Project Plan
From CLASM
Contents |
Overview of Project
1. Background
pointless edit
Course materials and learning objects used in VLEs are still predominantly stored within the VLE's own file storage system objects. This is effective for the immediate needs of course designers, but over the longer term may inhibit reuse, resource discovery and preservation of learning objects. A more robust and sustainable approach would be to ensure that materials uploaded through the VLE UI are effectively stored and managed in a separate repository.
The widely used Moodle Open Source VLE has recognised the need to integrate external repositories and has roadmapped development of interfaces to a variety of external digital object repositories, including Google Docs, Flickr, Amazon S3 storage. Development of a DSpace interface has been flagged as a requirement but appears to be undeveloped/ unclaimed. (See http://docs.moodle.org/en/Development:Repository_API#Repository_plugins).
The MR CUTE project has made important advances in managing Learning Objects in a dedicated MR CUTE Moodle repository. It does not appear yet, however, to have engaged with the generic architecture of the main Institutional Repository platforms.
Other projects have demonstrated the use of Institutional Repositories for Learning Object management. For example, at the 2007 DSpace User Group Meeting, Federico Meschini described MasterEL at Università degli Studi della Tuscia, and argued the need for integrated OA repositories with the ability to handle both research content and learning content, LOM metadata and DC metadata (see http://www.aepic.it/conf/viewabstract.php?id=332&cf=11)
Rather than develop dedicated plugins for interaction between the popular Moodle VLE and specific IR implementations (Eprints, DSpace, Fedora, etc.), or a dedicated repository, a plugin based on SWORD for object deposit would offer greater flexibiity.
2. Aims and Objectives
- Establish Moodle and Eprints instances at ULCC for development and testing.
- Create a SWORD version of the Moodle repository interface.
- Create a VLE Administrator interface enabling VLE administrators to manage the entry of SWORD service document URLs.
- Achieve through consultation a baseline analysis of the requirements and approaches.
- Define the specific requirements for the Copyright Licensing
- Build functionaility into the plugin that best meets copyright licensing requirements.
- Assist those institutions who require it, to install CLASM on their own live VLE system.
3. Overall Approach
- Consult community/Research issues
- Define specs
- Write plugin
- Test, review and revise
- Publish plugin
- Publish report
4. Project Outputs
- A Moodle plugin that...
- ...automatically deposits chosen material into an institutional repository (using SWORD protocol)
- ...allows management of copyright licensing
- ...allows access to material in accordance to copyright licensing constraints
- A project wiki that fully explains the project to the VLE/repository community (inc documenataion, user guides, etc)
5. Project Outcomes
- Greater interoperability between VLE and repository systems.
- Lowering of 'barrier to deposit' for IR's with concern to VLE related resources.
- Establish a greater understanding and appreciation for copyright licensing issues amongst VLE administrators and users.
6. Stakeholder Analysis
| Stakeholder | Interest | Importance |
|---|---|---|
| Moodle users (admins, course designers, etc) | Enhanced functionality for managing CL issues, greater potential to protect course material in institutional repository | High |
| Repository users (admins, etc) | Increased deposit rate through auto depositing from VLE | High |
| Librarians and those lot... | Address issues surrounding VLE's and copyright licensing | High |
| SWORD team at Bath | Demonstrate use of SWORD between two very well used bits of academic software | High |
7. Risk Analysis
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Staff availability and turnover | low | high | All staff are in post and available to start work immediately this short project |
| Goals are technically unfeasible | low | high | SWORD deposit plugins are proliferating, and Moodle interaction with external repositories is also proven (e.g. MR CUTE). The envisaged model for managing CLA material has much in common with the proven SCORM standard for Learning Object packaging. |
| Lack of stakeholder engagement | low | high | The proposal has been largely inspired by discussions with information professionals at several institutions (including Royal College of Arts and Waterford Institute of Technology, Eire), all of whom identify management of CLA materials as a cause for concern. |
| No live systems available to use the plugins | medium | low | ULCC hosts many Moodle installations and has strong contacts with other institutions using both Moodle and Eprints. It may be necessary to wait for suitable moments in the lifecycles of live systems, but the value of the plugins is not diminished even if takeup is not immediate. Dissemination activities will also be undertaken to promote the plugin. |
8. Standards
Platform: Linux and web Software: Moodle, SWORD-App, EPrints/D-Space (PHP, Perl, XML, MySQL, Apache) Metadata standards: SWORD
9. Technical Development
- Specs will list required functionality for the plugin, supported by use cases/scenarios as appropriate.
