A Primer on Metadata Standards

1. A Primer on Metadata Standards From Dublin Core to IEEE LOM Rory McGreal Julia Innes Toni Roberts TeleEducation NB

2. How did standards develop?

3. What is METADATA? I never met a meta metadata I ever really liked.(Dorman, 1999) Like any early inception of any standard, just understanding the landscape is difficult. (Luh, 1999)

4. What is METADATA? data about data Metadata standards are agreed-on criteria for describing data to support interoperability Example: January 31, 2001 31 janvier 2001 2001-01-31 01-31-2000 31012000

5. What is METADATA? Author: Banathy,B.H. Year: 1973 Title: Developing a Systems View of Education: The Systems-Model Approach Publisher: Lear Siegleer, Inc./Fearon Publishers

6. What is METADATA? Objective: Factual information – e. g. author, subject, cost, code Subjective Attributes: opinions e. g. evaluation of a module varied & variable information

7. Learning objects any entities, digital or non-digital, which can be used or referenced in technology-supported learning. Modular

8. Learning objects Adaptable Affordable Assessable Accessible Discoverable Durable Interchangeable Interoperable Manageable Re-usable Reliable Scorm -ABLES Scorm Scorm Scorm Adapted from Parmentier, 1999

9. Learning objects Programme Module Lesson Component Course granularity

10. Why learning objects? From custom-made to Mass production to Mass-customization

11. Why learning objects? FROM TO One size fits all Tailored Generic Focused Just-in-case Just-in-time

12. Why learning objects? • COST: 1000s of colleges have common course topics • large numbers of courses are going online • World does not need 1000s of similar learning topics • World needs only about a dozen • Expensive to develop so sharing is essential • (From Downes, 2000) Design courses as a collection of learning objects NOT HTML

13. Who inputs METADATA? • Two Camps: • Internal referenced - Users input their own metadata • External referenced – Professionals input metadata • number of electronic objects is growing rapidly • metadata required is too much for third-party indexers

14. METADATA characteristics • a data dictionary of commonly defined elements; • a method for manipulating and communicating elements electronically; • rules for identifying and extracting content; • an official standards body; • tools for creating, transmitting, and storing. • Ahronheim (1998)

15. METADATA conditions • Mandatory fields (small subset) • Optional fields • Extensible • International interoperability • Adapted from Griffin and Wason (1997)

16. METADATA challenges Too much concern with FIELDS NOT enough with TERMS • Fields need a common terminology • Described by a content expert BUT • TERMS must fit into a universe of knowledge • AND • Not be only useful to content experts • Cross-searching requires compatible vocabularies

17. What is RDF? (Resource Description Framework) An infrastructure enabling the encoding, exchange, and reuse of structured metadata (Bearman et al., 1999) RDF is syntax independent, and can be expressed in both XML and HTML. -- World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/

18. What is RDF? (Resource Description Framework) • Uses a refined XML vocabulary • Consists of nodes with attached pairs • Nesting is used RDF: Author: name: R. McGreal email: rory@telecampus.edu phone: 506444-4230 http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/

19. What is XML? (eXtended Markup Language) Standard General Markup Language • Extends HTML without complexities of SGML • XML is the underlying syntax for the transport of information for exchanging structured data SGML XML HTML http://www.w3.org/XML/

20. What is XML? • any level of complexity • functions without the server • vendor independent • user extensible • validation & human readability Warning: possible Pandora's box of incompatible metatags

21. Why XML? • standardized • uses schemas • machine-readable • two entities can use the same data <ASSERTIONS> href=“http://www…”> <author> <RESOURCE> <name>Rory McGreal</name> <email>rory@telecampus.edu</email> <phone>5064444230</phone> </RESOURCE> <author> </ASSERTIONS>

22. Metadata and RDF/XML XML = syntax RDF = structure Metadata = semantics & resources

23. CanCore METADATA standards • Dublin Core • IMS • ARIADNE • IEEE LTSC LOM • ADL SCORM • ISO 11179

24. METADATA standards 2 • AICC • ALIC (Japan) • CEN • Cisco RLO • MARC 21 (MARBI & OAI) • Msoft LRN • Warwick Framework • Z39.5 • EML

25. METADATA standards agreement December 6, 2000 "Ready access to comprehensive repositories of metadata is the critical factor at the inflection point of the next generation of learning and knowledge creation. However, this will require that metadata be highly interoperable and reusable worldwide. This agreement marks a major step toward realizing this vision." -- Wayne Hodgins, Chair of the IEEE LTSC LOM Working Group

26. Dublin Core . . . the HTML of Web metadata (Bearman et al., 1999) . . . lingua franca for metadata, . . . at a basic level (Milstead & Feldman, 1999) . . . the most broadly based consensus on resource description on the Web"(Weibel, 1999) http://purl.oclc.org/dc/

27. Dublin Core • coexists with other metadata sets • all elements are optional • all elements are syntax-independent • tagged in HTML, raw XML, or RDF/XML

28. Dublin Core Fields Title Creator Subject Description Publisher Contributor Date Type Format Identifier Source Language Relation Coverage Rights All fields are optional, none are mandatory

29. IMS Educause: Instructional Management System?? MANDATE • catalyst for development of instructional software • creation of an online management infrastructure for learning • facilitation of collaborative learning activities • certification Partners: ARIADNE (Europe), NIST LOM, Members:Apple, Cisco,ETS, IBM, Indust.Canada, Microsoft, Oracle, Sun, US Defense,etc.

