The PoEML Proposal to Model Services in Educational Modeling Languages

  • Manuel Caeiro-Rodríguez
  • Martín Llamas-Nistal
  • Luis Anido-Rifón
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4154)


This paper proposes a framework to support the modeling of services in Educational Modeling Languages (EMLs). EMLs have been proposed to support the modeling of educational units (e.g. a theoretical distance learning course, a lab practice, a discussion-based course). Their modeling approach is based on the featuring of the elements involved in educational units (e.g. participants, data, tasks) and the coordination among these elements (e.g. the order between tasks, the data flow, the assignment of participants to tasks). A key issue in EMLs is the modeling of environments where participants are intended to interact. This part of the modeling involves the featuring of the services and the coordination requited to obtain appropriate service interactions. The paper describes the perspectives of a new EML proposal named PoEML (Perspective-oriented Educational Modeling Language) devoted to the modeling of services and their coordination: operational, interaction, awareness and authorization.


Service Orient Architecture Composite Event Service Description Primitive Operation Event Instance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rawlings, A., van Rosmalen, P., Rodríguez-Artacho, M., Lefrere, P.: Survery of educational modelling languages (EMLs). Technical report, CEN/ISSS Workshop on Learning Technologies (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koper, R., Olivier, B., Anderson, T. (eds.): IMS Learning Design Information Model. IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dalziel, J.R.: From re-usable e-learning content to re-usable learning designs: Lessons from LAMS. Technical report (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Weller, M., Little, A., McAndrew, P., Woods, W.: Learning Design, generic service descriptions and universal ACID. IEEE Educational Technology and Society (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caeiro, M., Anido, L., Llamas, M.: Towards a benchmark for the evaluation of LD expressiveness and suitability. Journal of Interactive Media Education (4) (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curbera, F., Khalaf, R., Mukhi, N., Tai, S., Weerawarana, S.: The next step in Web services. Communication of the ACM 46(10), 29–34 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cardoso, J.: Approaches to developing semantic Web services. International Journal of Computer Science 1(1), 8–21 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chinnici, R., Ryman, A.J.J.M., Weerawarana, S.: Web Services Desicription Language (WSDL). Technical report, W3C (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clement, L., Hately, A., von Riegen, C., Rogers, T.: Uddi version 3.0.2. Technical report, OASIS (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zimmer, D., Unland, R.: The formal foundation of the semantics of complex events in active database management systems. Tecnical Report 22/1977, C-LAB, Paberborn Germany (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bernauer, M., Kappel, G., Kramler, G.: Composite events for XML. In: Proceedings of WWW 2004  (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yoneki, E., Bacon, J.: Unified semantics for event correlation over time and space in hybrid network environments. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) Proceedings of CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE 2005, vol. 3769, pp. 366–384. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vogten, H., Martens, H., Nadolski, R., Tattersall, C., van Rosmalen, R., Koper, R.: Coppercore service integration. Integrating IMS Learning Design and IMS Question and Test Interoperability. In: Proc. ICALT, Kerkrade, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vega-Gorgojo, G., Bote-Lorenzo, M.L., Gomez-Sanchez, E., Dimitriadis, Y.A., Asensio-Perez, J.I.: Semantic description of collaboration scripts for service oriented cscl systems. In: Artificial Intelligence in Education (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    LAMS: Learning Activity Management System (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilson, S., Blinco, K., Rehak, D.: An e-learning framework. a summary. Technical report, JISC (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smythe, C.: The IMS Abstract Framework: Applications, services, and components. Technical report, IMS Global Consortium (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Caeiro-Rodríguez
    • 1
  • Martín Llamas-Nistal
    • 1
  • Luis Anido-Rifón
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Telematic EngineeringUniversity of VigoSpain

Personalised recommendations