Ontological Modelling for Designing Educational Systems

Joost Breuker, A.J. Muntjewerff, Bert Bredeweg

UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) · 1999 · 47 citations · 22 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Ontological engineering in educational design has long been used to specify educational goals, yet research has focused more on form than content, and recent work suggests that re‑framing these goals as ontologies can give new insights into domain structure. The paper aims to illustrate how a core ontology of law can be employed in designing educational systems. The authors use the FOLaw functional ontology of law, which mediates between a top ontology of common sense and a domain ontology, to build PROSA, a case‑based learning system for administrative law. The study concludes that adopting an ontological perspective shifts focus from skill acquisition to insight and understanding, and that core ontology categories naturally align with task‑analysis decompositions.

Abstract

Constructing ontologies in educational design is not really new. The specification of educational goals is what is called now a days an ontology. Although content has always been considered a crucial factor in education, the emphasis in educational research has been on form, as is also pointed out by [Mizoguchi et al., 1997]. Ontological engineering for constructing educational systems may look like putting the same old wine in new barrels, but we should be aware that that these new barrels may give a new flavour to this wine. As an example we discuss a core ontology about law, used in the development of educational systems. 1 A core ontology mediates a top ontology, that reflects our common sense understanding of the world, and an ontology that defines the concepts and structures in a domain. A core ontology tells us what a domain is about. The core ontology discussed is FOLaw [Valente, 1995], a functional ontology of law, as applied in PROSA, a system that trains students to solve problems (cases) in adminstrative law. A major conclusion is that emphasis has shifted from skill acquisition to obtaining insight and understanding. Anaother benefit of this ‘ontological view’ is that types of knowledge distinguished in core ontologies can make up categories that provide the similar decompositions as task analyses, but apparently in a more ‘natural’ way.

References

22