30. IMS Metadata Schema NOT just a metadata schema • incorporates & extends Dublin Core • mandatory fields • simple controlled vocabulary • sets dictionary values • reference schemas • domain-specific taxonomies • RDF/XML http://imsproject.com

31. ARIADNE Alliance of Remote Instructional Authoring and Distribution Networks for Europe • fosters the sharing and reuse of electronic pedagogical material, by universities and corporations. • a Europe-wide repository for pedagogical documents (Knowledge Pool System) • co-author of IMS Metadata structure http://ariadne.unil.ch/

32. IEEE LTSC LOM P1484.12 Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers Learning Technologies Standards Committee Learning Object Management Protocol MANDATE • To enable learners or instructors to search, evaluate, acquire, and use Learning Objects • focus on the minimal set of properties needed http://ltsc.ieee.org/index.html

33. ADL SCORM Advanced Distributed Learning Network Sharable Courseware Object Reference Model • a set of interrelated technical specifications built upon the work of the AICC, IMS and IEEE to create one unified content model • It incorporates XML • supported by US Dept. of Defense Roger St-Pierre Grandfather http://www.adlnet.org/Scorm/

34. CLEO Lab Customized Learning Experiences Online • one-year research collaboration between corporations • ADL SCORM • focused, applied research on technical and pedagogical issues Cisco Systems, Click2Learn, IBM Mindspan Solutions, Microsoft and NETg http://www.cleolab.org/

35. ISO/IEC JTC1 SC36 International Standards Organization Information Technology for Learning, Education, & Training • standardization in IT for learning • support individuals, groups, or organizations • enable interoperability & reusability of resources & tools • External Liaisons: • IEEE/LTSC (Learning Technology Standards Committee) • CEN/ISSS/LTWS (Learning Technology Workshop) http://jtc1sc36.org/#terms_of_reference

36. AICC Aviation Industry CBT (Computer-Based Training) Committee Provides guidelines for interoperability for systems to share data online http://aicc.org/ AICC Guidelines & Recommendations (AGR)

37. ALIC Advanced Learning Infrastructure Committee (Japan) • works with other international standards bodies for metadata • facilitates interoperability http://www.alic.gr.jp/

38. CEN/ISSSE U R O P E A N   C O M M I T T E E  F O R  S T A N D A R D I Z A T I O N Information Society Standardization System • formal and informal standardization • full standards to best-practice agreements  • employs an open, transparent consensus mechanism • direct industry participation & consumer interests • not pushing a particular solution or technology • a wide constituency of interested parties • flexible methods of working and flexible deliverables http://www.cenorm.be/isss/

39. Cisco Systems RLO/RIO Re-usable Learning Objects/ Re-usable Information Objects • 7 (+ or – 2) chunked reusable information objects • forms a complete lesson • incorporates metadata http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/779/ibs/solutions/learning/whitepapers/

40. Microsoft LRN Learning Resource INterchange • Implementation IMS content packaging specification v1.0 • more than a metadata implementation that incorporates IMS metadata http://www.microsoft.com/elearn/support.asp LRN Toolkit v. 2.0

41. OAI Open Archives Initiative • develops and promotes interoperability standards that aim to facilitate the efficient dissemination of contentas a means of increasing the availability of scholarly communication • Digital Library Federation and the Coalition for Networked Information http://www.openarchives.org/

42. Warwick Framework • a higher-level context for the Dublin Core • nests components (packages) in containers • facilitates interoperability • permits selective access & manipulation of data WARNING: It can create complexity that is not needed.(Lagoze, 1996) http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july96/lagoze/07lagoze.html

43. Learning Object Repositories • GEM • JA-SIG • MERLOT TeleCampus

44. EML Educational Modeling Language • Notational system codifying units of study (e.g. courses, components, programmes) • Describes roles, relations, interactions & activities • Expressed in XML • Supports IMS, SCORM, – more comprehensive

45. GEM Gateway to Educational Materials • The Gateway, a an example repository or catalog • set of metadata standards and technical mechanisms • "one-stop, any-stop" access to uncatalogued educational materials • consortium of 200 + orgs. & individuals • a project of the U.S. Dept. of Education, ERIC http://www.geminfo.org/ http://www.thegateway.org/

46. JA-SIG Java in Administration Special Interest Group • like Merlot: a collection interactive online learning materials • an example of a learning object repository • does not adhere to universal metadata standards http://www.mis2.udel.edu/ja-sig/

47. Merlot Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching California State University system’s Distributed Learning and Teaching Initiative & Multimedia Repository Initiative • a collection of high quality interactive online learning materials & people • an example of a learning object repository • does not adhere to universal metadata standards http://www.merlot.org

48. TeleCampus Online Course Directory • A metadata repository • Conforms to international metadata standards. • Houses only the metadata • Does NOT house actual lessons, modules, or courses • Links to the institutions that own the courses • +45 000 online courses • + 30 countries, +12 languages • +3 500 free courses http://telecampus.edu

49. CanCore Canadian Core Fields and Vocabulary • a metadata protocol • an interpretation and simplification ofthe 86 elements of the IMS Model • FULL compatibility with IEEE LOM http://www.careo.org/cancorehttp://teleeducation.nb.ca/CanCore

50. CanCore International Metadata Standard for Learning Objects IEEE LOM P1484.12 IMS/ARIADNE/SCORM Dublin Core vocabulary Expressed through RDF> XML/SGML