- Test cases will be ennumerated and based on specifications and managed on the wiki
- Test results will be published/maintained on the wiki. Testing, evaluation and any subsequent amendments to the development milestones will take place as appropriate within the SCRUM schedule.
- Code changes will be managed in CVS repository?!?!
- Documentation will be maintained on the wiki, and referenced from within the Moodle plugin repository with code base.
10. Intellectual Property Rights
CLASM plugins will be published on the same basis as Moodle and SWORD software (GNU).
Project Resources
11. Project Partners
ULCC
12. Project Management
Roru McNicholl
13. Programme Support
David Flanders; JISC RRT
14. Budget
| Directly Incurred Staff | April 09 - September 10 (Projected) | April 09 - September 08 (Actual) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| PM (including planning, publicity, dissemination, JISC liaison) (25d) | £6488.33 | ||
| Analysis, design, specification (10d) | £2595.33 | ||
| Development/Testing (25d) | £6488.33 | ||
| Total Directly Incurred Staff (60d) | £15,572 | ||
| NonStaff | April 09 - September 10 (Projected) | April 09 - September 10 (Actual) | Total |
| Travel and expenses | 0 | ||
| Hardware/software | 0 | ||
| Dissemination | 0 | ||
| Evaluation | 0 | ||
| Total Directly Incurred NonStaff | 0 | ||
| Total Directly Incurred | 0 | ||
| Directly Allocated | April 09 - September 10 (Projected) | April 09 - September 10 (Actual) | Total |
| Staff | |||
| Estates | £3,780 | ||
| Other | |||
| Directly Allocated Total | £3,780 | ||
| Indirect Costs | £10,620.00 | ||
| Total Project Cost | £29,973.00 | ||
| Amount requested from JISC | £23,979 | ||
| Institutional Contributions | £5,994 | ||
| Percentage Contributions over the life of the project | ULCC: 20%, JISC: 80% | Total 100% |
Detailed Project Planning
15. Workpackages
See Workpackages and SCRUM schedule
16. Evaluation Plan
| Timing | Factor to Evaluate | Questions to Address | Method(s) | Measure of Success |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| End of project | Functionality of plugin | Does plugin meet mimnimum specifications? | Internal and 3rd party testing | |
| End of project | Ease of installation | Is plugin easy to install (in relation to level of difficulty of other Moodle plugin installation) | Internal and 3rd party testing | |
| End of project | Integration with external systems (RSS readers etc) | Can newsfeed outputs from plugins be easily fed to and read by external systems | Internal and 3rd party testing | |
| End of project | Usefulness of plugin/functionality | Is the functionality likely to be of immediate use in the community? | Consultation with community | |
| End of project | Future enhancements | How could the work be taken forward? | Consultation with community |
17. Quality Plan
- Work to agreed Specification, Test Plan and standards
- Ensure Test Plan is completed by internal third-party
- Produce public alpha and beta releases for third-party testing and feedback
18. Dissemination Plan
- Publicise online through ULCC DA Blog, Sword twitter feed/mailing list Eprints wiki/forums/Facebook group DSpace mailing list/fourm.
- Participation in Open Repositories conference (Atlanta, May 2009)
- Participation in other JISC Repositories Programme activities
19. Exit and Sustainability Plans
- Publish code and documentation in open code repository, preferably same location as core Eprints distribution.
- Ensure that plugin compatibility with any imminent release of Moodle and any changes to SWORD specification
- Continue use of plugin in ULCC hosted Moodles and/or repositories, and continue to feedback enhancements to the community, through various means
