EuroLM Achievement Information Model

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This is the development version of the EuroLM Achievement Information model. Please add comments and changes directly to the wiki text or send them directly to Cleo Sgouropoulou, who will integrate them.

European Learner Mobility (EuroLM) Achievement Information Model

Contents

Foreword

  1. Introduction
  2. Scope
  3. Conformance
  4. Normative References
  5. Other References
  6. Terms and Definitions
  7. European Learner Mobility Achievement Information Model
  8. Vocabulary Encoding Schemes
  9. The EuroLMAI Description Set Profile
  10. Recommended Uses of the EuroLMAI Model

Foreword

The European Learner Mobility (EuroLM) Achievement Information Model
aspires to address the identified need for a harmonized solution on the recording and exchange of learner mobility information within the European Education Area. The results of this work will contribute to the effort towards interoperable European-wide IT systems that manage and exchange learner achievement information.

The EuroLM Achievement Information work has its roots in the European transparency tools and especially in the Europass framework for the transparent description of qualifications and competences. Europass provides the common basis for the well-structured recording of all life-long learning opportunities taken, including European Higher Education structures and learners' private and institution-owned information. The EuroLM Achievement Information Model is expected to result in a multipart standard, however in this phase the main focus will be on the representation of formal, institution attested achievement information.

The development of the proposed model has been carried out within the context of the CEN WSLT project on "Guidelines for a European Learner Mobility Model", funded under the 2008 ICT Standardization Work Programme. The project was initiated and led by Cleo Sgouropoulou (ELOT, Greece). The appointed project team also comprised the following experts: Simon Grant (UK, JISC-CETIS), Erlend Øverby (Norway, Hypatia AS) and Simone Ravaioli (Italy, KION). Other experts contributing to this work have been: Scott Wilson (UK, JISC-CETIS), Mark Stubbs (UK, MMU), Christian Stracke (Germany, Vice Chair CEN TC 353), Geir Vangen (Norway, USIT/UiO), Andy Dowling (Ireland, Digitary), Luis Anido Rifón (Spain, University of Vigo) and Alessandra Biancolini (Italy, IFSOL).The close collaboration and substantial support of the Rome Student Systems and Standards Group of software implementers regarding the EuroLM standardisation efforts is highly acknowledged.

1. Introduction

The establishment of Europass as a common framework which is accepted throughout Europe demonstrates that European education has reached a maturity stage where there is a demand for the recording and exchange of learner mobility information needs to be efficiently supported by technical interoperability standards.

At the initiation point of this project several relevant standardization efforts were identified and significant national expertise had already been accumulated. However, harmonization was deemed necessary towards a European solution, in order to provide viable support for emerging European student management information systems and dissuade service providers from developing proprietary services and platforms.
The results of the current and future EuroLM work aspire to support the development of a new generation of technology-enhanced services for learners (learning and employment opportunities exploration), higher education institutions (certification or augmentation of learner information), employers (work-place descriptions, recruiting and development of learners' competences) and other stakeholders of learning, education and training throughout Europe, as the European Union and Commission, the Member States and their governments and ministries, etc.

The EuroLM Achievement Information Model seeks to address directly the European requirement for rapid implementation and dissemination of the institution-owned transparency information tools throughout Europe. As such, the Europass Diploma Supplement (DS) is considered one of the most important Europass documents, having an essential role in the transparent interpretation and recognition of academic and professional qualifications (diplomas, degrees, certificates) across the diverse European educational systems map. The Europass DS aims at:

  • Promoting transparency within and between higher education systems;
  • Providing accurate and up-to-date information on an individual's qualifications;
  • Aiding mobility and access to further study and employment abroad;
  • Providing fair and informed information relating to qualifications; and
  • Facilitating academic and professional recognition and thus increasing the transparency of qualifications.

The Europass DS constitutes an instrument upon which a high level of agreement on the content and structure has been achieved among the EU member states. Most of the European countries have taken up the DS initiative and have specified their national variants, in most cases being minor variations of the Europass DS. However, currently the DS is mostly issued in paper-based format. In cases where it is issued electronically, the DS is represented in a proprietary manner. A major problem has been the lack of interoperable tools, impeding the recording and/or reuse of data in existing student management systems for the production of an electronic DS and the exchange of information among interested parties.

This EuroLM Achievement Information (EuroLMAI) Model will be developed as a generic model for representing the institution attested achievements of a learner within a formal learning setting, resulting from the learner's participation in one or more learning opportunity instances and including any available associated results. The Europass institution-owned learner achievement information structures, namely the Europass Diploma Supplement and the Europass Mobility, as well as other official achievement information reports (e.g. the learner's Transcript of records), will be specified as application profiles of the EuroLMAI model.

This document specifies, first, a skeleton (subset) of the generic EuroLMAI model, and, second, building on that skeleton, an Application Profile for the Europass Diploma Supplement. Other learner mobility achievement structures (e.g. that of Europass Mobility), set the requirements for the future enhancement of the skeleton model with additional information entities concerning assessment processes, intended learning outcomes, etc. New projects should be launched in order to develop these entities and provide the appropriate extensions to the EuroLMAI model.

2. Scope

This standard defines a model for the recording and exchange of learner achievement information among student management information systems, as well as the aggregation of information by third party suppliers.

The model proposed within the standard is not intended to define the representation of the entire spectrum of Learner Mobility information - the scope of the standard is restricted to the definition of the electronic representation of official, institutionally attested achievement information for learners engaged in formal learning processes, in order to facilitate its recording and subsequent exchange within the European Education Area.

Achievement Information structured and presented in compliance with this standard may, of course, be used for other purposes - for instance, providing descriptions of achievement to enrich a learner-owned report, in terms of an e-portfolio. However, guidance on the specification and organisation of information for purposes other than the representation of formal achievement reports is outside the scope of this standard.

The EuroLMAI model has been developed as:

  • a lightweight standard taking into consideration existing and emerging educational practice processes
  • an easy-to-implement standard in order to ensure a rapid uptake by stakeholders of learning, education and training throughout Europe (Higher Education Institutions, learners, employers, service providers, etc.)

The EuroLMAI Diploma Supplement Application Profile, in full compliance with the Europass requirements, focuses on the expression of information regarding the qualification awarded to a learner upon completion of a formal educational programme. The proposed profile is needed for the general purposes of:

  • the exploitation of academic achievements abroad: in continuing education or in seeking job opportunities
  • the admission of students or graduates in home and European universities: acknowledgment of credits or transfer of credits accumulated in home institutions moving from one university to another
  • the expression of the level, content and nature of qualifications to potential employers both nationally and at a European level
  • the enhancement of internal and European student mobility, from a university to another, or from one branch of studies to another
  • the proper integration of foreign workers into a country's employment setting.
  • the normalization of higher education qualifications, either in academic or non academic paths
  • the establishment of good practices in the recognition procedures of qualifications among Higher Education Institutions

3. Conformance

3.1 Conforming Instances

A strictly conforming instance is a set of structured information constituted only of objects and statements defined by the classes and properties of this standard and fully qualified refinements of the properties defined in this standard.

A fully qualified refinement is defined for the purpose of conformance as a property that explicitly extends a property defined by this standard. A fully qualified refinement must be capable of being processed according to the semantics of the property it extends. A conforming instance may contain additional objects and properties.

3.2 Conforming Bindings

A strictly conforming binding is constituted only of bindings to an exchange format of the classes and properties defined by this standard and fully qualified refinements of the properties defined in this standard.

A conforming binding may contain additional properties that do not necessarily extend or map to the properties defined in this standard.

Both strictly conforming bindings and conforming bindings must be capable of generating and validating instances that can be automatically converted to a strictly conforming instance of this standard.

Both strictly conforming bindings and conforming bindings may impose additional constraints upon the values of properties defined in this standard.

Both strictly conforming bindings and conforming bindings may impose cardinality constraints on properties defined in this standard.

3.3 Conforming Applications

A conforming application must have at least one of the following capabilities:

  • Generating conforming instances and/or instances conforming to a conforming binding
  • Processing conforming instances, and/or instances that conform to a conforming binding.

4. Normative References

[OJ L 390, 31.12.2004] DECISION No 2241/2004/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 15 December 2004 on a single Community framework for the transparency of qualifications and competences (Europass)

[CWA 15903] Metadata for Learning Opportunities (MLO) - Advertising

[CWA XXXXX] Educational Credit Information Model

[CWA YYYYY] ECTS Information Package/Course Catalogue MLO Application Profile

[CWA ZZZZ] Guidelines on a European Learner Mobility Model

[CWA WWWW] Europass Diploma Supplement EuroLMAI Application Profile

[ECTS Users' Guide] ECTS Users' Guide http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc/ects/guide_en.pdf

[ISO 15836] Information and documentation - The Dublin Core metadata element set

5. Other References

[CWA 15555] Guidelines and support for building application profiles in e-learning

[DCMI-SF] DCMI Singapore Framework http://dublincore.org/documents/singapore-framework/

[DCMI-TERMS] Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: Terms 1.1

[DCMI-DSP] DCMI Description Set Profile http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/03/31/dc-dsp/

[IETF-RFC2396] Uniform Resource Identifier

[IETF-RFC2426] vCard MIME Directory Profile

[ISO 8601] Data elements and interchange formats - Information interchange - Representation of dates and times

[UML] Unified Modelling Language, v2.1.2 http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.1.2/

[W3C-DTF] W3C DateTime Format

[W3C-RDFS] W3C Resource Description Framework Schema Language 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/

[W3C-VCARD] W3C Note: Representing vCard Objects in RDF/XML http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf

6. Terms and Definitions

For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. The notation "Term1 [Term2]" is used to denote that Term2 is a synonym of Term1. The notation "Term <Domain1> Definition1 <Domain2> Definition2" is used for the provision of multiple, domain-specific definitions of a term.

6.1 EuroLMAI model related terms

Assessment result [Result]

The recorded result of an assessment process

Awarding body

Organisation that awards credit or qualifications

NOTE

The same organisation may also be a learning opportunity provider or an assessing body.

Credit

The quantified means of expressing the volume of learning based on the workload students need in order to achieve the expected outcomes of a learning process at a specified level [ECTS Users' Guide]

Credit scheme [Credit transfer scheme]

See framework

Credit value

Particular amount of credit

NOTE

Credit value is only meaningful within a framework or credit scheme, and the framework or scheme may require the specification of a level. The European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) is one such scheme. Credit value is an abstract amount that can be applied in several circumstances.

Diploma

Official documentary record of the awarding of a qualification

NOTE

This is equivalent to the [ECTS Users' Guide] Glossary term Qualification: "Any degree, diploma or other certificate issued by a competent authority attesting the successful completion of a recognised programme of study." Here, the preferred usage of the term "qualification" (q.v.) is for the status conferred, not the documentation.

Framework [Credit scheme]

System of concepts, definitions and provisions through which educational practices are ordered, related and articulated

Learner

<European Learner Mobility>

Individual engaged in a learning process [ECTS Users' Guide]

NOTE

Broad term, for entire European Learner Mobility landscape. ECTS notes that learning processes can be formal, non-formal or informal. Thus, this term can include everyone.

<Achievement Information>

Person currently or formerly enrolled in a formal learning opportunity (course, seminar, work placement, programme, etc.).

<Diploma Supplement>

Person currently or formerly enrolled in a formal educational programme

NOTE

The [ECTS Users' Guide] Glossary defines "student" as a "learner enrolled in a formal educational programme". Narrow term, for the Diploma Supplement domain. Within such context, the learner is seen as a current or former ECTS student.

Learning opportunity

Formally specified education or training process [CWA 15903]

NOTE

This is close to the [ECTS Users' Guide] Glossary definition of Educational Component: "A self-contained and formally structured learning experience (such as: course unit, module, seminar, work placement)." There are other opportunities to learn that are less structured, but these are of less interest in the context of European learner mobility.

Learning opportunity instance

Single presentation of a learning opportunity

NOTE

"Unlike a learning opportunity specification, a learning opportunity instance is not abstract, may be bound to particular dates or locations, and may be applied for or participated in by learners." [CWA 15903]

Learning opportunity provider

Organisation that validates or advertises learning opportunity specifications, or that runs learning opportunity instances

NOTE

The same organisation may also be an assessing body or an awarding body.

Learning opportunity specification

Description of a learning opportunity, consisting of information that will be consistent across multiple instances of the learning opportunity [CWA 15903]

Level [Educational level]

One of a set of terms, properly defined within a framework or scheme, applied to an entity in order to group it together with other entities relevant to the same stage of education

NOTE

This is similar in intention to the definition of level in [CWA 15903] which in turn refers to the Dublin Core term with name "educationLevel" and label "Audience Education Level". Level terms are typically consecutive small integers.

Module

Course unit in a system in which each course unit carries the same number of credits or a multiple thereof [ECTS Users' Guide]

Programme

Set of learning opportunities for successful completion of which the learner can be awarded a specified qualification.

NOTE

[ECTS Users' Guide] Glossary defines "Programme (educational)" as a "set of educational components, based on learning outcomes that are recognised for the award of a specific qualification". In a learner mobility document (including Diploma Supplement), the programme refers to the top level learning opportunity whose results are represented in the document.

Qualification

Status awarded to or conferred on a learner by an awarding body

NOTE

This is compatible with the Qualification property of [CWA 15903]. A qualification is identified and represented by its name, and possibly also its subject. To be of value, a qualification must be meaningful within the system of education and within the society in which it is embedded. The EQF defines a qualification as "a formal outcome of an assessment and validation process which is obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards", which says a lot about the process, but little about the nature of the outcome.

