Call for Papers: IWL-LOKMOL 2008

January 31st, 2008 by Martin

We had very inspiring and successful LOKMOL (Learner Oriented Knowledge Management & KM-Oriented E-Learning) workshops in 2005 , 2006 and 2007. This year, we decided to start a joint initiative with the IWL Special Track of the IKNOW conference.

I’m especially interested in how we can support individuals in organizations without just focusing on organization and business goals. I think the main point is always to empower people and encourage them to learn, participate and collaborate!

Looking very much forward to your submissions!!!

Call for Papers for the I-KNOW ‘08 Special Track

Intelligent Assistance for Self-Directed and Organizational Learning
Connecting Individual, Community and Organizational Learning

Graz, September 03, 2008

A joint initiative of the IWL Special Track and the LOKMOL Workshop Series


Important Dates

14 April 2008: Submission of the full papers (8 pages)
31 May 2008: Notification of acceptance
30 June 2008: Camera ready version (8 pages)
3-5 Sept. 2008: TRIPLE-I Conference

For topics and submission procedures, check here.


January 23rd, 2008 by Martin

I got an invitation from to give a talk about User Generated Content on Wednesday 30th at the LEARNTEC 2008 in Karlsruhe. You can find an agenda here - it only seems to be available in German, although my talk will be held in English.

It’s always a bit difficult to prepare a talk when you don’t know your audience, whether they are familiar with the concept of user generated content or not. Anyway, I will give some examples, talk about social media and the paradigm shift that we experience, and of course also say a few words about how this influences the way people learn.

Update: The slides are available at slideshare now


November 12th, 2007 by Martin

Yesterday I was visiting the Turner Prize Retrospective In the Tate Britain. And they offered FREE BEER (version 3.2) :

20071111 london 011

The recipe and branding elements of FREE BEER is published under a Creative Commons license [Attribution Sharealike 2.5].

This brings a whole new meaning to the words “open content” and “sharing”…cheers! ;-)

Web2.0 at Tate Modern

November 6th, 2007 by Martin

Yesterday I was at Tate Modern, where I could see some great works of Pablo Picasso, Roy Lichtenstein (thanks to him, I edited a Wikipedia entry for the first time!), Andy Warhol, Joseph Beuys and many others. And I really liked this piece of “mashup art”:

20071105 london 012

The performance artist Andrea Fraser “created a scrambled remix of Tate Modern’s multimedia tours for the exhibition The World as a Stage“.

Maybe we’re all (more or less good) artists doing mashups and remixing stuff :-)

London calling

October 29th, 2007 by Martin

From tomorrow on, I’ll be in London for a month to work as a “visiting researcher” at the Knowledge Media Institute of the Open University UK! I’m looking very much forward to this trip, thanks again to Peter Scott and Elia Tomadaki for the invitation :-)

London Underground

I’m sure that it will be a great time - Elia and I have several ideas, amongst others we will try to use ALOE (by the way, ALOE has a blog now!) in several scenarios. There are lots of users and resources at OUUK, so this could be very exciting…

What we also plan to do is to work on approaches to connect formal metadata with data generated in “Web2.0 environments”…more about this in the following weeks, stay tuned!

LOKMOL presentations are online!

October 8th, 2007 by Martin

Picture by Margit Hofer, you can find more LOKMOL pictures here

Here you can find slides as well as audio of the the following LOKMOL presentations (click here for an overview including papers):

  • LOExtractor - Rapid Authoring Tool to Support Workflow-Embedded Authoring (O. Rostanin)
    slides(pdf), audio(mp3)
  • Context assessment as a basis for appropriate support of individual and organizational learning (N. Faltin)
    slides(pdf), audio(mp3)
  • Social Technologies as New Forms for Organizational Innovation (T. Arina)
    slides (on slideshare), audio(mp3)
  • Learn@Work: Competency Advancement with Learning Templates (W. Bonestroo)
    slides(pdf), audio(mp3)
  • Collaborative Knowledge Building and Sharing for Reshaping European Educational Landscapes (M. Hofer, F. Wild)
    slides(pdf), audio(mp3)

Thanks again to all the authors and participants!

