Towards a normalized trustworthiness approach to enhance security in on-line assessment

(c) 2014 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other users, including reprinting/ republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted components of this work in other works.This paper proposes an approach to enhance information security in on-line assessment based on a normalized trustworthiness model. Among collaborative e-Learning drawbacks which are not completely solved, we have investigated information security requirements in on-line assessment (e-assessment). To the best of our knowledge, security requirements cannot be reached with technology alone, therefore, new models such as trustworthiness approaches can complete technological solutions and support e-assessment requirements for e-Learning. Although trustworthiness models can be defined and included as a service in e-assessment security frameworks, there are multiple factors related to trustworthiness which cannot be managed without normalization. Among these factors we discuss trustworthiness multiple sources, different data source formats, measure techniques and other trustworthiness factors such as rules, evolution or context. Hence, in this paper, we justify why trustworthiness normalization is needed and a normalized trustworthiness model is proposed by reviewing existing normalization procedures for trustworthy values applied to e-assessments. Eventually, we examine the potential of our normalized trustworthiness model in a real online collaborative learning course.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Metadata enrichment for digital heritage: users as co-creators

This paper espouses the concept of metadata enrichment through an expert and user-focused approach to metadata creation and management. To this end, it is argued the Web 2.0 paradigm enables users to be proactive metadata creators. As Shirky (2008, p.47) argues Web 2.0’s social tools enable “action by loosely structured groups, operating without managerial direction and outside the profit motive”. Lagoze (2010, p. 37) advises, “the participatory nature of Web 2.0 should not be dismissed as just a popular phenomenon [or fad]”. Carletti (2016) proposes a participatory digital cultural heritage approach where Web 2.0 approaches such as crowdsourcing can be sued to enrich digital cultural objects. It is argued that “heritage crowdsourcing, community-centred projects or other forms of public participation”. On the other hand, the new collaborative approaches of Web 2.0 neither negate nor replace contemporary standards-based metadata approaches. Hence, this paper proposes a mixed metadata approach where user created metadata augments expert-created metadata and vice versa. The metadata creation process no longer remains to be the sole prerogative of the metadata expert. The Web 2.0 collaborative environment would now allow users to participate in both adding and re-using metadata. The case of expert-created (standards-based, top-down) and user-generated metadata (socially-constructed, bottom-up) approach to metadata are complementary rather than mutually-exclusive. The two approaches are often mistakenly considered as dichotomies, albeit incorrectly (Gruber, 2007; Wright, 2007) . This paper espouses the importance of enriching digital information objects with descriptions pertaining the about-ness of information objects. Such richness and diversity of description, it is argued, could chiefly be achieved by involving users in the metadata creation process. This paper presents the importance of the paradigm of metadata enriching and metadata filtering for the cultural heritage domain. Metadata enriching states that a priori metadata that is instantiated and granularly structured by metadata experts is continually enriched through socially-constructed (post-hoc) metadata, whereby users are pro-actively engaged in co-creating metadata. The principle also states that metadata that is enriched is also contextually and semantically linked and openly accessible. In addition, metadata filtering states that metadata resulting from implementing the principle of enriching should be displayed for users in line with their needs and convenience. In both enriching and filtering, users should be considered as prosumers, resulting in what is called collective metadata intelligence

Virtual collaboration: A Phenomenological Study of Remote Online Adjuncts Virtual Collaboration Lived Experiences

Online education is rapidly growing in higher education. To stay competitive, many colleges and universities have begun to offer online classes. Some institutions even offer complete degree programs online. This has left colleges needing to hire more part-time remote adjuncts to fill the fluctuating number of available courses. Because remote online adjuncts are susceptible to isolation, the need has arisen to study the benefits and barriers of virtual collaboration. The purpose of this phenomenological qualitative study was to examine the virtual collaboration lived experiences of remote online adjuncts. The study helped unveil the motives and lived experiences of virtual collaboration among online adjuncts. The current research is sparse when narrowed down to the population of remote online adjuncts. Because remote online adjuncts are a specific population of professors, the barriers and benefits to virtual collaboration may be different from faculty who work full-time in a brick and mortar building. Because virtual collaboration among remote online adjuncts is not pervasive in the current literature, the phenomenological approach allowed the searching of patterns across participants. The central question asked: What effective virtual collaboration lived experiences are remote online adjuncts using to influence their teaching strategies to develop as professionals? The interview replies from 10 remote online adjuncts created the significant statements about virtual collaboration. The composite description revealed nine themes about how participants experience virtual collaboration. The study suggests that higher education leaders would be well served to focus their efforts on leadership that will promote virtual collaboration practices. It is advisable that higher education leaders look for ways to provide leadership to connect collaborators, create opportunities for collaboration, and define clear roles for virtual collaboration. Remote online adjuncts may find camaraderie, social connections, an opportunity to participate in scholarship, a chance for self-reflection, and develop a sense of pride through virtual collaboration. Barriers that must be overcome for virtual collaboration included trust, a lack of time, and a feeling of pressure to participate

A collaborative framework for enhancing sustainable learning for vulnerable learners in a rural ecology.

Doctoral Degree. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban.There is a paucity of collective structures that enhance quality learning for those learners who reside within the rural ecologies and who are perceived as being vulnerable. This study aims to propose a collaborative framework for enhancing sustainable learning for vulnerable learners in a rural ecology. It is located within the critical paradigm and it employed a qualitative approach. Participatory Action Research methodology was used to involve those parties within the community who displayed an interest in the study and thus they participated in activities or actions which led to the emancipation of the communities who eradicated the problems which plagued the local learning ecology. Purposive, as well as snowballing sampling techniques, were used to select a diverse group of co-researchers which comprised of learners, teachers, parents, a nurse, a priest, a police officer, a social worker and a traditional healer. The co-researchers were of various ages, cultural and religious backgrounds, economic and educational statuses. In order to generate data, collages, focus group discussions, free writing reflections and field notes were used. The amalgamation of the Asset Based Approach and Collaboration formed the theoretical framework which guided the study. To analyse generated data, the content analysis method was utilised. Through content analysis, raw generated data was dissected thoroughly and categorised into labelled segments of thematic codes. Thereafter, patterns were observed, while repetitions were eliminated; finally, the patterns were grouped into themes. These themes formed a structure for a collaborative framework which was used to enhance sustainable learning for vulnerable learners in a rural ecology. The four pillars that underpinned the collaborative framework included promoting a culture of ambitious learners who possess a positive mentality, intensifying the existing forms of care and support, inspiring collaborations, and connecting with the curriculum. While the study recommended that researches of a similar nature could be employed to mitigate other societal ills in rural sectors either than the disruption of learning for vulnerable learners such as unemployment, hate crime, woman abuse and others. The study could also be conducted in other rural ecologies and involve a wider category of co researchers such as unemployed graduates, medical practitioners and psychiatrists. The study concluded that converting frameworks into actions is a complex activity which requires collaborators to mindful of the threats to the operationalisation of the initiative, to monitor the implementation process and to be continuously corporative while they share a common goal and a strong desire for liberation. KEYWORDS:Collaborative,Framework,Sustainable learning,Vulnerable learners,Rural ecology

E-learning and open education quality – some European and national standards and regulations

This article describes and analyses selected European and national standards and regulations concerning e-learning and open education quality, such as the World Declaration on Education, Bologna Process, European Higher Education Area in 2015: Implementation Report, ENQA’s report on “Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area”, UNIQUe, European Universities Quality in e-Learning, Information Package, EFQUEL Brussels, as well as a number of national regulations: Austrian, Czech, Irish and Polish. The author also discusses some research results, obtained within the framework of the international IRNet project. At the end an analysis is presented of the “new vision” of eLearning, based on educational aims and priorities, collaboration and community building, integration and partnership, with a strong innovation focus, which are likely to produce more convincing results. The author also looks at elements which were identified in Bergen as concerning the “Bologna process” vision of eLearning.Scientific publication co-financed by funds for scientific research in the years 2014–2017 granted by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education for the implementation of the co-financed international project IRNet and from statutory funds for research. The research leading to these results has received funding from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2013/ under REA grant agreement No 612536. University of Silesi

Unleashing the power of Open Educational Practices (OEP) through Artificial Intelligence (AI): where to begin?

[Resumen no disponible

Advances in Teaching & Learning Day Abstracts 2005

Proceedings of the Advances in Teaching & Learning Day Regional Conference held at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston in 2005

Analysis of Emerging Reputation and Funding Mechanisms in the Context of Open Science 2.0

This report covers the outcomes of two studies funded by JRC IPTS to explore emerging drivers for Open Science 2.0. In general, Open Science 2.0 is associated with themes such as open access to scientific outputs, open data, citizen science and open peer evaluation systems. This study, however, focused on less explored themes, namely on alternative funding mechanisms for scientific research and on emerging reputation mechanisms for scholars resulting from Web 2.0 platforms and applications. It has been demonstrated that both are providing significant new opportunities for researchers to disseminate, share, explore and collaborate with other researchers, but it remains to be seen whether they will be able to bring about more disruptive change in how science and research systems function in the future. They could well do so, especially if related changes being considered by the European Commission on ‘Science 2.0: Science in Transition’ are taken into account.JRC.J.3-Information Societ