Student

See Learner

Transcript

Collection of information, represented in a learner mobility achievement information report, about learning opportunity instances taken by a learner, including any available associated results for that learner

6.2 Informative terms

Application profile

An assemblage of metadata elements selected from one or more metadata schemas and combined in a compound schema. The purpose of an application profile is to adapt or combine existing schemas into a package that is tailored to the functional requirements of a particular application, while retaining interoperability with the original base schemas.

NOTE

Term and definition same as in [CWA 15555]

Class

A group containing members that have attributes behaviours, relationships or semantics in common.

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Domain

The class of resource to which statements using a property may be made

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Literal

A literal value for a property defined within a statement; this may be a plain literal value (such as a string and language term) or a typed literal value (such as a value and data type specification identifier)

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Property

A specific aspect, characteristic, attribute, or relation used to describe resources

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Range

The range of values that may be used for a property

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Record

An instantiation of a set of descriptions, created according to a binding specification

Resource

Anything that might be identified. Familiar examples include an electronic document, an image or a service

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Sub Property Of

The superclass of a property

NOTE

Attention is drawn to [W3C-RDFS] for the detailed definition of this term

Statement

A combination of a property and a value specified for a resource

URI

A uniform resource identifier

NOTE

As defined by [IETF-RFC2396]

h2. 7. European Learner Mobility Achievement Information Model
This specification has been developed following the principles of the Singapore Framework for application profiles defined by the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative [DCMI-SF].The EuroLMAI Model is defined in terms of:

  • a Conceptual Model, aiming at the description of the semantics of the achievement information field through the representation of the participating entities and a series of assertions about its inherent processes, and
  • a Domain Model, providing a detailed description of the DS resources and their associations

7.1 Conceptual Model

The CWA on "Guidelines for a European Learner Mobility Model" [CWA ZZZZ] specifies a high-level working model of the educational practice relevant to the learner mobility domain (Figure 1), in the context of which information arises - that is, the practice that generates information, parts of which are gathered together in mobility documents and reports.


Figure 1. Conceptual model of educational practice within EuroLM

The conceptual model illustrates the rough division of the subject matter into three distinctive parts: learning opportunity provision, award of credit or qualification, and assessment . Between these parts sits the learner, the learner's actions, and their results as evidence, which provide the basis for the rest of the system. Intended learning outcomes act as the proper bridge between learning opportunity provision and assessment. Without this bridge, the connections are more tenuous.

The above model provides the basis for the definition of a complete EuroLMAI model, under the condition of existence of the ingredient, standardised models, for the representation of each of the entities taking part into the educational practice. At the current point of maturity, standardisation advances within the learner mobility context can support modelling of practice and processes regarding the recording of the institution attested information about a learner's participation in a single or a set of learning opportunities and the associated qualifications and/or results obtained. Information representation concerning assessment processes or intended learning outcomes cannot yet be considered, given that relevant specifications are expected by future developments.
The above restrictions taken into account, a subset of the overall model is defined and illustrated in Figure 2 (marked in bold, in a detailed version of representation). This subset can be assumed as the conceptual foundation for the development of the EuroLMAI skeleton model, regarding mainly the representation of institution attested information on learning opportunities taken by a learner and the possible associated awarding and/or results obtained, within a formal learning setting supporting a wide range of delivery and assessment practices [CWA ZZZZ], such as:

  • Traditional, single institution delivery and assessment in terms of a full programme of study
  • Provision of lesser learning opportunities (single courses, or learning streams)
  • Awarding with experience components
  • Shared programmes between different institutions
  • Exchange of learners with a sequential or parallel plan of delivery and assessment


Figure 2. Conceptual model ingredients relevant to EuroLMAI

7.2 Domain Model

This section defines the domain model of the skeleton EuroLMAI model. The EuroLMAI model is concerned with specific sets of learner achievement information arising from the different administrative processes carried out at the institutions throughout the implementation of educational practice, as well as with the associations amongst them. The EuroLMAI model builds upon information regarding learner information, description of learning opportunities, assessment of qualification for a specific learner and result information for each completed learning opportunity. The EuroLMAI model defines the assemblage pattern of such information in terms of an achievement report configuration, consisting of:

  • a Learner instance, representing the individual enrolled in a formal learning opportunity (part or full programme of study, course, work experience, etc.)
  • an Issuer instance, representing the authority that awards credits and/or qualifications and/or attests learner participation in the described learning opportunities including any associated results gained
  • at least one Learning Opportunity object, which, depending on its function and level, may comprise any or all of the following information:
  • description of a learning opportunity or period of learning the learner currently or formerly enrolled in, and in case of successful completion, of the qualification achieved, including the actual result for the specific learner
  • description of possible component units (each of which may contain provider, credit, and result information for the specific learner)
  • and optionally, a set of additional information properties.


