Quality in Learning Objects: Evaluating Compliance with Metadata Standards

  • C. Christian Vidal
  • N. Alejandra Segura
  • S. Pedro Campos
  • Salvador Sánchez-Alonso
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 108)

Abstract

Ensuring a certain level of quality of learning objects used in e-learning is crucial to increase the chances of success of automated systems in recommending or finding these resources. This paper aims to present a proposal for implementation of a quality model for learning objects based on ISO 9126 international standard for the evaluation of software quality. Features indicators associated with the conformance sub-characteristic are defined. Some instruments for feature evaluation are advised, which allow collecting expert opinion on evaluation items. Other quality model features are evaluated using only the information from its metadata using semantic web technologies. Finally, we propose an ontology-based application that allows automatic evaluation of a quality feature. IEEE LOM metadata standard was used in experimentation, and the results shown that most of learning objects analyzed do not complain the standard.

Keywords

Quality learning objects e-learning ontology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Al-Khalifa, H.S., Davis, H.C.: The evolution of metadata from standards to semantics in E-learning applications. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia. ACM, Odense (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soto, J., García, E., Sánchez Alonso, S.: Repositorios semánticos para objetos de aprendizaje. In: V encuentro de universidades & e-learning, en actas de Virtual C@mpus, Barcelona (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Morales, E., Gil, A., García, F.: Arquitectura para la Recuperación de Objetos de Aprendizaje de calidad en Repositorios Distribuidos. In: XII Jornadas de Ingeniería del Software y Bases de Datos, Zaragoza, España (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sarasa Cabezuelo, A., Dodero Beardo, J.M.: Towards a Model of Quality for Learning Objects. In: Fourth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2004), pp. 822–824 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vidal, C.L., Segura, A.A., Prieto, M.E.: Calidad de Objetos de Aprendizaje. In: V Simposio Pluridisciplinar sobre Diseño y Evaluación de Contenidos Educativos Reutilizables (SPDECE 2008), Salamanca (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Segura, A., Vidal, C., Prieto, M.: Evaluación de la Calidad del Software para el Aprendizaje. In: X Simposio Internacional de Informática Educativa SIIE 2008, pp. 59–64. Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pérez, M., Díaz-Antón, G., Grimán, A., Mendoza, L.: Calidad Sistemática del software Educativo. In: Congreso Internacional EDUTEC 2003, Gestión de las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación en los Diferentes Ámbitos Educativos, Caracas (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marqués, P.: Evaluación y selección de software educativo. Comunicación y Pedagogía 185, 31–37 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bednarik, R.: Evaluation of Educational Environments. The TUP Model. MSc. Thesis. Department of Computer Science, University of Joensuu, Joensuu (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shaughnessy, M.R.: Educational Software Evaluation: A Contextual Approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leighton, H., García, J.: Calidad en los Sitios WEB Educativos. Reporte Técnico. Departamento de Informática y Automática, Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pérez, M., Pérez, N., Mendez, S., García, A., Galvez, M.P., Quincoses, V., Liberatori, H., Fiorito, B., Lassere, C.: Construcción y Validación del cuestionario: Métrica de Calidad de Credibilidad e Interacción de Cursos de Teleformación. TE&ET Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnología en Educación y Educación en Tecnología 2, 30–38 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Plaza, I., Marcuello, J., Arcega, F.: Evaluación de la calidad del software educativo: revisión normativa. In: Simposio Nacional de Tecnologías de la Información y las Comunicaciones en la Educación CEDI, Zaragoza, España (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abud, M.A.: MECSE: Conjunto de Métricas para Evaluar Software Educativo. UPIICSA Tecnología Ciencia Cultura, 39 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sanz, J., Dodero, J.M., Sánchez-Alonso, S.: A Preliminary Analysis of Software Engineering Metrics-based Criteria for the Evaluation of Learning Objects Reusability. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) 4 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Khoo, C.S.G., Chaudhry, A.S., Butdisuwan, S., Chen, J.C.-c.: Factors affecting re-usability of learning objects across national boundaries: an exploratory study of information organization and knowledge Management. In: World Library and Information Congress: 76th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Gothenburg, Sweden (2010) Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Currier, S., Campbell, L.M.: Evaluating 5/99 content for reusability as learning objects. VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems 35, 85–96 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cuadrado, J.-j., Sicilia, M.-a.: Learning Object Reusability Metrics: Some Ideas from Software Engineering. In: International Conference on Internet Technologies and Applications ITA, Wrexham, North Wales, UK (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hiddink, G.: Solving reusability problems of online learning materials. Campus-Wide Information Systems 18, 146–152 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nesbit, J., Belfer, K., Vargo, J.: A Convergent Participation Model for Evaluation of Learning Objects. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology 28, 105–120 (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Morales, E., Garcia, F., Rego, H., Moreira, T.: Learning objects quality management for e-learning systems. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 1, 193–204 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ochoa, X., Duval, E.: Quality Metrics for Learning Object Metadata. In: Pearson, E., Bohman, P. (eds.) World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2006, pp. 1004–1011. AACE, Chesapeake (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Franch, X., Carvello, J.P.: Using quality models in software package selection. IEEE Software 20(1), 34–41 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Uebersax, J.: Likert scales: dispelling the confusion. Statistical Methods for Rater Agreement website, http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jsuebersax/likert.htm
  25. 25.
    IEEE-LOM: Draft Standard for Learning Object Metadata. IEEE P1484.12.1 (2002) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., McGuinness, D., Welty, C.: OWL: a Description Logic Based Ontology Language for the Semantic Web. In: Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sicilia, M.A., Garcia-Barriocanal, E., Sanchez-Alonso, S., Soto, J.: A Semantic Lifecycle Approach to Learning Object Repositories. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Industrial Conference on Telecommunications/Service Assurance with Partial and Intermittent Resources Conference/E-Learning on Telecommunications Workshop (AICT/SAPIR/ELETE 2005), Lisbon (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    McGreal, R.: A Typology of Learning Object Repositories. Athabasca University Library. Athabasca University, Athabasca (2007) (pre-print accepted for publication)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vidal, C., Prieto, M.: Una Ontología de apoyo a actividades de Diseño Instruccional. In: Prieto, M., Sanchez-Alonso, S., et al. (eds.) Recursos Digitales para el Aprendizaje. Editorial Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán, Mérida (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fermoso, A.M., Sánchez-Alonso, S., Sicilia, M.A.: Una ontología en OWL para la representación semántica de objetos de aprendizaje. In: V Simposio Pluridisciplinar sobre Diseño y Evaluación de Contenidos Educativos Reutilizables, SPDECE 2008, Salamanca (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    O’Connor, M.J., Shankar, R.D., Tu, S.W., Nyulas, C.I., Das, A.K.: Developing a Web-Based Application using OWL and SWRL. In: AAAI Spring Symposium, Stanford, CA, USA (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Morales, R., Ochoa, X., Sánchez, V.G., Ordoñez, V.: LA FLOR - Repositorio Latinoamericano de Objetos de Aprendizaje. In: Prieto, M., Sánchez-Alonso, S., Pech-Campos, S.J. (eds.) Recursos Digitales para el Aprendizaje. Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán, Mérida (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Prieto, M., Menéndez, V., Segura, A., Vidal, C.: A Recommender System Architecture for Instructional Engineering. In: Lytras, M.D., Carroll, J.M., Damiani, E., Tennyson, R.D. (eds.) WSKS 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5288, pp. 314–321. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Duval, E., Forte, E., Cardinaels, K., Verhoeven, B., Durm, R.V., Hendrikx, K., Forte, M.W., Ebel, N., Macowicz, M., Warkentyne, K., Haenni, F.: The Ariadne knowledge pool system. Communications of the ACM 44, 72–78 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stefaner, M., Vecchia, E.D., Condotta, M., Wolpers, M., Specht, M., Apelt, S., Duval, E.: MACE – Enriching Architectural Learning Objects for Experience Multiplication. In: Duval, E., Klamma, R., Wolpers, M. (eds.) EC-TEL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4753, pp. 322–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Christian Vidal
    • 1
  • N. Alejandra Segura
    • 1
  • S. Pedro Campos
    • 1
  • Salvador Sánchez-Alonso
    • 2
  1. 1.Univ. del Bio-BioConcepciónChile
  2. 2.Univ. AlcaláMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations