Docstoc

spdece07.ehu.espresentacionesjuevesjueves_202S

Document Sample
spdece07.ehu.espresentacionesjuevesjueves_202S Powered By Docstoc
					   On the general structure of
ontologies of instructional models

  Miguel-Angel Sicilia
  Information Engineering Research Unit
  [University of Alcalá]
                    Motivation

• The status of “pedagogical metadata”
  – IEEE LOM: InteractivityType/level, etc.
  – IMS LD: Represents the structure, not the
    pedagogical rationale behind
  – Some classifications exist, e.g. Conole.
• What about intructional design?
  – ID techniques constraint the universe of possible LD
    (combinations of resources/activities)
            Instructional models

• Instructional models
  – practice-oriented theories offering explicit guidance
    on how to help people learn that offer situation-
    specific methods, that in turn are described in terms
    of components, and that are know to be effective for
    learning under some conditions (to some extent).
• Methods can be made operational
• Result:
  – Learning resources, e.g. an IMS LD.
    Not talking of “Process models”

• E.g. ADDIE


                   IDProcessModel      IDArtifactType

                              *        *       produces
                   hasStage   *
             *                             hasNext
                 IDProcessModelStage
   hasSubstage                             *
                        *         *
               Design constraints

• A concrete learning design LD expressed in a digital
  educational description language is provisionally
  conformant to the IDModel A if there exist a legal
  interpretation LI of A in terms of the description
  language and LD fulfills all the constraints contained in
  LI.                              methodPart *
                         *                  *
             IDModel                            IDMethod
                             methodIdentified
                                                           *


                       ApplicabilityCondition


            IDSituationDescription
             Ontologies and rules

 • “TheoryOne”
    – “give abundant examples of the concepts treated”
    – We assume a IMS LD ontology in OWL.
lr:LearningObject(?lo) 
lr:hasPart(?lo, ?lo2)  lr:hasPart(?lo, ?lo3)   
lr:ExerciseLO(?lo2)  lr:ExerciseLO(?lo3)
   hasAbundantExamples(?lo, true)



lr:LearningObject(?lo1)  lr:hasPart(?lo1, ?lo2) 
lr:hasPart(?lo2, ?lo3)  lr:hasPart(?lo1, ?lo3)
               Requirements

• State the objectives.
• State the kinds of learning resources.
• State sequences and relations between them.

• … these can be found in IEEE LOM to some
  extent.
• Use your favorite DL+rules language.
                                  Usage

• Practical application
  Method          checking                      generating
  “give           Check that the appropriate For each of the concepts
      abundant       number of resources of      identified in the objectives,
      examples”      type exercise are included  generate in the IMS LD
                     as part of the Environment  method an activity to teach
                     of the activities. Contrast the concept, which contains
                     that     those     examples an activity that is specific for
                     illustrate     the    same  exercising, and has in its
                     concept expressed in the    Environment                    a
                     objective of each activity. KnowledgeObject of type
                                                 exercise.



• Search: give me LD that complies with inst. theory X.
                 Elaboration theory

• “Teach broader, more inclusive concepts before
  narrower, more detailed concepts that
  elaborate upon them”
ld:Learning-Activity(?a1)  ld:Learning-Activity(?a2) 
ld:Activity-Structure(?as1)  ld:execution-order(?a1, ?o1)
 ld:execution-order(?a2, ?o2)  ld:execution-entity-ref(?as1,
?a1)  ld:execution-entity-ref(?as1, ?a2)  swrlb:lessThan(?o1,
?o2)    ? COMP_showsBefore(?a1, ?a2)


COMP_showsBefore(?a1, ?a2)  ConceptLearningActivity(?a1)     
ConceptLearningActivity(?a2)  ld:Activity-Structure(?as)     
ld:execution-entity-ref(?as, ?a1)  ld:execution-entity-
ref(?as, ?a2)  concept-learning-objective(?a1, ?c1) 
concept-learning-objective(?a2, ?c2)  KnowledgeItem(?c1)     
KnowledgeItem(?c2)  concept-includes(?c2, ?c1) ?
COMP_Reigeluth_ElaborationTheory(?as, false)
                   Conclusions

• (some)Intructional methods can be (partially)
  made operational in term of learning resources.
  – Some are still too abstract (this can be a criteria for
    validness)
• (different) sets of rules can be used to check
  them as an aid in the instructional design
  process.
• This is largely unexplored.
• This has practical applications to design tools
  and for search!.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:5/10/2013
language:English
pages:10