Vocabularies for the DC-Ed Application Profile
The DC-Ed Community decided at the DCMI Conference in Mexico that one task for 2007 would be defining a candidate list of jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional vocabularies for the DC-Ed Application Profile. See the ![[WWW]](/wiki/dcmi/img/moin-www.png){kind=small}
DC Education Working Group Session Report for more information.
The focus of this work has been gathering and evaluating vocabularies for Type and Instructional Method. There has been a lot of progress in these two areas, however, submissions and suggestions for vocabularies for inclusion are still welcome. Vocabularies for Subject and Audience will be looked at in 2007/2008 after the DC2007 conference.
This page will be the focal point for making public information about these vocabularies. Gathering of information and discussion will take place on the Community Mailing List. Please join the group if you'd like to take part, or email ![[MAILTO]](/wiki/dcmi/img/moin-email.png){kind=small}
Sarah Currier or Diane Hillmann.
Defining a Candidate List of Vocabularies
In March 2007, Diane Hillmann sent to the DC-Ed e-mail list a draft of four possible criteria for determining whether vocabularies may be included in the DC-Ed AP. There was some discussion on the list. Then, on April 16, 2007, Sarah Currier presented the same four criteria to a meeting of the JISC-CETIS Metadata and Digital Repositories Special Interest Group, which also sparked a lively discussion. See the March 2007 archive of the e-mail list, and Sarah's JISC CETIS MDR SIG Meeting Report on the SIG discussion for further information.
The draft Four Criteria for Candidate Vocabularies seem to be generally accepted as a good thing in the sense of encouraging potential interoperability. However, there are misgivings in the community about the fact that virtually no vocabularies will meet all of the criteria in the foreseeable future, and that this might inhibit people putting vocabularies forward for inclusion. There are other issues, to do with maintenance of vocabularies, and ownership of widely used vocabularies, e.g. the standard IEEE LOM vocabulary for Learning Resource Type does not itself meet the criteria.
The following ideas for ways forward have been under consideration:
* Devising a clear statement about what it means for DC-Ed to recommend a vocabulary as part of its AP.
* Writing a clear introduction to the four draft criteria emphasising that these are good things for interoperability and reusability, but that they are something to work toward, and that vocabularies that don't meet all four will be considered.
* Beginning to list candidate vocabularies here on the DC-Ed Wiki, showing all vocabularies, noting which of the criteria they meet and how.
These ideas will be further put to the DC-Ed Community via the e-mail list, and more news will be posted here when it's available.
Candidate Vocabularies for Instructional Method and Type
The DC-Ed Community Moderators have collated a list of all the vocabularies they could find for these two properties. The list may be viewed here. It consist of two tables of vocabularies, noting their jurisdiction (i.e. the geographic area to which the vocabularies apply), and notes on whether they meet the four draft criteria.
If you know of a vocabulary that could be included in either table, or have further information about the vocabularies listed, please contact Co-Moderator Sarah Currier.
Clearly, it would be easy for the list to become a de facto registry of vocabularies, and there are many other properties of vocabularies that could be noted here. Discussion is ongoing within the DC-Ed Community regarding what needs to be recorded. Please feed back to the Moderators or via the DC-Ed e-mail list.
Sources of Information About Relevant Vocabularies
JISC-CETIS Pedagogical Vocabularies Review In 2006 JISC-CETIS published three review documents as a result of a study on the current landscape relating to pedagogical vocabularies. Report 1 is the Pedagogical Vocabularies Review, which inventories existing pedagogical vocabularies, including flat lists, taxonomies, thesauri, ontologies and classification schemes, relevant to the UK post-16 and HE education sectors, with reference to current work in Europe. The pedagogical vocabularies described in this report include those that cover mainly instructional method, but due to the blurring of the two areas in some vocabularies, resource type as related to education is also covered. DC-Ed work and some relevant American vocabularies are also included. Contact Sarah Currier for more information.
Becta Vocabulary Bank Becta is the British Education Communications and Technology Association, a central educational agency. Their vocabulary bank aims to be the premier repository for controlled curriculum vocabularies used in UK education. These vocabularies are freely available to providers of digital learning resources to the education sector. Vocabularies are searchable, browsable and downloadable in ZThes format. At present, the vocabularies mainly cover curriculum areas by subject. However, it is likely that other educational vocabularies will be submitted in future. For instance, the ACLearn (Adult and Community Learning) vocabulary that is currently held in the Bank includes sub-nodes for Teaching Resources by Type, and for Course Delivery, which includes instructional method terms.
JISC-CETIS Metadata and Repositories Special Interest Group This SIG maintains an informative website with up-to-date information on everything relating to educational metadata, including application profiles and vocabularies.