Problematizing the way we do standards: focussing more on scope and rationale

T. HOEL; J. MASON

Issue 2

Mar. 2012

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences) > 2012 > (2): 25-34,41

T. HOEL, J. MASON. Problematizing the way we do standards: focussing more on scope and rationale[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2012, (2): 25-34,41.

Citation:

T. HOEL, J. MASON. Problematizing the way we do standards: focussing more on scope and rationale[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2012, (2): 25-34,41.

T. HOEL, J. MASON. Problematizing the way we do standards: focussing more on scope and rationale[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2012, (2): 25-34,41.

Citation:

T. HOEL, J. MASON. Problematizing the way we do standards: focussing more on scope and rationale[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2012, (2): 25-34,41.

PDF( 372 KB)

Problematizing the way we do standards: focussing more on scope and rationale

T. HOEL¹,
J. MASON²

1.
Centre for Educational Research and Development, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Oslo NO-0130, Norway;
2.
Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, QLD 4001, Australia

Received Date: 2011-09-01
Rev Recd Date: 2011-12-01
Publish Date: 2012-03-25

Abstract

Abstract

This paper brings together two perspectives on current developments in information and communications technology (ICT) utilized for the purposes of learning, education, and training (LET). One perspective is concerned with governance and legitimacy issues regarding the process and relevance of standards development; the other, is concerned with the role of discerning relevant questions in LET and the potential scope for innovation that might develop tools to support such discernment. Discussion of information systems architecture is introduced as a means to set the context and provide a framework for bringing together an overall narrative and coherence to these two perspectives. Questions initiated by why are of particular interest because they typically demand an explanation in natural language to satisfy the questioner. By focusing on why as a key primitive of enquiry the authors present an approach that might inform improved processes of ICT for LET (a.k.a ITLET) standardization.
- standards governance,
- ICT standards,
- e-Learning,
- information systems architecture,
- enterprise frameworks,
- ITLET

FullText(HTML)

References(1)

References

[1]

［1］ CARGILL C F. Information Technology Standardization: Theory, Process, and Organizations［M］. MA, USA: Digital Press, 1989.

［2］ COLLIER G, ROBSON R. eLearning Interoperability Standards, a White Paper［R］. Santa Clara, California: Sun Microsystems, 2002.

［3］ COOPER A R. Key challenges in the design of learning technology standards: observations and proposals［J］. International Journal of IT Standards and Standardization Research, 2010, 8(2): 2029.

［4］ EGYEDI T. Shaping Standardization: A study of standards processes and standards policies in the field of telematic services［M］. Delf: Delf University Press, 1996.

［5］ EGYEDI T M, SHERIF M H. Standards’ dynamics through an innovation lens: next generation ethernet networks［C］∥Proceedings of the First ITUT Kaleidoscope Academic Conference. Genera:［s.n.］,2008: 127134. 

［6］ EVERED R. A Typology of Explicative Models［M］∥Foundations for Inquiry: Choices and Tradeoffs in the Organizational Sciences. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Press, 2005.

［7］ GRAESSER A, RUS V, CAI Z. Question Classification Schemes［DB/OL］.2007［20120206］. http://www.cs.memphis.edu/~vrus/questiongeneration/16GraesserEtAlQG08.pdf.

［8］ GRAESSER A, OTERO J, CORBETT A, et al. Guidelines for Question Generation Shared Task Evaluation Campaigns［R］∥The Question Generation Shared Task and Evaluation Challenge Workshop Report. Memphis: University of Memphis, 2008. 

［9］ GRAESSER A, RUS V, D’MELLO S, et al. Learning through Natural Language Dialogue that Adapts to the Cognitive and Affective States of the Learner［M］∥Recent Innovations in Education Technology That Facilitate Student Learning. NC: Information Age Publishing, 2008.

［10］ HOEL T, HOLLINS P A. Learning technology standards adoption: how to improve process and product legitimacy［C］∥Proceedings of ICALT, 2008.

［11］ HOEL T, PAWLOWSKI J M. Key knowledge sharing points: exploring a new concept for studying crossroads in global innovation projects［C］∥ECKM 2011.［S.l.］: University of Passau Germany, 2011.

［12］ JAKOBS K, PROCTER R, WILLIAMS R. Standardization and implementation of information technology［C］∥Proc Int Resource Management Assoc.［S.l.］: IRMA, 2001. 

［13］ ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2: Rules for the structure and drafting of international standards, Section 4.2［S］. 2004［20120206］. http:∥isotc.iso.org.

［14］ JOVANOVIC V, MRDALJ S, GARDINER A. A Zachman Cube ［J］. Issues in Information Systems, 2006, 7(2): 16. 

［15］ LEPPNEN M. An Ontological Framework and Methodical Skeleton for Method Engineering［M］. ［S.l.］: University of Jyvskyl, 2005.

［16］ MASON J. A model for sensemaking: exploring why in the context of learning and knowing［C］∥Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computers in Education. Taipei: AsiaPacific Society for Computers in Education, 2008. 

［17］ ADL CoLaboratory. Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM), Version 1.0, January 2000［S］.

［18］ SNOWDEN D. The cynefin framework［DB/OL］. 1999［20120206］. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin.

［19］ SNOWDEN D. Multiontology sense making: a new simplicity in decision making, cynefin centre, UK［DB/OL］. 2005［20120206］. http://www.cognitiveedge.com/ceresources/articles/40_Multiontology_sense_makingv2_May05.pdf. 

［20］ SNOWDEN D. Complex acts of knowingparadox and descriptive self awareness ［J］. Journal of Knowledge Management Special Issue,2002.  ［21］ THEIJSSEN D. Automatically classifying why-questions with the help of syntax［DB/OL］∥Leiden Working Papers in Linguistics 5.1. 2008［2012-02-06］.http://www.lucl.nl.

［22］ TIDD J, BESSANT J. Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change［M］. 4th ［S.l.］: Wiley, 2009:638.

［23］ VERBENE S. In Search of the Why: Developing a system for answering why-questions, Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Radboud Universiteit ［DB/OL］. 2010［2012-02-06］.http://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/76174.

［24］ WIERZBICKI A P, NAKAMORI Y. Creative Space: Models of Creative Processes for the Knowledge Civilization Age, Studies in Computational Intelligence ［M］. The Netherlands:Springer, 2006. 

［25］ ZACHMAN J A. A framework for information systems architecture ［J］. IBM Systems Journal, 1987, 26(3): 276-293.

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Proportional views