both have published standards for doing this, and there's a defacto standard (with some issues) on the corestandards.org site for doing this?

I think lots of folks are interested in distributing this kind of information (through LR among other methods). But there's no agreement on how to talk about these items, and there have been political issues in settling on such standards..

If CEDS provided the standard/binding, I think distributing through LR makes a ton of sense. RTTA consortia I think would find that attractive for example..

Am I following along?

Steve

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Learning Registry: Collaborate" group.
 
To post: learning-regis...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe:learning-registry-co...@googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/learning-registry-collaborate?hl=en?hl=en
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Learning Registry: Collaborate" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to learning-registry-co...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Jim Goodell]

It shouldn't be a problem to standardize. CEDS has the standard  vocabulary and an 'at rest' model that is similar to ASN and using the same elements as SIF 3.0 xml binding.  Most important is making the process easy for standards publishers to push the information to LR...this might need to provide a different/additional entry point than how LR typically works, e.g. spreadsheet upload by an authorized publisher.  I'll plan to post some ideas next week about how I think this could work.

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Learning Registry: Collaborate" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/learning-registry-collaborate/IaMLiVz2TVE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to learning-registry-co...@googlegroups.com.

[Stuart Sutton]

Jim and Steve:

I'd follow-up on your comments, Steve, by noting that CEDS is a quite nifty and comprehensive inventory of data elements common to the education ecosystem [1]; but, as far as I know, does not include schemas that slice and dice its very large store of common elements into useful schema packaging.  Again, I could be wrong.  The ASN Framework does provide an extensible schema for description of competency frameworks that is rooted in the RDF model and has nevertheless been widely used for over a decade in non-RDF contexts.  ASN provides a mapping of its schema properties to CEDS elements at [2].    

Like CEDS, the ASN framework and the contents of the ASN-US repository of nearly 1,500 competency frameworks was largely developed and maintained for most of ASN's life with public funding (i.e. your US$ at work through NSF) as part of the public data infrastructure.  It is a strangely unknown fact, Jim, that any competency framework promulgator with stable frameworks in use can have its own (free), promulgator-controlled authoring space in the ASN to generate and maintain the RDF data representations of its frameworks.  If you go to the ASN frameworks index page at [3] you'll see the far right column identifies jurisdictions/organizations.  Behind each of those jurisdiction/organization links is a protected authoring space where the individual jurisdictions/organization can (most don't yet) fully exercise editorial, publication and curational control of their RDF data representations.  All someone representing an entity with one or more stable competency frameworks has to do is ASK to be set up and trained in managing their own ASN authoring space.

Historically, convincing competency framework promulgators that it is useful to have globally referenceable data representations of their creations hasn't been easy.  A decade ago, promulgators couldn't see beyond the utility of their frameworks in handsome, published full-color narrative texts in the hands of teachers, administrators, policy makers.  Over a decade ago when the architecture of the ASN-US was being formulated, getting a US state or a professional society to jump into an authoring space (no matter how friendly) to create data representations of their frameworks was pretty much out of the question.  Since there were no "takers" back then, the ASN seeded the repository centrally.  Also, nothing says you have to "love" the ASN Framework to value from its power.  Nothing says an ASN framework description need be the only description of a framework that exists.

SO, again, all that's necessary for an existing or new jurisdiction/organization with stable competency frameworks to manage their own ASN authoring "space" is a simple request.  Then, Jim, we'd have those accessible data representations you rightly note we lack--and, in a public and open space.

Stuart

[1]  https://ceds.ed.gov/whatIsCEDS.aspx
[2]  http://asn.jesandco.org/content/schema-map-ceds-asn
[3]  http://asn.jesandco.org/resources/ASNJurisdiction

--

Stuart A. Sutton, 

Managing Director, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI)

   http://dublincore.org

Associate Professor Emeritus, University of Washington 

   Information School

   http://ischool.uw.edu/

Email: stuart...@gmail.com

Skype: sasutton

DCMI - a project of ASIS&T

   https://www.asis.org/

[Joshua Marks]

What about SIF LearnignStandardItem and LearnignStandardDoc?

 

Joshua Marks

CTO

Curriki: The Global Education and Learning Community

jma...@curriki.org

www.curriki.org

US 831-685-3511

 

I welcome you to become a member of the Curriki community, to follow us on Twitter and to say hello on our blog, Facebook and LinkedIn communities.

[Jim Goodell]

Stuart,

I agree that the ASN framework can act as a binding and ASN as an entry point.  I recognize the value in what ASN has provided. My thought is that the distributed model of LR can preserve the information beyond the sustainability of any one node, protecting against any single point of failure.

What I have in mind would be simpler than 'an authoring space  to create data representations of their frameworks'.  States and professional organizations might not have someone to build RDF representations , but they often already have spreadsheets containing the frameworks. RDF could be a transitional form, but we can reduce friction if the agency rep can simply upload a spreadsheet.  ...I'm interested in your thoughts on this kind of approach (via ASN?) as a gateway to into LR.

Jim

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Learning Registry: Collaborate" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/learning-registry-collaborate/IaMLiVz2TVE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to learning-registry-co...@googlegroups.com.

[Jim Goodell]

Joshua, 

Yes, I mentioned SIF in my previous post.  I don't know enough about LR technical details, but as I understand it, LR is flexible about how the metadata package is returned for a resource,  eg as a JSON object, RDF/XML, SIF XML. It comes down to data objects and attributes...we have compatible terms, no problem. Could be a translation service between these, or the recipient knows what to expect and can parse into what is needed?  How is it generally done with LRMI terms in LR?

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Learning Registry: Collaborate" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/learning-registry-collaborate/IaMLiVz2TVE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to learning-registry-co...@googlegroups.com.