openess and portfolio technology

Openess and Portfolio Technology

Darren CambridgeGeorge Mason University

Overview

• Open content: Multimedia• Open architecture: Integration • Open standards: Interoperability• Open services: Distribution

Open Content

• Portfolio pedagogy and assessment practice values– Student ownership and control– Authentic evidence– Diverse evidence

• Implies a wide variety of file formats and authoring tools– Challenging to support

Supporting Open Content

• Portfolio studios – Clemson University– LaGuardia Community College

• Multimedia writing centers – University of Michigan

• Archival formats for long-term storage– PDF-A

Open Architecture

• Portfolio systems are integrative– Can make use of data from multiple academic

and administrative systems– Can provide data to same systems – Ease of integration depends on both systems

• Increased openess decreases complexity of integration

Degrees of Openess

• Closed– Dependent on a single vendor for integration– Requires relationship between vendors if products from different

companies

• Offers APIs– Some data and functions exposed– Documentation may an issue– Depends on proprietary decision on both ends

• Supports open standards and specifications– Less dependent on both ends

• Open source– Fully customizable

Open Source Software

• Open source software (OSS) programs are – applications that are distributed with their source

code, – giving users the freedom

• to run the program for any purpose, • to study and modify the program, and • to freely distribute copies of the original or modified programs

• You probably use OSS everyday– Email = sendmail– Web server = Apache

Drivers of OSS in Education

• Tight budgets (Coppola and Neely)

• Desire for freedom from vendor control• Lack of innovation• Collaboration technology that enables virtual

teamwork• Development technologies that support

modularity and interoperability • Proven business models• Coherence with academic culture

In Search of a Better Model…

CreatingSoftware

SustainingSoftware

CommunitySourceProjects

PartneringOrganizations

Higher EdCoordination

Open IP

LicensingFees

MaintenanceFees

CommercialCoordination

Closed IP

Objective…sustainable economics and innovation for satisfied users

…for how we pay and what we get. Software is not free.

Bundled IP & Support Unbundled IP & Support + Commercial Support Options

OSS as Scholarship

• OSS has the three characteristics of scholarship– Made public– Subjected to peer review– Available for reuse (Shulman)

• OSS is part of a larger movement to reconceive teaching and learning as scholarly work

• Assessment is also part of this movement

Open Standards and Specifications

• Social software specifications– RSS, Atom – Friend of a Friend (FOAF) – Social software APIs

• eLearning specifications– IMS ePortfolio– IMS Tool Portability

Portfolio as Digital Composition

• An ePortfolio is a digital composition – A message in a rhetorical situation– The product of the author’s agency – Integral

• Not just a repository• Arrangement and design matter• Explains and predicts

Social Software Specifications

• Lightweight and flexible • Excellent support for

– Atomization– Distribution– Aggregation

• Little support for– Synthesis– Contextualization

IMS ePortfolio

• Final version 1.0 approved by IMS Technical Advisory Board June 20, 2005

• Captures the essential elements of an ePortfolio discussed earlier

• Accommodates diverse purposes• Complicated • Will require development of application

profiles

Scope

• Focus on portability of portfolios as integral wholes

• Services out of scope• Integrates and expands on existing

specifications • XML binding • Revisions anticipated based on evidence

from actual practice

Components of a Portfolio

• A collection of heterogeneous parts • Associated with an owner• A set of relationships between the parts• Views

– Selections of parts and relationships for a purpose

• Presentations– Instructions on how an audience experiences a view

Portfolio PartActivity Competency Goal Product

Accessibility

FROM LIP ….. etc

ACCLIP

New Assertion Reflexion

Participation (Data model in binding – based on Enterprise Services Group)

Rubric Rubric Cell (uses RDCEO)

Finally Other

LIP:Relationship

Relationship Types

• Basics– shows-up– Supplements– Supports– precedes

• Assessments and Evidence– Attests– Evaluates– Evidences

• Commentary– reflects-on

• Showcasing– Presents

• Motivation– aims-at

(Categorization by CETIS)

Packaging

• Uses Organisation/Title to identify resources for– Views– Presentations– Owners– Relationships– portfolioParts

Packaging Example

Naming Convention for content-types

Title

Implementing IMS ePortfolio

• Chris Arnett, Open Source Portfolio Initiative

IMS Tool Interoperability

• Enables use of external tools and services within a learning environment

• Simple demonstrator at Alt-I-Lab 2005• Initial release Fall 2005 • ePortfolio community should generate

requirements for further development

From Scott Wilson’s workbloghttp://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/scott/blogview?entry=20050603020705

Open Services

• Service Orientated Architectures to support portfolio development and use

• Examples:– Skills Profiling Web Service– Web Services for Reflective Learning

• Challenge: Integrity

Sharing Goals Through 43 Things

• Easy to share goals to and from a portfolio using RSS and 43 Things API

• Such sharing divorces the shared goal from its relationships to other objects and the portfolio as an integral whole

• Portfolio services must contextualize information within synthesized composition

• http://www.43things.com/

Keep In Touch

• dcambrid@gmu.edu• Blog: http://ncepr.org/ncepr/drupal/blog/1