metadata quality in learning repositories: issues & considerations

30
Metadata quality in learning repositories: Issues & considerations Nikos Palavitsinis , Nikos Manouselis, Salvador- Sanchez Alonso ED-MEDIA 2011, 27/7-1/7, Lisbon, Portugal

Upload: nikos-palavitsinis

Post on 18-Dec-2014

3.403 views

Category:

Technology


0 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Metadata quality in learning repositories: Issues & considerations

Nikos Palavitsinis, Nikos Manouselis, Salvador-Sanchez Alonso

ED-MEDIA 2011, 27/7-1/7, Lisbon, Portugal

Page 2: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Key Concepts

• Learning Repositories

• Resources

• Metadata

Page 3: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Quantity is NOT the problem!

• MERLOT, ARIADNE, LRE for schools, MACE, etc

• Millions of resources on various topics/areas/fields

Image taken from: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/223/475156707_d56e38f251.jpg

Page 4: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Quality?

• Publishers of content are under pressure to ensure that in the plethora of information that is available in today’s web, resources are highly discoverable and highly credible

Walker, 2010 Quality of metadataQuality of content

Page 5: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Truth or…

“Isn't it true, that only librarians like to search? Everyone else likes to find”

Roy Tennant

Images taken from: http://gigglebot.net/wp-content/uploads/wpsc/product_images/librarian.png & http://www.ala.org/img/alonline/computer%20guy.jpg

Page 6: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

…dare?

Page 7: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Context of the study

Page 8: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

about Organic.Edunet

• Completed eContentPlus project (10/2007 – 10/2010) funded with 2.5M €

• Main objective: Make learning content on Organic Agriculture and Agro-ecology available online, for a range of stakeholders.

• And: Develop educational scenarios to be used within schools & universities

Page 9: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations
Page 10: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Stats

• 1,5 year of operation• 53.859 visits • 208.963 page views• 41.804 unique visitors• 166 countries• 2.041 registered users• 10.967 resources

Page 11: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Multilingualism

• Multilingual interface (17 languages)– Text-based search– Browsing– Tag-based search– Semantic search

• Multilingual resources (10 languages)– Images, videos, articles, scenarios, etc

• Multilingual metadata (17 languages)– IEEE LOM Application Profile

Page 12: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

How did we get there?

Started on June of 2008…

Page 13: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Process (1/2)

• Developed an Application Profile of IEEE LOM to be used to describe resources on Organic Agriculture & Agroecology

Page 14: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Organic.Edunet IEEE LOM AP

Definition of own requirements

Selection of LOM elements

Semantics Refinement

Multiplicity constraints and values

Relationships and dependencies

Required extensions

Application Profile Binding Evaluation of AP

Evaluation phase

Results’ analysis

AP modifications

Page 15: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Process (2/2)

• Developed a Repository Management Tool where resources would be described with IEEE LOM metadata (Confolio – http://oe.confolio.org)

Page 16: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

May 2009

• 6.600 resources uploaded in Confolio– 1.100 fully annotated by partners– 5.500 harvested and manually enriched records

• Time to start playing with the data…

Page 17: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

First Analysis

• Measured metadata completeness for all IEEE LOM AP elements

• Usage of metadata elements was not as high as desired, but was as low as anticipated!

Page 18: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Results

Page 19: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Improving Metadata Quality

Through a Metadata Quality Assurance Mechanism

Page 20: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Step 1

• Review of metadata records by experts (9/2009)– Direct feedback through e-mail &– Good & Bad metadata practices

Page 21: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Step 2

• Review of metadata records by subject-matter experts (12/2009)– Direct feedback through e-mail – General statistics

Page 22: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

January 2010

Page 23: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Time to measure again…

Page 24: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Second Analysis

• Improved completeness for…– Mandatory elements: -0.3% to 82,4%

• Rights.Copyrights and Other Restrictions (82.4%)• Rights.Cost (64%)

– Recommended elements: 47,4% to 82,9%• Rights.Description (82.9%)• General.Keyword (78.1%)

– Optional elements: 13,2% to 79,9%• General.Coverage (79.9%)

Page 25: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

What about Educational elements?

• Educational…– Intended End User Role: +66.1% (78.9%)– Typical Age Range: +57.7% (61.5%)– Context: +47.4% (57.6%)– Language: +50.9% (51.2%)– Difficulty: +36.1% (36.2%)– Semantic Density: +35.9% (36.1%)– Interactivity Level: +35.8% (36.1%)– Interactivity Type: +35.6% (35.9%)– Description: +13.2% (14.7%)

Page 26: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Overview

-20,00%

0,00%

20,00%

40,00%

60,00%

80,00%

100,00%

120,00%

Metadata elements

Co

mp

lete

ne

ss

After

Before

Page 27: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Conclusions

• Training experts on a specific field on metadata concepts & principles, improved resulting metadata completeness

• Manual effort is really important

• Further effort for optional elements needed

Page 28: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Limitations

Improvement coming from familiarizing with the annotation process

VSImprovement coming from the mechanisms put

into place

Is it possible to measure separately?

Page 29: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Future Research

• Insert more similar mechanisms throughout the learning resource/repository lifecycle

• Focus more on additional metadata quality metrics on top of completeness

• Extend this framework to other types of resources, i.e. cultural collections, etc.

Page 30: Metadata Quality in Learning Repositories: Issues & Considerations

Metadata quality in learning repositories: Issues & considerations

Thank [email protected]

ED-MEDIA 2011, 27/7-1/7, Lisbon, Portugal