Figure 3. The EuroLM Achievement Information skeleton domain model

Figure 3 illustrates the domain model in UML. Attention is drawn to UML for an explanation of the underlying semantics of this diagram. Each box in the diagram relates to a Class (see section 7.3.1 Classes). Each named association (line with label) in the diagram represents an Association Property (see section 7.3.2 Association Properties). The Resources of this model are either defined in this specification or in the MLO-AD standard [CWA 15903]. Attribute Properties from other relevant standards have also been reused. Arrows on named associations indicate the direction in which traversal between instances can occur. No cardinality is specified for any association. Lines with an unfilled diamond shape represent an association with an aggregation relationship, indicating that one class is a part of another class.

7.3 EuroLMAI Resources

The following elements represent the Resources (classes, association properties and attribute properties) defined for European Learner Mobility Achievement Information.

7.3.1 Classes

URI: elm:Learner
Label: Learner
Type: Class
Definition: Individual currently or formerly enrolled in a formal learning opportunity (part of,or full programme of study, seminar, work experience, single course, etc.)
Comments:

URI: elm:Issuer
Label: Issuer
Type: Class
Definition: The body that issues the EuroLMAI report
Comments: May be the same as the Provider of the top-level learning opportunity, but the role is different.

URI: elm:Result
Label: Result
Type: Class
Definition: A grade or classification of the actual outcome for a learning opportunity for a learner as stated by a provider or the issuing body
Comments:

7.3.2 Association Properties

URI: elm:hasResult
Label: Has Result
Domain: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Resource
mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance?
Range: elm:Result
Sub Property Of: http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/relation
Definition: A relation of a resource to a Result
Comments: For example, the relation of a learning opportunity instance to a result

7.3.3 Attribute Properties

URI: elm:status
Label: Status
Domain: elm:Result
Range: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Literal
Definition: The status of a result
Comments: For example, whether the result has been already assessed or is a predicted result. See the status vocabulary encoding scheme (section 8.1)

COMMENT - SCOTT
URI: elm:value
Label: Value
Possible property definition for Result to express value - Pls. review proposals and comment
Result information
For HEAR, we defined result as being a simple String value. However in ELM currently there is no place to hold a "value" for a result, only its status. There are several approaches possible:
1. Define a "value" property to hold "the value of the result".
This fits current practice but is quite weak semantically. For example, valid values may be "63%", "PASS", "A", "merit" etc. This is a known issue for transcripts, where students can end up with a mixture of result styles. (Current recommendations for HEAR are to try where possible to harmonize on (I think) letter grades.) However there is a diversity of practice now, and no real clarity about future directions, so we have to be flexible.
This could be helped by a Note explaining that the property should be refined for specific result schemes where known, enabling better interpretation and comparison of results.
Some possible examples of bindings:
a. Binding maps "value" to text content and "status" to attribute
<result status="achieved">24%</result>

b.Binding maps both properties to elements

<result>
<status>achieved</status>
<value>24%</value>
</result>

c. Binding refines value property

<result>
<status>achieved</status>
<value xsi:type="x:percent-grades>24%</value>
</result>

d. JSON binding

{"Result": {
'status':'achieved',
'value':0.24
}}

2. Recommend the use of a description property to describe the result
While being fairly honest about the kind of data, this has the disadvantage of making comparisons even harder.
Description instead of value

<result>
<status>achieved</status>
<description>24%</description>
</result>

3. Don't define anything
Leave it to profiles to put something here. An easy option, but not even offering a base type to extend from could harm future interoperability.
Binding refines Result class and defines content to be letter grades

<result status='"achieved" xsi:type="ukqca:letter-grade">A</result>
COMMENT - SIMON
I'm inherently suspicious of "status" elements, and status here is no exception. The problem is when a distinction in status changes the very nature of the information represented. This is a personal view, but I believe that predicted grades are much overused, and I fear that having predicted and achieved grades distinguished just by "status" sends entirely the wrong semantic message, and does not allow for the extra elements that would be needed properly to deal with other aspects of prediction.
I would much prefer two distinct elements. Yes, it seems more complex, but I believe clearer, less prone to problems, and therefore better in the long run. For instance, I would be happy with "result" and "predictedresult" (with any capitalisation, spacing, punctuation etc.)
A less satisfactory alternative would be to have to sub-elements of "result", one being "value" and the other being "predictedvalue".
To capture correctly proper semantics for predicted results, I would say that one would need
  • the date on which the predication was made
  • the party making the prediction
  • the basis on which the prediction was made
  • any comment from the learner, such as whether this prediction was accepted as reasonable, or whether (on the contrary) the basis of the prediction was judged to be unreliable.

Because there is all this reasonably required semantics within predicted results, that is the reason I would strongly favour to distinct elements, result and predictedresult, and not making the distinction at the level of value and predicted value, let alone simply with a status element.

Your other discussion points look very helpful. On quick reflection (fallible!) I would say that the main value types are

  • purely numeric – it doesn't seem to me to matter what the number scale is, or what it means, except to note whether higher is better (as in percent) or lower is better (as in traditional degree classification)
  • category scheme – this does all single scales that are not purely numeric. We could go on to write a mini-spec for value category schemes, which we might require to contain or refer to an ordered list of categories. Alternatively, it would be easy to define such a scheme with SKOS, plus an added relationship such as "better than".
  • vector (though, as we discussed, we wouldn't have to use that very term). In this case, each component of the result would need a term for what the component was, plus an indication of what kind of value that dimension was (purely numeric, category scheme)
    In the conceptual model I have put together, I just note that the value of the assessment result must fall within a range given by the assessment specification. This is just common sense, but flags the need to take into account the result semantics when we make better models of assessment.
COMMENT - CLEO
Could we consider a refinement of the Result class, to a PredictedResult class?
We could then associate PredictedReslt to an Agent providing the prediction.
By the way an Agent could be a base class for Issuer, Awarding Body, Assessment Body or any other organisation having a role within the conceptual model and will be addressed in future activities (e.g. assessment modelling).

URI: elm:additionalInformation
Label: Additional Information
Domain: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Resource
Range: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Resource
Definition: Additional information concerning the resource
Comments: For example, additional information about a EuroLMAI report

URI: elm:IssueDate
Label: Issue Date
Domain: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Resource
Range: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Literal
Sub Property Of: http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/date
Definition: The date on which the resource was formally issued
Comments: For example, the date of issue of the EuroLMAI report

7.4 Resources included from the MLO-AD specification

The following Resources defined in the MLO-AD specification [CWA 15903] are applicable within the EuroLMAI domain.

7.4.1 Classes

URI: mlo:LearningOpportunityObject
Label: Learning Opportunity Object

URI: mlo:LearningOpportunityProvider
Label: Learning Opportunity Provider

URI: mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification
Label: Learning Opportunity Specification

URI: mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance
Label: Learning Opportunity Instance

7.4.2 Association Properties

URI: mlo:offeredAt
Label: Offered At

URI: mlo:hasPart
Label: Has Part

URI: mlo:specifies
Label: Specifies

7.4.3 Attribute Properties

The entire set of attribute properties defined by the MLO-AD specification is applicable within the EuroLMAI domain.

7.5 Properties included from the DC Metadata Element Set

The following Properties defined in the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set [ISO 15836] are applicable within the EuroLMAI domain.

URI: http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/identifier
Label: Identifier
Comments: The content should conform to a URI, as defined by IETF- RFC2396.

URI: http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title
Label: Title

URI: http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/type
Label: Type

URI: http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/description
Label: Description

7.6 Properties included from DCMI Terms

URI: http://purl.org/dc/terms/educationLevel
Label: Education Level

7.7 Properties included from vCard MIME Directory Profile

The following Properties defined in the vCard MIME Directory Profile [IETF-RFC2426] are applicable within the EuroLMAI domain.

URI: http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#Given
Label: Given

URI: http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#Family
Label: Family

URI: http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#BDay
Label: Birthday

7.8 Properties included from the Educational Credit Information Model

The following Properties defined in the Educational Credit Information Model [CWA XXXX] are applicable within the EuroLMAI domain.

URI: http://purl.org/net/cm/level
Label: Level

URI: http://purl.org/net/cm/scheme
Label: Scheme

URI: http://purl.org/net/cm/value
Label: Value

h2. 8. Vocabulary Encoding Schemes
The following vocabulary encoding schemes are defined as part of this standard.

8.1 Status property of Result class

Legal values of the vocabulary for the elm:status property are:

  • Predicted: The result is a predicted value based on performance to date
  • Achieved: The result is a final result

9. The EuroLMAI Description Set Profile
The EuroLMAI model was based on the approach of developing an application profile of existing specifications. Application profiles can be defined as schemas which consist of data elements drawn from one or more namespaces, combined together by implementers, and optimised for a particular local application. A EuroLM Achievement Information report comprises the following components:

  • the Achievement Information report itself [SIMON]
  • information about the learner currently or formerly enrolled in a formal learning opportunity
  • information about the issuer of the report (institution attesting the learner's achievements and/or awarding the learner with a qualification)
  • Information about the learning opportunity the learner has taken, any associated results obtained, and the qualification possibly achieved
  • Information about the components studied as well as the result and credits in those components
  • Other achievement information

The following sections provide constraint clauses for the resources of the EuroLMAI model.