Leaving Crete

September 21st, 2007 by Martin


It started to rain (well, sort of) outside, and I’m sitting in the lobby of the Kalimera Kriti enjoying the free WiFi :-) It was a great time here in Crete, especially because of the inspiring discussions and good times with interesting people. And not to forget the awesome minigolf session last night (freaky!) I will surely miss the people, the surroundings … and the food ;-)

A lot of material is available about EC-TEL 2007: The wiki with a lot of additional material and presentations, the conference blog, and also photos on flickr. Check it out!

20070919 kreta 002
EC-TEL Science Fiction Session with Hermann Maurer and Bruce Sterling

PS: Join the EC-TEL07 group on facebook!

Evaluating Usability in Technology-Enhanced Learning - 100 Ways Do It Right?

September 20th, 2007 by Eric

I am currently attending several paper presentation during the EC-TEL 2007. Many papers present new tools for authoring, connecting people, aggregating content etc. Most have evaluated their recently developed tools. That is the most interesting part, isn’t it? I have seen evaluating the efficiency, effectivity, usability etc. Especially in the domain of usability evaluation “standards” exist. At least everybody is stating that he is using “the standard”. Even if I thought that I know the standards for measuring usuability, I have to say that in technology-enhanced learning new instruments are said to be a standard instrument. Cool! So I spent some time in page turning the proceedings. My first impression was that usability is often evaluated by using self-developed measuring instruments. Why? Are TEL tools so different from other software? The reason for using standards measure instruments is to compare the usability of TEL tools. Using proprietary things makes it impossible to compare tools.
I am working at a software engineering institute, we mostly use the “technology acceptance model” also known as TAM or the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model also called UTAUT. These scales have been evolved over the years and work fine - at least for us. If I ask people ask the people whether they know TAM or UTAUT, I get the answer “well in fact - no”. One of the speakers uses “SUS” to evaluate the usability. SUS stands for quite and dirty scale for usability evaluation. I had a look at it: the webpage not available anymore. I only find a paper about it as PDF. The scale look ok - put creating to a scale value looks very suspicious because very different items were just summed up with some weights …

Could it be that usability evaluation is dependent on the context of the tools to be evaluated or is it just another case of “not knowing and looking at other domains”? One thing is for sure. If we continue to use different “standards” or self-developed instruments, we will never be able to compare things….(ok it is always a risk to compare your stuff with other stuff in the right way - you risk to loose your face ;-))

Tell me what you mean!

September 19th, 2007 by Martin

Why do people so often give talks about “context” without explaining how they understand it? There’s surely no common understanding of this concept… but that’s not only concerning the term “context” - terminology is a big mess both in the field of KM andTEL. And I’m a mathematician, maybe that’s the reason why this seems to disturb me more than others: You cannot have a meaningful discussion or collaboration (or presentation) without a common understanding of the key concepts. I WANT DEFINITIONS! ;-)


September 19th, 2007 by Martin

I’m attending the “Web2.0 and Social Software” session. On the presenter’s slides, I always read “Making Semantic Web Real”. I wonder if a lot of the things now claimed to be “Semantic Web” projects really belong to the field. I have the impression that it’s often just a desperate effort to keep the label after the rather slow uptake in the last years. E.g., just using RDF somewhere in an application doesn’t make it a Semantic Web application…

Tim O’Reilly gives a very nice explanation about Semantic Web and Web2.0 in this posting:

And so, it seems to me that Pagerank illustrates the fundamental difference between the approaches of the Semantic Web and Web 2.0. The Semantic Web sees meaning as something that needs to be added to documents so that computers can act intelligently about them. Web 2.0 seeks to discover the ways that meaning has already been implicitly encoded by the way people use documents and digital objects, and then to extract that meaning, often by statistical means by studying large aggregates of related documents.

Don’t get me wrong: Using Semantic Web Technologies is fine when trying to add some more semantics, e.g., to provide recommendations. But we may not rely just on these technologies, we have to develop hybrid approaches in the future. Welcome to Web3.0!