On the Use of Semantic Technologies to Support Education, Mobility and Employability

  • Valentina Gatteschi
  • Fabrizio Lamberti
  • Claudio Demartini
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 418)


The technological development that has taken place over recent years has affected the way that the Web is exploited by users. In fact, a user is no longer seen as a mere observer; instead, he or she actively takes part in the production of new knowledge, which is then made available to other users. In this scenario, which is characterized by ever-growing information, new approaches (e.g., based on semantic technologies) for processing large amounts of content must be developed. Other sectors, including education and learning, as well as job seeking and hiring activities, could benefit from the exploitation of tools that can be developed within the Semantic Web initiative. As a consequence of the use of semantic technologies, learners could find more efficient training paths that provide them with their missing areas of competence and training institutes could analyze and modify existing qualifications according to a market’s requirements, while companies could effectively identify the best candidates for a given job, not only within national boundaries but also worldwide. This study aims to present an overview of recent research in the field of semantic technologies applied to education and job-seeking contexts. Issues that are related to students’ and workers’ mobility, job seeking and hiring and the improvement of qualification offers will be analyzed and compared, by distinguishing three fields of research: knowledge base creation, the development of strategies for the integration of heterogeneous systems and the definition of inference rules, and the identification of methodologies for the visualization of qualification outcomes and curricula.


Unify Modeling Language Inference Rule Semantic Technology Bologna Declaration Training Path 
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. [Anderson et al. 2001]
    Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S.: A taxonomy for learning teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman (2001)Google Scholar
  2. [Anderson et al. 2004]
    Anderson, T., Whitelock, D.: The Educational Semantic Web: visioning and practicing the future of education. Journal of Interactive Media in Education (JIME) 7, 1–15 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. [Auer and Lehmann, 2007]
    Auer, S., Lehmann, J.: What have Innsbruck and Leipzig in common? Extracting Semantics from Wiki Content. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 503–517. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Aydin and Tirkes, 2010]
    Aydin, C.C., Tirkes, G.: Open source learning management systems in e-learning and Moodle. In: IEEE Education Engineering (EDUCON), pp. 593–600 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. [Bittencourt et al. 2008]
    Bittencourt, I.I., Isotani, S., Costa, E., Mizoguchi, R.: Research Directions on Semantic Web and Education. Journal Scientia - Interdisciplinary studies in Computer Science 19(1), 59–66 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. [Bizer et al. 2005]
    Bizer, C., Heese, R., Mochol, M., Oldakowski, R., Tolksdorf, R., Eckstein, R.: The Impact of Semantic Web Technologies on Job Recruitment Processes. In: International Conference of Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 17–26 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. [Bloom, 1956]
    Bloom, B.S.: Taxonomy of educational objectives - the classification of educational goals - Handbook I: cognitive domain. Longman (1956)Google Scholar
  8. [Bologna Declaration, 2001]
    Bologna Declaration Communiqué of the meeting of European Ministers in charge of Higher Education (May 19, 2001), (cited May 2011)
  9. [Bourque et al. 2003]
    Bourque, P., Buglione, L., Abran, A., April, A.: Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels for Three Software Engineer Profiles. In: Eleventh Annual International Workshop on Software Technology and Engineering Practice (STEP 2003), pp. 123–129 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. [Cubillos et al. 2006]
    Cubillos, C., Lamberti, F., Demartini, C.: National Qualification Systems Integration Using Ontologies. IFIP, vol. 210, pp. 285–289 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. [Cubillos et al. 2007a]
    Cubillos, C., Lamberti, F., Demartini, C.: Integration at Vocational Education and Training Level through Mapped Ontologies. In: Third International Conference on Convergence and Hybrid Information Technology (ICCIT 2008), vol. 1, pp. 117–122 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. [Cubillos et al. 2007b]
    Cubillos, C., Lamberti, F., Demartini, C.: Integrating European Qualification Systems with OWL Ontologies. In: Electronics, Robotics and Automotive Mechanics Conference (CERMA 2007), pp. 752–757 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. [De Meo et al. 2007]
    De Meo, P., Quattrone, G., Terracina, G., Ursino, D.: An XML-Based Multiagent System for Supporting Online Recruitment Services. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans 37(4), 464–480 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [Devedžić, 2005]
    Devedžić, V.: Intelligent Web-based computer-supported collaborative learning. In: Ghaoui, C., Jain, M., Bannore, V., Jain, L.C. (eds.) Knowledge-Based Virtual Education - User-Centred Paradigms, pp. 81–110. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  15. [Devedžić, 2006a]
    Devedžić, V.: Computer-supported collaborative learning. In: Ghaoui, C. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Human Computer Interaction, pp. 105–111. Idea Group Reference, Hershey (2006a)Google Scholar
  16. [Devedžić, 2006b]
    Devedžić, V.: Semantic Web and Education. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  17. [Dexter and Davies, 2009]
    Dexter, H., Davies, I.: An ontology-based curriculum knowledgebase for managing complexity and change. In: 9th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 136–140 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. [ECVET, 2009]
    Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET) (June 18, 2009), (cited May 2011)
  19. [EQF, 2008]
    Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (April 23 2008), (cited May 2011)
  20. [Gatteschi et al. 2009]
    Gatteschi, V., Lamberti, F., Salassa, F., Demartini, C.: An Automatic Tool Supporting Life-long Learning Based on a Semantic-Oriented Approach for Comparing Qualifications. In: IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2009), pp. 354–358 (2009)Google Scholar
  21. [Gatteschi et al. 2011a]
    Gatteschi, V., Lamberti, F., Sanna, A., Demartini, C.: Using taxonomies and ontologies to define occupation and education-driven European qualifications. IADIS International Journal on Computer Science and Information Systems 6, 30–44 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. [Gatteschi et al. 2011b]
    Gatteschi, V., Lamberti, F., Sanna, A., Demartini, C.: Using tag clouds to support the comparison of qualifications, résumés and job profiles. In: 9th IEEE International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA2011), pp. 57–61 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. [Gatteschi et al. 2011c]
    Gatteschi, V., Lamberti, F., Sanna, A., Demartini, C.: A ranking tool exploiting semantic descriptions for the comparison of EQF-based qualifications. Journal of Universal Computer Science 17(7), 1060–1077 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. [Gestwicki, 2008]
    Gestwicki, P.: Work in Progress – Curriculum Visualization. In: Frontiers In Education Conference (FIE 2008), pp. T3E13–T3E14 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. [Gruber, 1993]
    Gruber, T.R.: Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. In: Padua Workshop on Formal Ontology, pp. 1–23 (1993)Google Scholar
  26. [Hackelbusch, 2006]
    Hackelbusch, R.: Handling Heterogeneous Academic Curricula: National qualification systems integration using ontologies. In: DEXA 2006, pp. 344–348 (2006)Google Scholar
  27. [Harzallah et al. 2002]
    Harzallah, M., Leclere, M., Trichet, F.: CommOnCV: Modelling the competencies underlying a curriculum vitae. In: Proc. Int. Conf. SEKE, pp. 65–71 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. [Hexin and Bin, 2006]
    Lv, H., Zhu, B.: Skill ontology-based semantic model and its matching algorithm. In: 7th International Conference on Computer-Aided Industrial Design and Conceptual Design CAIDCD 2006, pp. 1–4 (2006)Google Scholar
  29. [Hoffman, 2003]
    Hoffmann, M.: Using Blooms Taxonomy of learning to make engineering courses comparable. In: EAEEIE 19th Annual Conference (2008), pp. 205–209 (2008)Google Scholar
  30. [LOM, 2002]
    IEEE 1484.12.1 Final Draft Standard for Learning Object MetadataGoogle Scholar
  31. [Mirizzi et al. 2009]
    Mirizzi, R., Di Noia, T., Di Sciascio, T.: A Semantic Web enabled System for Résumé Composition and Publication. In: IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computting (ICSC 2009), pp. 583–588 (2009)Google Scholar
  32. [Netcraft, 2011]
    Netcraft Web Server Survey, (cited May 2011)
  33. [Ohler, 2008]
    Ohler, J.: The SemanticWeb in Education – What happens when the read-write web gets smart enough to help us organize and evaluate the information it provides? EDUCAUSE Quarterly Magazine 31(4), 7–9 (2008)Google Scholar
  34. [Pernici et al. 2006]
    Pernici, B., Locatelli, P., Marinoni, C.: The eCCO System: An eCompetence Management Tool Based on Semantic Networks. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2006 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 4278, pp. 1088–1099. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [Poyry et al. 2002]
    Poyry, P., Pelto-Aho, K., Puustjarvi, J.: The role of metadata in the CUBER system. In: Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on Enablement Through Technology, pp. 16–18 (2002)Google Scholar
  36. [Poyry and Puustjarvi, 2003]
    Poyry, P., Puustjarvi, J.: CUBER: a personalised curriculum builder. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 326–327 (2003)Google Scholar
  37. [Protégé, 2000]
    Protégé user guide (2000), (cited May 2011 )
  38. [Ronchetti and Sant, 2007]
    Ronchetti, M., Sant, J.: Curriculum Management and Review: an ontology-based solution. In: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (ELEARN 2007), pp. 6476–6482 (2007)Google Scholar
  39. [Saini and Ronchetti, 2003]
    Saini, P., Ronchetti, M.: Deriving ontology-based metadata for e-learning from the ACM Computing Curricula. In: IADIS International Conference e-Society 2003, pp. 892–898 (2003)Google Scholar
  40. [Sampson and Fytros, 2008]
    Sampson, D., Fytros, D.: Competence Based Educational Metadata for Supporting Lifelong Competence Development Programmes. In: The 8th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2008), pp. 288–292 (2008)Google Scholar
  41. [Sommaruga and Catenazzi, 2007]
    Sommaruga, L., Catenazzi, N.: Curriculum visualization in 3D. In: 12th International Conference on 3D Web Technology, pp. 177–180 (2007)Google Scholar
  42. [Spivey, 2007]
    Spivey, G.: A Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing Digital Logic Design. Frontier. In: Education Conference – Global Engineering: Knowledge Without Borders, Opportunities Without Passports (FIE 2007), pp. F4G-9–F4G-14 (2007)Google Scholar
  43. [Staab and Studer, 2004]
    Staab, S., Studer, R.: Handbook on Ontologies. International handbooks of Information Systems. Springer (2004)Google Scholar
  44. [Starr et al. 2003]
    Starr, C.W., Manaris, B.Z., Stalvey, R.H.: Bloom’s taxonomy revisited: specifying assessable learning objectives in computer science. SIGCSE (2008), 261–265 (2008)Google Scholar
  45. [Tao et al. 2005]
    Tao, F.B., Millard, D., Davis, H., Woukeu, A.: Managing the Semantic Aspects of Learning using the Knowledge Life Cycle. In: The 5th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2005), pp. 575–579 (2005)Google Scholar
  46. [Tiropanis et al. 2009]
    Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M.: Semantic Technolologies for Learning and Teaching in the Web 2.0 Era. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(6), 49–53 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [UML, 1996]
    Unified Modeling Language (UML), (cited May 2011)
  48. [UMLGraph, 2003]
    UMLGraph, (cited May 2011)
  49. [W3C, 2004]
    W3C OWLWeb Ontology Language, (cited May 2011)
  50. [Wordle, 2009]
    Wordle, (cited May 2011)
  51. [WordNet, 1985]
    WordNet, (cited November 2011)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentina Gatteschi
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Lamberti
    • 1
  • Claudio Demartini
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Automatica e InformaticaPolitecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations