Semantic Analysis for Curricular Mapping, Gap Analysis & Remediation

Jennifer Staley, American Public University SystemPhil Ice, American Public University System

Justin Beals, Roundbox Global

According to the New Media Consortium’s / ELI 2010 Horizon report

indicates semantically-aware applications are not likely to become

mainstream for four to five years within the higher ed community, however a

few cutting edge prototypes are currently being utilized.

Agenda

Curricular Mapping ProjectProject Outcomes DemosSemantic Analysis Deep Dive

CM & Files Single Purpose Structure

Content Duplication

Challenge Surveying Content Landscape

Difficulty Assessing Cross Curricular Opportunities

LMS & CMS

Needs

Reporting

AlignSurvey Examine

Locate & ModifyFulfill

Solution

Gap Analysis Remediation

ChunkContent

Content Management

Gap Analysis & Remediation Tool Demo

Common Library E-Reader & AIR Application Demo

Semantic Analysis: A Deep Dive

Learning Object Lifecycle

Smart Objects and Systems

Objects on their own are not smart

Systems can be built to semantically correlate object bonds

By mapping Critical, Important and Desirable outcomes we can link learning objects, to their related: +Concept Elements & Components

+Course Concepts & Curricular SegmentsMapping can be accomplished independent of the content source when digitized

Learners can discover ancillary materials and even subject matter of interest that might not be on their identified curriculum

Semantic Aware Content Development

• Granularity• Easily Consumed / Tagged• Common Library, Open

Calais, 2028 and other Platform As A Service (PAAS) components

• Adopt standards: IEEE, IEEE-LOM, SCORM, DCMI, DCMI-Extended

• Enable future individualized cohort learning profiles

Collaborative Content Development

• Use tools in which network affects are default, collaborative links and recommendations are dynamic (Facebook, LinkedIn, Common Library)

• Tools operate within an existing technology portfolio, enabled by standards-based systems

• Enables future individualized and cohort learning profiles

• Collaborative teams in traditional Instructional Design (ID) processes (SME, Producer) can make the system more self-aware.

• Content Management as an enabling set of tools

Collaborative Development

Thank You!

Phil Ice

pice@apus.edu

Justin Beals

justinbeals@gmail.com

Jennifer Staley

jstaley@apus.edu

http://card.ly/jennystaley

References & Supporting Materials

Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and higher Education, 11(3-4), 133-136.

Ice, P. & Staley, J. (March, 2010) "Using Semantic Analysis for Content Alignment and Gap Analysis" Orlando, FL: ELearning Guild Learning Solutions Conference and Expo, 2010.

Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

McKeachie, W. (Ed.) (1986). Teaching and learning in the college classroom: A review of the research literature. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.

Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 42(5).

Staley, J., Gibson, A., & Ice, P. (February, 2010) "Impacts on Student Satisfaction through Curricular Design: Factors of the Community of Inquiry Framework and Instructional Design Practices" New Orleans, LA: Southwest Educational Research Association, 32nd Annual Conference.

References

APUS ID Process Model

Common Library: www.commonlibrary.org