Route map: getting on

1
Route map getting on

• Lifelong Learning Support Project
• Wigan 2004-01-29
• Simon Grant
• CETIS - CRA - LIPSIG

2
Before lunch outline

• The route map
• Navigating the map
• Mapping the information
• Pilot experience
• Transforming the information
• Pilot experience

3
The haiku

• Diverse practice! Shared
• - mutual recognition -
• representation

4
1. The route map

• Purposes
• Information
• Architectures
• Mapping (a.m.)
• Transforming (a.m.)
• Transferring (p.m.)
• Feedback

• This is the structure of the information on the
  related web site http//www.cetis.ac.uk/members/l
  lsp/interop

5
Legend to route map

• Practitioners interests
• Managers interests
• Technical interests
• Roots are quite particular and diverse
• We focus on the common trunk
• Mapping, transformation, some transfer

6
Towards interoperability the route map as a tree
feedback
transfer
transfer
after lunch
mapping
transform
before lunch
architecture
information
purposes
purposes
7
Now go stage by stage

• Very brief overview of some major considerations
  at each stage
• Further material is on web site and can be
  followed up there

8
Purposes

• Best to start from here
• Practitioner, managerial
• For the learner, the organisation, or both?
• Supporting e-learning?
• PDP?
• E-portfolio?
• Technical to serve these purposes

9
Information

• Of interest to all parties
• Should relate to purposes
• Practitioners concern on adequacy
• Managers concern on propriety
• Technical concern on access and security

10
Architectures

• Purposes and information may inform
• Technical concern then to make it work
• Two main distinct systems to support
• Bulk transfer when learner moves
• Continued interoperation web services
• In between, may need to support both

11
Mapping

• On the trunk route
• Everyone has to navigate it
• Needs technical and practical collaboration
• Plenty of scope for different mappings
• so not straightforward
• Focus of the morning session
• with experience from pilots

12
Transforming

• Practitioner, technical concern
• Some experience from pilots
• Different choices with resource implications
• DIY transformation
• Special transformation systems
• On trunk
• Again, everyone has to go through it

13
Transferring

• Focus of afternoon session
• Of particular managerial and technical concern
• Perhaps define web services
• Different technical solutions
• DIY transfer
• JISC-sponsored ioNodes architecture

14
Feedback

• Because not everything will be perfect
• Practical, managerial, technical
• Essential to project success
• To cover on another day!
• And you can follow up ideas on the web site

15
2. Navigating the map

• Practitioner routes
• Managerial routes
• Technical routes
• If only transcript
• If only Known technical systems

16
Practitioner routes

• Purposes supporting learner, PDP
• Information about the learner, where?
• Mapping and transforming
• Working towards shared representation
• Feedback practitioners are best placed to know
  what is happening in practice

17
Managerial routes

• Purposes for the organisation
• (and learner, as benefits organisation)
• Information (ownership, propriety, silos)
• Architecture, mapping, transformation
• Affected by resource decisions
• Transfer process, authorisation
• Feedback process responsibility

18
Technical routes

• Information access and security
• Architecture technical advice, implement
• Mapping work with practitioners
• Transforming ditto
• Transfer get it working
• Feedback provide support systems

19
If only transcript

• Fewer data protection concerns
• No sensitive information
• Could be all in the public domain
• Mapping
• Transformation
• Transfer

20
If only known technical systems

• (Why the restriction?)
• Still have to consider information
• Mapping, transformation, transfer
• Are there any feedback systems in place?

21
Pause for breath

• Any questions so far on the route map?
• Earlier we looked at some purposes
• Now well look at the trunk routes

22
3. Mapping the information

• Mapping background
• IMS LIP and our UK version
• Pilot experiences
• ePARS (Nottingham)
• LUSID (Liverpool)
• 3T (part of RM plc, contracted by DfES)

23
Mapping background

• Whatever purposes you have, they need information
  to fulfil them
• Interested in information about learners
• You have information in databases, etc.
• There are standard representations
• Map between the two

24
What information do you have?

• In databases (tables and fields, etc.)
• In spreadsheets (rows and columns)
• On paper?
• Where is it and what format?
• Or are you using a proprietary system to which
  you have little or no access?

25
Specifications and standards

• IMS LIP 1.0 (2001) is our starting point
• UK Developmental LIP (2003 ?)
• UK LeaP (2004 on)
• IMS e-portfolio (2004 on)
• Other related
• IMS Enterprise, ACCLIP, CEN/ISSS, etc.
• Later versions of IMS LIP

26
IMS LIP specification UK

• ltidentificationgt
• ltqclgt
• ltactivitygt
• ltaffiliationgt
• ltgoalgt
• ltcompetencygt
• ltinterestgt
• ltaccessibilitygt

• ltreflexiongt
• UK proposal
• ltproductgt
• only as sub-element
• ltrelationshipgt
• types undefined
• lttranscriptgt
• ltsecuritykeygt

27
LIP structure

• Each element has a sub-element structure
• Many elements have types with controlled
  vocabularies of permitted values
• Fuller presentations elsewhere
• But IMS LIP 1.0 wasnt designed to represent PDP
  or reflection

28
UK ltreflexiongt element

• Reflect on anything (including self-evaluation)
• Embody journal or log entries, or just notes
• Give or describe evidence for many things
• Claim a competency
• Express a position or contract
• Explain / give reason for most things
• Present anything to specific audience
• Self-attest / testimonials by others

29
ltreflexiongt components

• Two meanings he or she reflects it reflects
• dates
• authorship
• could include verification information for
  authorship if the author is not the learner
• rationale
• giving context and purpose, intended audience
• status
• draft, completed, etc.

30
ltrelationshipgt

• LIP has useful ltrelationshipgt element, though no
  pre-defined types of relationship
• Many relationships connect PDR elements
• Relationships vital for reflexions
• We propose these relationships for PDR
• attests, claims, compiles, evidences / shows up,
  explains, grades, helps, is part of, presents,
  reflects on

31
Mapping between the two

• Each different relevant item of information held
  by your systems must be given a place in the
  standard representation
• Types, where necessary, must be defined

32
ePARS mapping

• (see spreadsheet)
• Take database table information
• Look at how pages use information
• First draft mapping
• Refer to usage
• Check with practitioners

33
LUSID mapping

• Experience, activity ? activity
• Achievement ? qcl
• Goal ? goal
• Skill ? competency
• Types were harmonised

34
3T mapping

• Relatively straightforward case
• Personal information ? identification
• Goals
• Activities

35
4. Transforming information

• Transforming principles
• DIY transformation
• Specialised transforming systems
• Pilot experience
• ePARS
• LUSID
• Future developments and UK LeaP

36
Transforming principles

• Once the mapping is decided, the information has
  to be converted between the two forms
• Output from database to XML is relatively
  straightforward
• Input is more of a challenge

37
ePARS transforming

• Program written specially
• Define one object per complexType
• That is, each of the main elements
• Also all the sub-elements with structure
• Export and import is done through these

38
LUSID transforming

• Export
• write a special LUSID page
• user copies screen to get XML file
• Import
• LIP transformed by XSLT to input XML
• input XML, Java, database
• Well-documented (see site)

39
UK Developmental LIP site

• Schemas
• that is, XSD files
• Examples
• that validate with the schemas
• Documentation
• Also some from pilots
• Pilot experience

40
Documentation

• The explanatory document
• will be merged into definitive pages
• The overall mapping
• will be kept at leading edge
• The vocabularies
• are being done as VDEX files with features

41
UKLeaP

• BS 8788 UK Learner Profile
• Work on drafting it has begun
• Draft to be produced within a few months
• Intended to serve the purposes identified
• Based on IMS LIP

42
IMS e-portfolio

• IMS Global has on board many of the big US
  vendors
• Initial work to see how far current standards
  could be used to represent e-portfoliios
• Work has begun, timescale like UKLeaP
• Later this year may develop original material

43
European work

• CEN/ISSS is the standards body, very interested
  in our work
• EPICC
• Peter Rees Jones is the expert here

44
Questions?

• Any questions of general interest?