CSG Open Knowledge
Initiative
May 11, 2001
James D.Bruce
Michael D. Barker
Phillip D. Long
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions © MIT 2000
1
Agenda

OKI Highlights
– Approach
– Architecture
– Value Added -- Feature Set

LMS Summit
– Key Points Summary




Influence on Vendors
CSG Priorities
Getting Involved
Summary & Q and A
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
2
Open Knowledge Initiative
(OKI)

What is it?
– Learning systems specification
» Standards based
» Pedagogically driven – proactive support for
PGP
– Reference implementation
» Open source
– Development Strategy
– Support strategy

Mellon Foundation Funding
– Vijay Kumar – PI
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
3
OCW vs OKI
Dueling TLAs
 Are these initiatives related? (besides the
letter “O”?)
 OKI is the infrastructure from which
content will be ‘published’ to OCW

– http://web.mit.edu/ocw - Information
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
4
OKI Core Collaborators
Stanford
U Penn
MIT
Dartmouth
May 11, 2001
NCSU
Harvard
U Wisconsin
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
5
OKI Collaborator Obligations

OKI Fellows join MIT-based team
– OKI partner desired competencies
» Pedagogical Research (OKI-Teach)
» Architecture/Design
» Development Resources
Stanford
UPenn
– Two Phases of Residency
MIT
Dartmouth
NCSU
Harvard
UWisc
» 1: Architecture, design and development
» 2: Implementation and Support
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
6
OKI Communities
Tech
Advisory
Projects:
IMS,
uPortal,
Stanford
I2
etc.
UPenn
LMS
Early
Advisory
Adopter
Inst.
NCSU
MIT
OKI
Dartmouth
Harvard
UWisc
Support
Other
Inst.
Partners Open
Source
Industry
May 11, 2001
Extended
Community
CSG
OKI Directions©
MIT 2000
7
OKI Core Timelines
MIT
MIT
Summer 01
Stellar
Stanford
Course
Work
OKI
Reference
Platform
MIT
UPenn
Stanford
OKI
Harvard
Dartmouth
NCSU
UWisc
OKI Spec
Sept. 2001
Other
Implementations?
Parallel
Efforts
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
8
Three Major Phases

Stellar-June:
– MIT Prototype, ready for alpha testing June 1
– initial production use June 30
– enhancement release Sept. 1

Stellar/Courseworks
– use in September across selected courses, continue
development


OKI Initial Outline of Draft specification set by
9/2001
OKI Reference implementation by summer
2002
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
9
OKI Learning Specifications
??
Authentication
Services
Enterprise
Information
-Student
Information
Systems
Modular
Authentication
User Interface
Specification
OKI “Core”
Reference Architecture
Other
LMSs
LMS-LMS
Exchange
Specification
Content
Users
Enterprise Data
Exchange
Specification
Process
Content Outline
Component
Specification
Digital
Asset
Exchange
Specification
Asset
Management
-Digital
Library
Initiatives
Quiz
List Management
White Board
Virtual Lab
Portfolio Management
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
10
We Interrupt This Powerpoint
Presentation for…
A Sneak Peek at Some Stellar Views
 What does a student see?
 What does a faculty member see?
 Can we change the look and feel?

Please stay seated as we click…
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
11
Data Objects and Tools
???
Tool Renderer
(Presentation)
XSL
TR
Tool Model
(Bus. Logic)
Home
Page
Core
Objects
Util
Library
Site
AuthN
DTL
TR
JSP
TR
“Integrated” tool
eg CourseWork
Announce
Syllabus
Nexus Measure
AuthZ
DB
DB
May 11, 2001
…
User
…
Role
Arc
Group
Store
Filespace
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
12
LMS Summit
Pedagogy Driving Development

Objectives – Generative Phase
– Identify principles of teaching and learning that an
LMS should proactively encourage
– Assemble examples of implementing T&L
principles
– Designate most important attributes for an LMS for
initial release

Process
– Pre-meeting email discussion
– Small group refinement of preliminary themes
– Selected issues from research, libraries, system
builders, and faculty users
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
13
LMS Pre-Meeting Themes




Assessment: formative
evaluation. Feedback.
Multiple levels.
Collaborative
Learning/Community
Building
Concept Mapping:
making visible structure
Constructivist:
scaffolds, novice vs
masters learners, build
portfolios.
May 11, 2001




Individualized/Adaptive
Learning
Reusability: make
earning objects
accessible across courses
and across institutions
System design:
scalability, integration,
reduce costs, drive
innovation
Usability/Faculty
Development
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
14
Observations

LMS Developers
– “Look for the sweet spot” –
» Carl Berger, Umich

Researchers
– “Generalize form, customize content” –
Diana Laurillard, Open University UK
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
15
Observations

Librarians
– Leverage existing digital asset management
projects – John Ockerbloom, U Penn

Faculty
– “Greatest faculty constraint is time” – Steve
Lerman, MIT Faculty Chair
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
16
Selected Critical Features V.1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Marketing plans and support
“Pedapoint”: wizards to support pedagogically sound
course structure and content creation
Modularity/Glue
Searching Multimedia and good representation of
what is contained
Collaboration across institutions
Learner, faculty, & institutional portfolios
Tools that allow easy migration of existing materials
Library of best practices
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
17
Summary of LMS Summit




We have established and must retain a
pedagogical basis
We will build aiming to deliver
something pragmatically useful
This is an organic community effort
And it’s now underway!
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
18
Views from the Summit
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
19
Influence on Vendors
Where do vendor products need
influence?
 For those invested in Blackboard,
WebCT, etc., besides magic pixie dust to
facilitate seamless transition into a new
LMS, to what should OKI pay particular
attention?

May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
20
Summary List of Responses to
CSG Survey
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
robust, flexible file management
support of webDAV and other content-authoring
standards
flexibility in roles and rights
content accessible to other courses and systems
flexible structure to group and partition course sites
internationalization
integration with other systems
common calendar (my calendar for all my courses)
good tools: quizzing, whiteboard
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
21
Prioritize Please – What’s
Missing?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
robust, flexible file management
support of webDAV and other content-authoring
standards
flexibility in roles and rights
content accessible to other courses and systems
flexible structure to group and partition course sites
internationalization
integration with other systems (e.g., common calendar
my calendar for all my courses)
good tools: quizzing, whiteboard
Archiving and version control
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
22
Goals for OKI





Hooks into Enterprise Data and Infrastructure
extensibility (don’t cater to least common denominator)
Accessibility
Security – your tools not MITs or Stanfords
Avoid marginalizing one or more of
–
–
–
–

User experience
Content management
Pedagogical process support
Support for institutional structure
Build a robust business model around Open Source
Licensed software
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
23
Open Source
Open source <> public domain
 License strategy?

– Reference Core
– Tools
Vendor strategy?
 These are issues for Core Collaborators
to tackle

May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
24
Join the Community

Stay informed – join oki-announce
– Subscribe at http://web.mit.edu/oki

Make the OKI architectural specifications what
you need
– Subscribe at http://web.mit.edu/oki

Engage with the OKI teaching and learning group
– Contact: longpd@mit.edu or kernsc@stanford.edu

Help build the commercial-OKI bridge.
– Work with your vendor to inform them of OKI
specifications development

Give us your input – send suggestions to
– oki-suggest@mit.edu
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
25
In Summary



OKI: an architecture with implementations
OKI: Pedagogy first! Then a grow the
community, technology, and support
OKI: it’s just the beginning of a conversation,
and we welcome your participation
– We need you to help us understand how OKI can
best serve you, and to work with your vendors to
make sure that they are a part of the OKI
community.
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
26
You Can Reach Us...
“Where the rubber meets the sky”

Michael Barker

– mbarker@mit.edu
– 617/253-0119

Vijay Kumar
OKI
– longpd@mit.edu
– 617/452-4038

– vkumar@mit.edu
– 617/253-8004
Phillip D. Long
Jeff Merriman
– merriman@mit.edu
– 617/452-4039
website: http://web.mit.edu/oki
Q&A
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
27
Questions and Answers
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
28
Stellar Requirements






Functional - does what MIT needs
Supportable (at relatively low expense, by
relatively few people)
Extensible (open software, but also based on
standards)
Simple to use by TAs but also administrative
assistants and even (!) faculty
Integrates with external institutional systems
(bi-directionally)
Provides for security, privacy, and addresses
intellectual property issues
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
29
Stellar System Requirements (cont)






Easy to use "standard" look and feel and
course organization, plus customizable
appearance & organization.
Support reuse and shared use of content
Provide support for good pedagogical practices
Must be accessible (ADA)
Support a number of portal environments
(OKI will align with uPortal in particular but
not necessarily exclusively
Establish a process for additions,
enhancements, and improvements
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
30
Suggestions/Questions

How does one contribute to the specifications?
– A. Block diagram of the architecture with a definition of the
APIs for each interface

Where the voting took place – what degree of difficulty
for the developers is associated with each of the items?
– Should this be a vote independent of degree of difficulty?



Might want to give voting process at the end of the talk
Explain “Pedagogically neutral” Differentiate OKI – is it just another LMS?
– Most have nothing to do with learning; how to structure your
learning methodology and teaching around your online
course environment – Where is the pedagogy in the LMS?
May 11, 2001
CSG OKI Directions© MIT 2000
31