1 / 26

Overview

coursey
Download Presentation

Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The RAMP Project: Authorisation and Activityflow for eResearchJames DalzielProfessor of Learning Technology, and Director, Macquarie E-Learning Centre Of Excellence (MELCOE)Macquarie Universityjames@melcoe.mq.edu.auwww.melcoe.mq.edu.auPresentation for EDUCAUSE Workflow CAMP, Burlington, Vermont, 29th June, 2006

  2. Overview • Background: MAMS and LAMS • RAMP Project • More on LAMS • Introducing RAMS • Sample eResearch Activityflow Use Cases • Early demonstrations • Why? • Future plans - activityflow

  3. Background • MELCOE – Research centre for next generation IT infrastructure for eLearning and eResearch • Major projects: • MAMS: Identity and access management • Special focus on repositories • Leading Australian Shibboleth rollout – 500,000+ identities • Developing Sharpe and Autograph • LAMS: eLearning workflow system • Re-usable sequences of collaborative learning activities • V2 beta release next week – separate core and tools • ASK-OSS: National advisory service on OSS for HE

  4. RAMP project • RAMP (Research Activityflow and Middleware Priorities) is a new Aust Gov funded eResearch project ($2.9M) • Part 1: Authorisation • Development of a generalised authorisation library using XACML, focus on implementation for repositories (esp Fedora) • Builds on MAMS work: SAML + XACML = Alternative to DRM • Part 2: Activityflow • “People-based workflow” for eResearch • Especially concurrent multi-actor multi-step workflows • Demonstrator of re-usable activityflows (builds on LAMS 2 core) • Theoretical review of workflow standards and concepts • Part 3: Authorisation/Activityflow “fusion” exploration

  5. More on LAMS • LAMS project over 4 years old, widespread adoption for next generation e-learning • Fundamental driver: Any teacher could create and run • Web application, J2EE + Flash, open source (GPL) • Based on new field of “Learning Design” • IMS Learning Design specification as a starting point • Core concepts of LAMS are not e-learning specific • Concurrent multi-actor, multi-step workflow system • BPEL expert: “Who are you guys?” • LAMS Community for faculty sharing LAMS sequences and discussing their use (1300 members) • 100 end-user created, shared and adapted eLearning workflows

  6. More on LAMS: Example • Online learning for trainee teacher students • Step 1: Each student answers “What are the qualities of an effective teacher?”, then considers collated responses • Step 2: Each student votes on the top 2 qualities from a list, then reflects on collated votes • Step 3: Group debate about the most important qualities of an effective teacher, based on outcomes of (1) and (2) • Step 4: Review of literature on effective teachers • Step 5: Group discussion of how the debate in (3) relates to literature in (4) • Step 6: Reflective report on the original question, based on own ideas and those of the group, including any changes in own views

  7. LAMS Authoring example – What are the qualities of an effective teacher?

  8. LAMS Learner example – What are the qualities of an effective teacher?

  9. LAMS Monitor summary – What are the qualities of an effective teacher?

  10. LAMS Monitor detailed – What are the qualities of an effective teacher?

  11. LAMS Monitor detailed – What are the qualities of an effective teacher?

  12. LAMS Community – View of various communities & forums

  13. LAMS Community – Repository Summary

  14. LAMS Community – Detailed view of individual sequence

  15. More on LAMS: V2 • LAMS V2 provides a modular architecture for building different kinds of people-based workflow systems • Separation of workflow core engine from “activity tools” • Agreement between core and tools via “Tools Contract” • Core requirements • Admin • Author • Monitor • “Learner” / Participant

  16. 2

  17. LAMS V2 Wiki (www.lamsfoundation.org/wiki) – Tools Contract

  18. Introducing RAMS • The “Research Activity Management System” (RAMS) builds on the LAMS V2 workflow core (+ new eResearch features) • A new suite of activity tools appropriate for people-based eResearch activityflows • Plus multi-purpose tools that apply across eLearning and eResearch • The result is two different domain-specific applications (LAMS for eLearning; RAMS for eResearch) that draw on a common workflow core • Everything is open source

  19. Introducing RAMS Teachers Researchers LAMS Application RAMS Application eLearning specific tools Multi-purpose tools eResearch specific tools “Education Workflow Engine” (LAMS core + new RAMS development) Admin Author Monitor Author

  20. Sample eResearch Activityflow Use Cases High level use cases from RAMP proposal: • Managing the research enterprise lifecycle (from grant planning to grant submission, to project initiation, to project lifecycle management, to research outcome dissemination), • Implementing auditable evaluation processes for assessing research quality (RQF assessor workflows, journal/conference peer review management, etc), • Designing and tracking article submission processes for Institutional Repositories, • Flexibly configuring and running online research collaboration processes (such as staged collaborative analysis and discussion for PhD/Postdocs around raw data, leading to interpretation, visualisation, and ultimately publications), and • Process-oriented research data collection from human subjects (such as in the humanities, and social and cognitive sciences).

  21. Use case 3: Institutional Repository submission workflow

  22. Use case 2: RQF assessor evaluation process

  23. Use case 4: Example of weekly research group meeting

  24. Use case 4a: Alternative example of weekly research group meeting

  25. Why? • Greater standardisation of common or repeatable research processes, leading to higher quality outcomes and improved efficiency; • The ability to share descriptions of common research processes both within institutions, and between institutions – including the ability to adapt and localise shared research processes; • Greatly improved accountability and audit for processes involving multiple actors across multiple steps – such as for research assessment (eg, RQF assessor workflows), as well as for research itself (eg, as a deterrent to academic fraud); and • Providing a process-oriented checklist to ensure the ordered completion of relevant research tasks.

  26. Future plans - activityflow • Development of RAMS: activity tools + core additions • Eg, branching, conditionality, grouping, tool data in/out, “edit on the fly” • Demonstrators for iterative requirements gathering • Sharing of “good practice” activityflows for review, re-use, adaptation • Community website for discussion + sharing activityflows (based on experiences from the LAMS Community) • Workflow theory review (Dr Yoichi Takayama) • Initial exploration of activityflow/authorisation fusion

More Related