9.1 EuroLM Achievement Information Report

The EuroLM Achievement Information report is a record that contains achievement information for a learner within a formal educational setting.

  1. A EuroLM Achievement Report instance MUST contain one and only one elm:Learner instance
  2. A EuroLM Achievement Report instance MUST contain one and only one elm:Issuer instance
  3. A EuroLM Achievement Report instance MAY contain at least one mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance Learning Opportunity [SIMON], representing the learning opportunity for which achievement information are represented within the scope of the report
  4. A EuroLM Achievement Report instance MAY contain one and only one elm:additionalInformation property
  5. A EuroLM Achievement Report instance MUST contain one and only one elm:issueDate property

9.2 Learner

A EuroLMAI Learner instance should adhere to the following constraint clauses.

  1. An elm:Learner instance MUST contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/identifier property
    NOTE

    Identifiers may be given for a learner using a range of identifier schemes, including provider-issued student identifiers, national personal identifiers, and schemes of identifiers used by education systems in specific jurisdictions. Where multiple identifiers are used in a Learner instance, each identifier should be specified by defining a sub property of http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/identifier for the scheme in use.

  2. An elm:Learner instance MAY contain at least one http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#Given property
  3. An elm:Learner instance MAY contain one and only one http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#Family property
  4. An elm:Learner instance MAY contain one and only one http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#BDay property
    NOTE

    Some known weaknesses of the vCard MIME Directory Profile specification [IETF-RFC2426], such as the handling of composite names are under consideration for resolution by W3C. Attention is drawn on multiple contacts and the UK MIAP CDD Common Data Definitions 2.0 specification http://www.miap.gov.uk/documentlibrary/documents/Common+Data+definitions+and+XML+Schemas.htm

9.3 Issuer

A EuroLMAI Issuer instance should adhere to the following constraint clauses.

  1. The elm:Issuer instance MUST contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/identifier property
  2. The elm:Issuer instance MAY contain at least at most one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title property for any given language [SIMON]
  3. The elm:Issuer instance MAY contain at least at most one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/description property for any given language [SIMON]
  4. The elm:Issuer instance MAY contain any other properties allowed as defined in the MLO-AD standard for Learning Opportunity Provider [CWA 15903]

9.4 Learning Opportunity

A EuroLMAI Learning Opportunity consists of an mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance and an mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance instance associated with the mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance using the mlo:specifies association property.

9.5 Learning Opportunity Specification

A EuroLMAI Learner Opportunity Specification instance should adhere to the following constraint clauses.

  1. An mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance MAY have zero or more child mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instances associated using the mlo:hasPart associations, representing modules or sub-components of the parent learning opportunity specification.
  2. Each mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance MUST contain one and only at least [SIMON: someone may have taken the same course many times] one mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance instance, associated using the mlo:specifies association.
  3. Depending on the function of the described learning opportunity, the corresponding mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance MAY contain one and only one mlo:qualification property or any number of mlo:credit properties.
    NOTE

    The mlo:credit property MUST NOT be used to provide a calculated credit value, such as may be obtained by summing the credit values of sub-components of the instance, but only a source credit value.

  4. Attention is drawn to the optional, though recommended use of the following properties:
    • An mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance SHOULD contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/identifier property
    • An mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance SHOULD contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title property
    • An mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance SHOULD contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/description property (if applicable)
    • An mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance SHOULD contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/type property (if applicable)
      NOTE

      In some models adopted by particular educational systems, there is an identified need of expressing grouping information for specific sets of learning opportunities. To address this need, apart from the representation of the individual opportunities, a parent learning opportunity can be defined, acting as a module-level component or a grouping component (e.g. semester, programme year, level or subject of a collection of courses). The http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/type property should be used to indicate the type of such components.

  5. Each mlo:LearningOpportunitySpecification instance MAY contain any other properties allowed as defined in the MLO-AD standard [CWA 15903].

9.6 Learning Opportunity Instance

A EuroLMAI Learner Opportunity Specification instance should adhere to the following constraint clauses.

  1. Each mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance instance MAY contain one and only one mlo:LearningOpportunityProvider instance, associated using the mlo:offeredAt association.
  2. Each mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance instance MAY contain one and only one elm:Result instance, associated using the elm:hasResult association.
  3. Each mlo:LearningOpportunityInstance instance MAY contain any other properties allowed as defined in the MLO-AD standard [CWA 15903]

9.7 Result

A EuroLMAI Result instance should adhere to the following constraint clauses.

