1 / 46

Exploiting Semantic Web and Knowledge Management Technologies for E-learning

Exploiting Semantic Web and Knowledge Management Technologies for E-learning. Sylvain Dehors Director Rose Dieng-Kuntz INRIA Sophia Antipolis University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis/ ED STIC. E-learning, this ?. A vision of e-learning. For us: Any learning activity mediated by a computer

drew
Download Presentation

Exploiting Semantic Web and Knowledge Management Technologies for E-learning

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. Exploiting Semantic Web and Knowledge Management Technologies for E-learning Sylvain Dehors Director Rose Dieng-Kuntz INRIA Sophia Antipolis University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis/ ED STIC

  2. E-learning, this ?

  3. A vision of e-learning • For us: • Any learning activity mediated by a computer • Buzz Word, but also real change in practices • Use of computers in daily activities • All ages, from youngster to adult teaching • In practice, several types of application • Simulation programs • Tutoring systems • On-line courses

  4. Our e-learning situation • Learning organization • Teacher(s) with a group of students • Environment • Computers for daily usage • Either on-line or face-to-face • Knowledge Sources • Course documents • Teacher’s expertise • Provide computer support for taking advantage of the knowledge sources

  5. Outline • Research question • Method Proposal • Selection and analysis of existing material • Semi automatic annotation • Learning activity • Analysis • Conclusion

  6. Research question How can teachers and students better use knowledge sources, such as pedagogical documents, with computer interfaces ? • Proposal: • apply Knowledge Management techniques and Semantic Web technology • develop a practical method • Illustration: a tool (QBLS) and experiments

  7. Inspirations • Knowledge Management • “The objective of a knowledge management structure is to promote knowledge growth, promote knowledge communication, and in general preserve knowledge within the organisation” (Steels L., 93) • Semantic Web: • “The Semantic Web provides a common framework that allows data to be shared across application, enterprise, and common boundaries.” (W3C) • Standards: RDF, RDFS, OWL, SPARQL

  8. Existing methods and tools (Dieng et al.) • Corporate semantic web DB Knowledge holder services documents Semantic annotation base ontologies Knowledge Management Syst. edit A edit O query User (collective task) User (Individual task) • Apply to a learning organization • - Tool: Corese semantic search engine to query formalized knowledge • W3C Standards expressing knowledge about the course

  9. 2 1 3 4 Method description • 1 - Selection and analysis of existing material • 2 - Semi automatic annotation • 3 - Learning activity • 4 - Analysis

  10. 2 1 3 4 Method description Select Enrich Original resources selection KM tools Semantization • Ontologies : • Document • Pedagogy • Domain Usage feedback tests Annotations Activity analysis Conceptual navigation + adaptation Use Analyze

  11. Experiment’s Agenda QBLS-2 : 3 months course Java Programming QBLS-1 : 2 hours lab Signal Analysis QBLS-ASPL : Knowledge Web NoE Semantic Web studies 2005 2007 2006

  12. Resource selection • First, establish a pedagogical strategy • Collaboration Teacher/QBLS designer • QBLS: Question Based Learning Strategy: Motivation, autonomy, self-directed learning • Existing resources: • Objective criteria • Availability, standard editable format (XML) • Suitability for annotation (modularity, coherence, vocabulary used) • Subjective criteria • Scope, goal, context • Teacher’s acceptance

  13. Original documents Power Point presentations • Signal analysis / Java programming • Used as hard copy course material Modularity Coherence, Vocabulary

  14. Ontology selection • Selection of existing models, ontologies? • Document: • Must fit the course structure • Document organization Document ontology • Pedagogy: • Appropriate for the pedagogical approach • Domain to learn: • Usually the biggest ontology • Fit the document contents (vocabulary used, conceptualization) • Fit the teacher’s vision Lots of constraints, difficult tofindappropriate ontologies

  15. 1- Selection and analysis of existing material 2 – Semi automatic annotation 4 - Analysis 3 – Learning activity

  16. Annotation • Express additional knowledge about the course • Based on teacher’s expertise and vision • Principles : • Use existing edition tools • Proceed through visual mark-up • Rely on XML technologies and Semantic Web formalisms

  17. A semi-automatic process • 3 steps • Pre-processing • Manual annotation • Automatic extraction resource to reuse (XML) annotated version “annotable” version content (XHTML) annotation (RDF) xsltransform. manual annotation pre-processing Ontologies (OWL, RDFS)

  18. Preprocessing • Identification of the content characteristics • Separation in small entities • Automatic annotation • Vocabulary used → domain concepts, automatic annotation with domain ontology • Resource roles → pedagogical ontology • Preparation • Styles → reflect ontological concepts • enrich style lists with ontologies

  19. Preprocessing

  20. Manual annotation • Exploitation of tools functionalities by the teacher for a visual markup • Evolution/enrichment/creation of corresponding domain ontology • Practical objective: connecting navigation paths • Edition of the content • Linking concepts with semantic hierarchical relations (SKOS) Statement Interface skos:broader skos:broader skos:broader Conditional Statement Assignment Statement Keyword « implements »

  21. Final result: Open Office-Writer

  22. Final result : MS-Word

  23. Experimental results: ontology re-use • Pedagogical ontology • Reused directly • Same intention as original: describe ped. role (generic?) • Domain Ontology • Design intention very important: here offer “conceptual views” of the resources • Mostly developed specifically, comparisons with other domain ontologies show striking incompatibilities. Method modifiers Access rights public protected private public protected private

  24. Experimental results: annotation cost

  25. 1- Selection and analysis of existing material 2 – Semi automatic annotation 4 - Analysis 3 – learning activity

  26. Learning activity • Offer “conceptual” navigation in the set of resources while answering questions or performing exercises • Navigation through semantic queries • Take advantage of domain concepts hierarchy (broader links) • Use typology of pedagogical concepts for ordering (subsumption) • Interface generation • Static XSL style sheets: performance, reuse, maintenance

  27. Semantic Web architecture Pedagogical ontology Domain vocabulary Doc. model Corese Semantic Search Engine (RDFS) (OWL) (Skos) rules logs (RDF) 4 Formalized Knowledge Answers (Sparql-XML) 3 Queries (Sparql) web-app content (XHTML) XSLT Learner Interface (XHTML) 2 5 Request 6 Tomcat web server HTTP 1

  28. Semantic Web at work Variable • Dynamic SPARQL queries: skos:primarySubject skos:broader SELECT * WHERE { FILTER (?c = java:variable) { ?doc skos:primarySubject ?c } UNION { ?doc skos:primarySubject ?c2 . ?c2 skos:broader ?c} ?doc rdf:type ?t ?t edu:order ?order ?doc dc:title ?docTitle ?t rdfs:label ?docLab ?c skos:prefLabel ?cLab } ORDER BY ?order Local Variable skos:primarySubject rdf:type Definition rdf:type edu:order Layout information Example 3 edu:order 7

  29. QBLS-1

  30. QBLS-2 Human readable information Variable skos:broader Fields Local variable

  31. Experimental results: students’ feedback • Good satisfaction • Structured navigation appreciated for direct access to information • Use of domain and pedagogical information

  32. QBLS-ASPL(Advanced Semantic Platform for Learning) • Existing resources on a portal : REASE, • MS-PowerPoint files

  33. QBLS-ASPL Interesting Web sites for advanced learners

  34. QBLS-ASPL Provided by QBLS

  35. 1- Selection and analysis of existing material 2 – Semi automatic annotation 4 - Analysis 3 – Exploitation by learners

  36. Analysis • Modeling user activity • A navigation model based on a graph representation • Exploitation of logs • Visualization through automatically generated graphs • Use semantic querying to highlight particular characteristics of the graphs represented in RDF mentions Concept subject of subject of Concept Resource Resource User A Time t

  37. Visualization

  38. Visualization

  39. Semantic querying • Find regularities, patterns? • Using the graph structure • Relying on the ontology • SELECT ?user count ?v WHERE { • ?aux skos:primarySubject ?concept • ?aux rdf:type edu:Auxilliary • ?v edu:user ?user • ?v edu:conceptVisited ?concept • OPTIONAL { ?v2 edu:resourceVisited ?aux • ?v2 edu:user ?user} • FILTER(! bound(?v2)) • } ?v Object ?v2 Def Ex.

  40. Experimental Results • Involve teacher’s in the analysis • Problem with large size graphs • Visualization tools not sufficient yet • Needs to be coupled with other sources of information • First step towards automated interpretation • Define a collection of patterns -> behavioral patterns • Use in “real-time”?

  41. Conclusion Learning Object Repositories LOM standard Scorm? Annotation tools Linguistic analysis Learner modeling Activity tracking Learning Design Adaptive hypermedia Semantic Web = valid connector

  42. Conclusion (2) • Semantic web interests: • Existing tools, Corese, Protégé, etc. • Existing models, in standard language • Unification and connection with other systems • Ontologies for e-learning • Interest, reusability of domain might be limited • Need for simple expressivity, “goal oriented design”

  43. Conclusion(3) • Resource Reuse • Observed use and good satisfaction level • Definite interest, cost still high • Knowledge management approach • Satisfaction of users • Initial goal fulfilled • May apply to other learning contexts

  44. Perspectives (1) • Short term • Further develop annotation system based on existing tools • Administrative tools to make teachers fully autonomous • Middle term • Enhance scalability with large RDF bases ( when triples are generated by learner activity) • Generalize log visualization, work on usage of such representations (e.g. teachers’ interpretations)

  45. Perspectives (2) • Long term • Investigate the cognitive implications for learning of the annotations • Importance of the pedagogical concepts • Structure of the domain • Enhance user tracking (more information, refine model)

  46. Acknowledgements • Catherine Faron-Zucker • Jean Paul Stromboni • Peter Sander

More Related