-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 826
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Course related proposals #3281
Comments
Discussion points:
|
Discussing with @philbarker briefly today, he suggests that we ought to be able to cover “skills” using the existing “teaches” property. |
Phil is correct. Teaches is inclusive of knowledge, skills, dispositions etc. Teaches can also point to concepts in a DefinedTermSet of identified as skills. |
Ideally we would want teaches to point to a DefinedTerm. For example in Credential Engine the entry for C182 - Introduction to IT from WGU shows under "connections" that it teaches 9 competencies drawn from this competency framework; these are also described by WGU using Rich Skill Descriptions like this one. I don't see how you can say that skills and teaches are different because they point to different sources of the same information, i.e. reference different skills frameworks. |
Thanks all for your feedback. Addressing some of the points we've heard here:
If absolutely necessary, we can try to make teaches repeatable, but we would be overloading the term and collecting two different pieces of data.
Please let us know your thoughts, especially on point 1. Thanks! |
Perhaps the notion of skill is something that we can consider part of the
property value?
It may be that certain websites currently use those words in this
configuration but it far from standard usage. There are numerous articles
that discuss ways to "teach", learn, or acquire a skill.
Competency and learning outcome (from our current definition) are a bit
jargon sounding to a non-educationalist but they're essentially the same
idea.
Whether the property values are formalised in code lists (by sites, tools,
schools or governments or international treaty is orthogonal. As is
repeatability (which is pretty much unavoidable here).
…On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, 19:33 ashyv, ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks all for your feedback. Addressing some of the points we've heard
here:
1. Skills are a defined set of terms, whereas teaches explains what
users will learn.
Coursera, as well as other providers, represent these in 2 distinct
ways [example course
<https://www.coursera.org/specializations/machine-learning-introduction>
with both skills and teaches]
If absolutely necessary, we can try to make teaches repeatable, but we
would be overloading the term and collecting two different pieces of data.
1.
We will rename courseLength to courseSchedule given the type it links
to is a Schedule object.
2.
What's the difference between timeRequired in course vs in Syllabus.
timeRequired in course is the length of the overall course (though we are
pushing our providers to use courseSchedule instead to provide more
detail). timeRequired in Syllabus is how long it should take to complete
one Syllabus section.
Please let us know your thoughts, especially on point 1. Thanks!
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3281 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABJSGJ4PNCXZS33RTTC74DW5CWKFANCNFSM6AAAAAAV2SZGP4>
.
You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Looking at the Coursera example, the "skills" look like subjects or topics, I would use @danbri yes, this is a bit education jargony, but not in any way that would be unfamiliar to Coursera or anyone else hoping to deal with education. And your instinct is right, competency and learning outcome are essentially the same thing; and "skills" in both education- and HR-speak are a subset of that thing.
BTW, you might want to look at how CTDL handles course schedules. |
It sees to me that what Coursera is doing here is providing a summary. That summary is like an abstract. Maybe abstract is a useful alternative here? Teaches like @philbarker and @stuartasutton suggest is supposed to point to defined terms in controlled taxonomies. |
I echo Phill's comments. The canonical authority for the semantic interpretation of LRMI elements within schema.org needs to rest with LRMI. If the semantics of the metadata terms (properties) are "co-opted" by other parties then this serves as a point of risk assessment for other metadata communities when they consider aligning with schema.org. That is, why align? semantics of the terms might be changed. |
Thanks for the suggestions. Does the following example look okay? "about": ["Build & train a neural network with TensorFlow to perform multi-class classification", "Apply best practices for ML development"] "teaches": ["Tensorflow", "Supervised Learning"] We'll use about for the free form description of what students will learn. And we'll use teaches for defined terms (we intend to provide ~1000 defined skills that our providers can pick from). Phil, regarding timeRequired, I think we are on the same page but perhaps I'm not saying it correctly. We are using the existing timeRequired property. But syllabusSections is a repeated field (i.e. a class might have 5 modules / chapters), so we need to include timeRequired in each Syllabus section. |
I was suggesting the other way round:
And yes, I know Coursera puts "Tensorflow", "Supervised Learning" under skills, but as learning objectives / competency statements they are not very helpful. I suspect they (or the organization that supplied the course) have a skills taxonomy/framework that looks something like: Specialization: Computer Science / Machine Learning
Topic: 2. Tensorflow
etc.
Yes, I think we are on the same page, that sounds good (renaming courseLength to courseSchedule helped a lot to clarify this). |
Ok, we are getting somewhere positive I think!
Thank you all for putting the time in to fond common ground and understand
where others are coming from - that is what shared schemas are all about!
I hope we also have rough consensus that for both these aspects of the
description we will expect to see both strings/phrases/hashtags as well as
URI/URL identifiers (ideally to shared definitions with both machine and
human representations).
The Schema can be essentially the same for both, i.e. providing a framework
for using controlled IDs without assuming everyone is set up to do so yet.
To support this better we could tweak /about to more explicitly support
DefinedTerm and clarify that when something is “about” such a term, it is
the content of the term that it the real value, not the term as a
bibliographic artifact.
…On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 at 09:55, Phil Barker ***@***.***> wrote:
Does the following example look okay?
"about": ["Build & train a neural network with TensorFlow to perform
multi-class classification", "Apply best practices for ML development"]
"teaches": ["Tensorflow", "Supervised Learning"]
I was suggesting the other way round:
"teaches": [
"Build & train a neural network with TensorFlow to perform multi-class classification",
"Apply best practices for ML development"
]
"about": ["Tensorflow", "Supervised Learning"]
And yes, I know Coursera puts "Tensorflow", "Supervised Learning" under
skills, but as learning objectives / competency statements they are not
very helpful. I suspect they (or the organization that supplied the course)
have a skills taxonomy/framework that looks something like:
*Specialization:* Computer Science / Machine Learning
*Topic:* 1. Supervised Learning
*Objectives:*
- 1.1. "Apply best practices for ML development"
- 1.2. etc.
*Topic:* 2. Tensorflow
*Objectives:*
- 2.1 "Build & train a neural network with TensorFlow to perform
multi-class classification",
- 2.2. etc.
etc.
Phil, regarding timeRequired, I think we are on the same page but perhaps
I'm not saying it correctly. We are using the existing timeRequired
property. But syllabusSections is a repeated field (i.e. a class might have
5 modules / chapters), so we need to include timeRequired in each Syllabus
section.
Yes, I think we are on the same page, that sounds good (renaming
courseLength to courseSchedule helped a lot to clarify this).
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3281 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABJSGN3TVS3ORPNJ55TIH3W5LEBZANCNFSM6AAAAAAV2SZGP4>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Phil, sounds good to go with what you proposed, but +1 to Dan's comment - we need to modify the about field to support DefinedTerm and Text (right now it just accepts a Thing type). Will this change happen alongside our Course Schema change, or will it be it's own standalone change? |
Also, now that we seem to be aligned on the Course Schema changes, what are the next steps? Is there anything more I can provide to make things easier on your end? |
I will queue this for inclusion in next release candidate. Examples in json-ld would be great! |
|
…hedule This reflects the full consensus of the public issue discussion #3281
Ok, this is live. There was a small mistake in yesterday's release (16.0) corrected today; I had courseLength instead of the agreed courseSchedule. |
This issue is being nudged due to inactivity. |
Context: Passing this along from Google colleagues who have been working with web data that uses current Course schema. The suggestions are based on a desire to be able to do more with this kind of data.
Proposal
Definition: “ A syllabus that describes the material covered in a course”
Typical properties (none new to Schema.org):
Example
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: