The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.03 - July-September (2009 vol.2)
pp: 226-238
Xavier Ochoa , Escuela Superior Politénica del Litoral, Guayaquil
Erik Duval , Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Heverlee
This paper conducts the first detailed quantitative study of the process of publication of learning objects in repositories. This process has been often discussed theoretically, but never empirically evaluated. Several question related to basic characteristics of the publication process are raised at the beginning of the paper and answered through quantitative analysis. To provide a wide view of the publication process, this paper analyzes four types of repositories: Learning Object Repositories, Learning Object Referatories, Open Courseware Initiatives, and Learning Management Systems. For comparison, Institutional Repositories are also analyzed. Three repository characteristics are measured: size, growth, and contributor base. The main findings are that the amount of learning objects is distributed among repositories according to a power law, the repositories mostly grow linearly, and the amount of learning objects published by each contributor follows heavy-tailed distributions. The paper finally discusses the implications that this findings could have in the design and operation of Learning Object Repositories.
Learning objects, publication, repositories, LOR, OCW, LMS.
Xavier Ochoa, Erik Duval, "Quantitative Analysis of Learning Object Repositories", IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol.2, no. 3, pp. 226-238, July-September 2009, doi:10.1109/TLT.2009.28
[1] B. Collis and A. Strijker, “Technology and Human Issues in Reusing Learning Objects,” J. Interactive Media in Education, vol. 4, pp. 1-32, 2004.
[2] E. Duval et al., “The Ariadne Knowledge Pool System,” Comm. ACM, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 72-78, 2001.
[3] R.G. Baraniuk, “Challenges and Opportunities for the Open Education Movement: A Connexions Case Study,” Opening Up Education: The Collective Advancement of Education through Open Technology, Open Content, and Open Knowledge, pp. 116-132, MIT Press, 2007.
[4] T. Malloy, G. Jensen, A. Regan, and M. Reddick, “Open Courseware and Shared Knowledge in Higher Education,” Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 200-203, 2002.
[5] T. Malloy and G. Hanley, “MERLOT: A Faculty-Focused Web Site of Educational Resources,” Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 274-276, 2001.
[6] A. Agogino, “Visions for a Digital Library for Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education (SMETE),” Proc. Fourth ACM Conf. Digital Libraries, pp. 205-206, 1999.
[7] L. Campbell, “Engaging with the Learning Object Economy,” Reusing Online Resources: A Sustainable Approach to E-Learning, pp.35-45, Kogan Page, Ltd., 2003.
[8] G. Richards, R. McGreal, M. Hatala, and N. Friesen, “The Evolution of Learning Object Repository Technologies: Portals for On-Line Objects for Learning,” J. Distance Education, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 67-79, 2002.
[9] S. Ternier, “Standards Based Interoperability for Searching in and Publishing to Learning Object Repositories,” PhD dissertation, Katholieke Univ. Leuven, 2008.
[10] S. Guth and E. Köppen, “Electronic Rights Enforcement for Learning Media,” Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf. Advances Learning Technologies (ICALT '02), V. Petrushin, P. Kommers, Kinshuk, and I. Galeev, eds., pp. 496-501, Sept. 2002.
[11] S. Downes, “Models for Sustainable Open Educational Resources,” Interdisciplinary J. Knowledge and Learning Objects, vol. 3, pp. 29-44, 2007.
[12] R. McGreal, “A Typology of Learning Object Repositories,”, 2007.
[13] S. Retalis, “Usable and Interoperable E-Learning Resources and Repositories,” Interactive Multimedia in Education and Training, Idea Group, 2004.
[14] A. Tzikopoulos, N. Manouselis, and R. Vuorikari, “An Overview of Learning Object Repositories,” Learning Objects for Instruction: Design and Evaluation, pp. 29-55, Idea Group, 2007.
[15] F. Neven and E. Duval, “Reusable Learning Objects: A Survey of Lom-Based Repositories,” Proc. 10th ACM Int'l Conf. Multimedia (MULTIMEDIA '02), M. Muhlhauser, K. Ross, and N. Dimitrova, eds., pp. 291-294, 2002.
[16] M. Sicilia, E. Garcia, C. Pages, and J. Martinez, “Complete Metadata Records in Learning Object Repositories: Some Evidence and Requirements,” Int'l J. Learning Technology, vol. 1, no. 4, pp.411-424, 2005.
[17] EdReNe, “Current State of Educational Repositories,” technical report, eContentplus, 2009.
[18] L. Egghe and R. Rousseau, “Systems without Low-Productive Sources,” Information Processing and Management, vol. 42, no. 6, pp.1428-1441, 2006.
[19] M. Goldstein, S. Morris, and G. Yen, “Problems with Fitting to the Power-Law Distribution,” The European Physical J. B-Condensed Matter, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 255-258, 2004.
[20] Q. Vuong, “Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-Nested Hypotheses,” Econometrica, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 307-333, 1989.
[21] A. Clauset, C. Shalizi, and M. Newman, “Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data,” p. 26, Arxiv preprint arXiv:0706.1062, 2007.
[22] R. Rousseau, “Lotkas Law and Its Leimkuhler Representation,” Library Science with a Slant to Documentation Studies, vol. 25, pp.150-178, 1988.
[23] Q.L. Burrell, “The Gini Index and the Leimkuhler Curve for Bibliometric Processes,” Information Processing and Management, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 19-33, 1992.
[24] F. Massey, “The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Goodness of Fit,” J.Am. Statistical Assoc., vol. 46, no. 253, pp. 68-78, 1951.
[25] J. Cole and H. Foster, Using Moodle: Teaching with the Popular Open Source Course Management System. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2007.
[26] H. Van de Sompel, M. Nelson, C. Lagoze, and S. Warner, “Resource Harvesting within the OAI-PMH Framework,” D-Lib Magazine, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 1082-9873, 2004.
[27] L. Carr and T. Brody, “Size Isn't Everything: Sustainable Repositories as Evidenced by Sustainable Deposit Profiles,” D-Lib Magazine, vol. 13, nos. 7/8, pp. 1082-9873, 2007.
[28] H. Wold and P. Whittle, “A Model Explaining the Pareto Distribution of Wealth,” Econometrica, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 591-595, 1957.
[29] C. Anderson, The Long Tail. Hyperion, 2006.
[30] B. Simon, D. Massart, F. van Assche, S. Ternier, E. Duval, S. Brantner, D. Olmedilla, and Z. Miklos, “A Simple Query Interface for Interoperable Learning Repositories,” Proc. First Workshop Interoperability of Web-Based Educational Systems, D. Olmedilla, N.Saito, and B. Simon, eds., pp. 11-18, 2005.
[31] H. Akaike, “An Information Criterion (AIC),” Math. Sciences, vol. 14, no. 153, pp. 5-9, 1976.
[32] G. Moore, Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling Disruptive Products to Mainstream Customers. Collins, 2002.
[33] P. Lyman and H.R. Varian, “How Much Information?” J. Electronic Publishing, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 8, 2000.
[34] D. Lindsey, “Production and Citation Measures in the Sociology of Science: The Problem of Multiple Authorship,” Social Studies of Science, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 145-162, 1980.
[35] P. Davis and M. Connolly, “Institutional Repositories,” D-Lib Magazine, vol. 13, nos. 3/4, pp. 1082-1101, 2007.
[36] R. Coile, “Lotka's Frequency Distribution of Scientific Productivity,” J. Am. Soc. for Information Science, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 366-370, 1977.
[37] M. Pao, “An Empirical Examination of Lotka's Law,” J. Am. Soc. for Information Science, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 26-33, 1986.
[38] R. Tansley, M. Bass, D. Stuve, M. Branschofsky, D. Chudnov, G. McClellan, and M. Smith, “The DSpace Institutional Digital Repository System: Current Functionality,” Proc. Joint Conf. Digital Libraries, pp. 87-97, 2003.
[39] C. Lagoze, S. Payette, E. Shin, and C. Wilper, “Fedora: An Architecture for Complex Objects and Their Relationships,” Int'l J. Digital Libraries, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 124-138, 2006.
[40] H. Hummel, D. Burgos, C. Tattersall, F. Brouns, H. Kurvers, and R. Koper, “Encouraging Contributions in Learning Networks Using Incentive Mechanisms,” J. Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 355-365, 2005.
[41] E. Duval, “LearnRank the Real Quality Measure for Learning Materials,” Policy and Innovation in Education—Quality Criteria, pp.457-463, European Schoolnet, 2005.
[42] Y. Matsuo, J. Mori, M. Hamasaki, K. Ishida, T. Nishimura, H. Takeda, K. Hasida, and M. Ishizuka, “Polyphonet: An Advanced Social Network Extraction System from the Web,” Proc. 15th Int'l Conf. World Wide Web (WWW '06), pp. 397-406, 2006.
[43] B. Berendt, E. Brenstein, Y. Li, and B. Wendland, “Marketing for Participation: How Can Electronic Dissertation Services Win Authors?” Proc. Next Steps—Electronic Theses and Dissertations Worldwide (ETD '03), pp. 156-161, 2003.
[44] X. Ochoa and E. Duval, “Quantitative Analysis of User-Generated Content on the Web,” Proc. First Int'l Workshop Understanding Web Evolution (WebEvolve '08), D. De Roure and W. Hall, eds., pp. 19-26, 2008.
[45] N. Taleb, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Random House, 2007.
19 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool