Content ecosystem implementation roadmapEdReNe repository strategies workshop17-18 September, 2009, Sestri Levante, Italy

Andrew KitchenSenior Architect – Digital Learning Resources and ToolsBecta

Quick overview

Published on 28th August, 2009 here:http://industry.becta.org.uk/display.cfm?resID=41020

Purpose to expand upon, contextualise and prioritise ecosystem components

A flexible pathway to enable the realisation of the content ecosystem vision

Delivered through a collaboration of partners and providers

Shaped by the community

Four phase approach

Focuses on phase 1, with a brief commentary for phases 2,3 and 4

The ecosystem component jigsaw

• The ecosystem is analogous to a jigsaw

• Without any single piece it would not be complete

• It takes time to put together in the correct way

• Can be divided into ten ‘pieces’ or components:

1. Content provision

• Digital learning resources (DLRs) are the ‘currency’ of the ecosystem

• Consisting of the following:

Public fundedCommercialUser generatedRemixed (mashup)

• Success is reliant on there being a diverse and comprehensive set of DLRs

• Service providers can develop rich applications that deliver compelling outcomes for the user

2. Content delivery management

• DLRs can come in various file formats of varying size.

• Bandwidth is currently inconsistent amongst homes, schools and other places of learning.

• Ensure best possible use of available bandwidth - applications and services should fully exploit what is available.

• Optimised delivery infrastructure for consistent user experience as far as possible, regardless of location.

• Different applications and services require different techniques to ensure delivery.

3. Metadata and vocabulary management

• Metadata is not solely about the publisher’s ‘official’ record and some simple controlled vocabularies such as file type to describe it.

• Metadata about a DLR can come from three types of sources:

authoritative descriptions of digital learning resources (publisher)expert created information concerning practical application (expert)user generated added value information (practitioner/learner/parent)

• Different metadata schemas are used by different sectors - cultural, health and traditional education sectors all produce DLRs.

• Defining profiles of all relevant schemas and managing their relationship to the central index is of key importance.

• Common vocabularies need to be established and their relationships well defined – vocabularies AND folksonomies.

4. IPR and copyright management

• IPR and copyright is currently a minefield.

• Not only very confusing to interpret but incredibly complex to understand and even more so to apply in practice.

• Compelling case for all stakeholders to ensure a safe, successful and legal navigation within the ecosystem.

• Compelling case for the number of unique/proprietary licences applied to digital learning resource usage to be reduced.

• Move towards a broadly encompassing set of licences that are supported through application by industry AND easily discernable by teachers, learners, parents and others.

5. Persistent identity and resolution management

• Unique and persistent identification of DLRs will provide the glue to link added value information with a specific piece of content.

• Users need to be confident that both the identity and location of a DLR are persistent over time.

• If not, risk of unmanageable task of dealing with orphaned information and a totally broken model.

• Many organisations are identifying their content but arguably in an unmanaged way.

• Various technical solutions are available to try and solve this issue, while practical persistent identity and resolution good practice guidance is needed.

6. Central index management

• The central index is the lynchpin of the whole ecosystem – a content broker.

• Allows service providers to develop their offerings without the burden of locating and brokering specific relationships with content providers.

• Enables content providers to expose their content to a wide range of different service providers without the need for specific relationships

• Various machine to machine (m2m) metadata ingestion options and search interfaces as a flexible approach.

• Data filters to be identified for a number of search indices.

• Management, usage policies and technical requirements need to be defined so that all stakeholders are able to fully engage with the ecosystem.

7. Federated access management

• Is a fundamental component for the ecosystem to improve the user experience from the point of discovery to the point of use.

• DLRs can either be freely accessible (easy management), free but requiring registration or subscription based (increased complexity).

• Users find remembering various usernames and passwords difficult and resort to bad practises to make life easier.

• However, access to restricted content should be as straightforward and efficient as if the resources were freely accessible.

• Support measures to remove the requirement for multiple usernames and passwords.

• Trusted relationships to be built between users/establishments and services.

8. Service provision

• Industry is encouraged to provide innovative services, sustainable business models and be interoperable with other ecosystem services and components.

• The central index will provide the foundations for the development of compelling discovery based services by third parties.

• Targeted or specialist services will open the door for added value service providers to complement these implementations.

• More compelling and innovative systems for the user.

• These services will act as an enabler for the user to make a more discernable choice in selecting digital learning resources that meet their needs.

9. Directories

• As the ecosystem matures there will be a growing need for the standards, specifications and services to be easily located.

• A natural solution for this is to use the concept of directory or registry services with m2m interfaces.

• Easier and more seamless integration within service provider offerings.

• Applicable to metadata schema/profiles, vocabularies, licences and services catalogued and referenced from definitive authorities.

10. Standards catalogue

• A standards catalogue will underpin the ecosystem.

• The catalogue will provide the ‘terms of engagement’ for those services that wish to partake within the ecosystem.

• It should include standards, profiles and specifications information and guidance materials on how to successfully implement them.

• The definitive reference guide for participation by stakeholders, embracing interoperability and co-operative working.

Implementation approach

• The ecosystem strategy’s vision is clear but it will be complex to implement due to :

the number of components involvedthe coordination of stakeholdersmanaging expectationsmaintaining momentummany other factors!

• As such a FOUR phase approach has been proposed where each phase focuses upon a set of core aims.

• Other non-core activity may also occur.

Phase 1 implementation

• Focus on core components that provide the ecosystem’s foundation.

• Piloting and refinement are the key activities at this early stage.

• Stakeholder engagement, relationship facilitation and leadership are crucial.

• TWELVE core aims during the phase.

• Proposals for non-core activities to promote the ecosystem’s vision are welcomed.

Core: Industry engagement, facilitation and leadership

Aim 1: We will actively engage with stakeholders who have already expressed support or interest in the ecosystem strategy, facilitate potential business relationships and approach new stakeholders to encourage support and participation.

Core: User engagement and communities of practice

Aim 2: We will work with stakeholders to identify and establish communities of practitioners to support a wider understanding and uptake of digital content and tools to support the ecosystem.

Core: Provision of digital learning resources

Aim 3: We will work with a group of stakeholders to select or, where appropriate, define education application profiles of LOM, DC and MARC21 for describing digital learning resources.

Aim 4: We will work with a group of stakeholders to select or, where appropriate, define standards, specifications and education application profiles for digital learning resources.

Aim 5: We will work with a group of stakeholders to define the elements that should be stored within a central index and how the relevant metadata/packaging standards map to this information.

Aim 6: We will work with a group of content providers to ingest metadata into a pilot central index through harvesting, feeds or deposit methods.

Core: Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and copyright for digital learning resources

Aim 7: We will lead work to identify the issues that make IPR and copyright problematic and identify approaches to solving each. This work will also identify a set of licences that encompass the broad requirements and their interrelation.

Core: Persistent identity and resolution for digital learning resources

Aim 8: We will lead work to provide guidance on the real web issues surrounding mismanagement of digital learning resource identity and resolution and how to overcome this. Considered recommendations will be made for suitable technologies that could be used, by setting, to manage persistent identity and resolution.

Core: A pilot central index of digital learning resource information

Aim 9: We will work with stakeholders to define appropriate standards and specifications for use by the pilot central index. We will also work with partners to design and configure a working prototype that enables both the ingestion of information about digital learning resources and the searching of the resulting index through machine to machine interfaces.

Core: Central index policy and management

Aim 10: We will work with a group of stakeholders to define the policy and management aspects that a central index service should include. This will also include discussion of possible sustainable business models for the service.

Core: Federated access management

Aim 11: We will work with the UK federation to establish how federated access management can be more seamlessly integrated by service providers, tackling misconceptions, implementation problems and concerns that stakeholders have raised to date. JANET(UK) will produce refreshed guidance, whilst a series of case studies will be presented and discussed at the UK federation in practice event in October 2009.

Core: An ecosystem standards catalogue

Aim 12: We will produce and publish an ecosystem standards catalogue through consultation with stakeholders.

What’s next?

Some activities have already started to deliver some of the core aims.

We will be working in collaboration with specialists to complete other aims.

We will be launching procurement exercises to commission partners to work with us in delivering the remaining aims.

Contact…

Andrew Kitchen

BectaMillburn Hill RoadScience ParkCoventry CV4 7JJ

T +44 (0)24 7679 7122F +44 (0)24 7641 1418E andrew.kitchen@becta.org.ukhttp://www.becta.org.uk