  1. Each elm:Result instance MAY contain one and only one elm:status property.

9.8 Qualification

The use of the Qualification property within the EuroLMAI model is constrained as follows:

  1. Each mlo:qualification property MAY contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/identifier property
  2. Each mlo:qualification property MUST contain at least one http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title property
  3. Each mlo:qualification property MAY contain zero or more http://purl.org/dc/terms/educationLevel properties
    NOTE

    Levels of qualifications are usually expressed in the context of a qualification framework, for example the European Qualifications Framework [EQF]. Rather than use a single integer or text for the EducationLevel property, implementers are encouraged to make use of Uniform Resource Identifiers [IETF-RFC2396] to identify both the level of the qualification and the framework from which the level is derived. For example, [CWA XXXXX] defines EQF levels using the form http://purl.org/net/cm/terms/EQF#n, where n is the number of the EQF level.
    Other frameworks for which a standard URI is not defined may be represented using a similar convention, whereby the URL of the framework precedes the level value separated using a URI fragment identifier. For example, the following would represent level 5 of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework: http://www.scqf.org.uk/#5

COMMENT - SCOTT
There is a further question which is whether to treat 8.8 as a separate CWA, as "MLO: Qualification Information Model", rather than core ELM. I'm sure like "Educational Credit Information Model" it could be easily reused by bindings of MLO-AD, for example. The question is really whether its worth it given how simple it is (re-use of 3 existing properties plus some guidance on their use) I'll see if I can draft something to see what it looks like.

9.9 Credit

The use of the Credit property within the EuroLMAI model is constrained as follows:

  1. Each mlo:credit property MAY contain zero or more http://purl.org/net/cm/level properties
  2. Each mlo:credit property MUST contain one and only one http://purl.org/net/cm/scheme property
  3. Each mlo:credit property MUST contain at least one http://purl.org/net/cm/value property

10. Recommended uses of the EuroLMAI Model

This section includes diagrammatic representations of recommended uses of the skeleton EuroLMAI model, for facilitating a number of processes in the context of educational practice involving different levels of achievement information reporting (interim study reports, qualification achievement reports, transcripts, courses taught at other institutions, etc.).

10.1 Report on completed part of programme of study

This case represents achievement information about a learner who has enrolled in an official programme of study and has completed part of the programme offered by a single or multiple providers (interim report). The learner has not yet obtained the corresponding qualification.


Figure 4. EuroLMAI report instance for completed part of programme of study

The EuroLMAI instance for this case includes the descriptions of:

  • a Learning Opportunity at the programme level, containing information on the programme the learner has enrolled in, without including any result information, since the qualification has not yet been obtained by the learner
  • Learning Opportunities as component units of the described programme (transcript level), which the learner has taken and achieved specific credits and results
  • where a unit of the programme is offered by another institution, the corresponding learning opportunity must make reference to the Provider that offered the unit (course, work experience, etc.) To represent this, the Learning Opportunity Instance of the component MUST contain the basic details of the other institution such as the institution name.

Figure 4 provides an example structure of a EuroLMAI report for a learner that has completed two course units, both at the institution offering the programme the learner has enrolled in.

10.2 Transcript information for a period of learning

This case represents achievement information about a learner who has enrolled in an official programme of study and has completed a specific period of learning, like a semester or year.


Figure 5. EuroLMAI report instance with transcript information for a period of learning

A EuroLMAI report of this nature could be structured as follows:

  • including three levels of learning opportunities, the topmost representing the programme of study, the next offering a grouping placeholder for the components units that relate to the specific period of learning, while the third comprising detailed information about each of the component units
  • including, at the top level, a learning opportunity which represents the period of learning of the programme of study and at a second level, the associated component units.

The Learning Opportunity Instance representing the period of learning MAY have associated overall credit or result information, as required by the specific educational system.

Figure 5 illustrates a EuroLMAI report instance for a learner that has completed all the course units of a programme year and has obtained an overall result and credit for this period of learning.

10.3 Report on qualification obtained for a completed programme of study

In the case of an achieved qualification obtained by the learner upon successful completion of a programme of study, the EuroLMAI report can be structured in any of the following ways:

  • comprise the information sections illustrated in case 10.1. Learning opportunities and associated credits and results gained by the learner MUST be represented for each component unit of the programme.
  • represent only the information concerning the learning opportunity corresponding to the programme of study with explicit reference to the qualification and the overall result obtained

The Learning Opportunity Instance at the programme level MUST make reference to the Provider that offered the programme.
Within the context of the European Higher Education Area, Higher Education Institutions need to issue Achievement Reports on qualifications adhering to the Europass Diploma Supplement Information structure. The Europass DS is fully supported by the EuroLMAI through a concrete Application Profile of the generic model, which defines specific refinements and constraints, as these are imposed by the DS information recording requirements [CWA WWWW].

Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.