We are working Computing with CSD to develop an integrated sign-in for Kritikos. At present, it is necessary to redirect users to the University Student Portal in order for them to sign in and perform an initial search from there. In future they will be able to sign in directly from the Kritikos site. We’re sure this will improve the overall experience for Kritikos users.
We are getting ready to “soft launch” Kritikos for all our Engineering students at the University of Liverpool. This demonstrates how they will access Kritikos via the student portal at University of Liverpool. All engineering student at University of Liverpool will have eventually have the Kritikos ‘widget’ pre-installed, so they’ll have access to it as soon as they log in.
When an user types a search term into the search box in the widget they will be taken to the main Kritikos search page, shown below, with all the results relevant to the particular search term. A user can select the resource type, and the page will display Any resource which already has data associated with it in the Learning Registry is clearly marked by the LR icon at the top-right.
Clicking on a thumbnail takes the user to the resource detail page. This provides a mini representation of the resource, and if it is interactive, the user can enjoy the full functionality of it without going to the host page. This is the page where all data associated with an individual resource is displayed. The user can also interact with the resourse, e.g. leave a comment, reccommend it, or assign it as relevant/not relevant to a particular module of study. A user can also add the resource to his/her favourites list. They can also ‘vote’ on the activity of other users by clicking on the thumbs up/thumbs down icons.
Paul Hagan and Simon Hatton from our Computing Services Department have been a huge help in finalizing the current view of the Kritikos widget and the site itself. Thank you guys!
Thank you to students Zofia and Lucas for coming in this afternoon to help us finalise some of the site design and functionality.
Both students reacted positively to the proposed re-branding to Kritikos. There was plenty of discussion about the name, the logo design and colours, but quite a strong consent to retain what has currently been produced.
- There was a feeling that the current Learning Registry icon should be removed and placed closer to the individual activity icons.
- Suggested use of a design/colour indicator to represent the amount of LR activity for each resource
Resource Details page
- Strong preference for user activity data to be aggregated and only to show the first few items, with a “view all” option if users want to see more.
- Use of module as the subject of the activity data, rather than user
- Use coloured icons for up- and downvoting
- More consistent use of icons and other screen elements to be comply with the Search page.
- Implement second level filtering. Currently the page filters by module or by user. But a user should be able to further filter their records by module. Also, provide different sort options
- A request to introduce ‘favourite’ activity, in addition to current activity types (relevant, not-relevant, comment, recommended), without tying it to any particular module.
We’re currently developing the code designed to prevent users from, accidentally or otherwise:
- recording the same activity more than once
- liking (or upvoting) their own activities
For example, if a student recommends a resource (URL) for a particular module, we should prevent them from doing it a second time. Likewise, we want to avoid the possibility of users voting for the same activity more than once (presumably with the intent of increasing the ranking of a resource or of another user). Similarly, we want to prevent users from upvoting any of their own activities (again with the intent of raising their own user ranking)
In looking for a suitable brand/identity for our visual media search engine, we’re looking for something that might encapsulate the following three concepts:
Note that since we see a future well beyond the scope of Engineering, we’re not looking to incorporate the subject into the new identity.
Eureka provides an obvious, if well-trodden, starting point. Famously uttered by Archimedes, it is the Ancient Greek for “I’ve found it”. This clearly hits the “finding” button, and the use of Greek language, coupled with the Archimedes story, offers the academic clue for “learning”. Sharing isn’t obvious though. The major problem with Eureka is that it has been so widely used in the past, and therefore could easily become confused with other projects, brands, websites, etc.
Staying in the classical world, Invenimus is the Latin equivalent to the Greek Eureka. It too has the potential advantage of sounding learned, but is far less widely used than Eureka, so making it easier for us to build up a unique brand. Four syllables might be considered a disadvantage; two or three syllables often trip off the tongue better. There are other possible verb conjugations; “inveniet” is the future tense – “i/we will find”, but they are all 4-syllables. Here’s a possible design:
The logo is taken directly from the Open Share icon, which may well constitute fair use for our project, if we are openly sharing paradata, etc. The colours are those of the Learning Registry logo; we can discuss whether this is a good idea or not, both on legal and design grounds.
Returning to Greece, kritikos means “able to discern or judge”, which also seems very appropriate. The English word ‘critical’ can have negative connotations, though perhaps in an academic context it might be seen as a positive attribute. Kritikos also allows us to play with some Greek letters, small kappa, iota, omicron, tau and even the trailing sigma all work whilst retain readability. Swapping the ‘r’ for rho would probably be a step to far.
Other suggestions include:
- Probo – Latin verb to approve, find good, judge etc.
- Ascisco – Latin for to receive, take up, approve
- Poisk - Russian for “search”
- Motor – Russian for “engine”
Comments and suggestions welcome.
An updated version of the kritikos design, with the outline of the eye stylised as arrows (=sharing) and the pupil as a target (=searching/finding). Arrows also separate the finding > learning > sharing.
We’ve been looking at the best way to implement upvote/downvote functionality in our website. The purpose of this is to enable users to endorse or disagree with other users’ activities, thereby introducing a level of self-regulation or democratisation. It also allows users to earn credibility or trustworthiness, which can then be used in the algorithm used to rank search results, and also incentivise students to interact positively with the ENGrich service.
Although some social media sites such as Facebook only support the positive like, our initial position is that we should allow (identifiable) users to give negative votes for activities they do not agree with. We shall review this position with our student group once we have gathered and analysed sufficient activity data.
The paradata statement we propose publishing into Learning Registry will take the following form. Note that the object of the paradata statement is the URL of a page describing the first user’s activity (e.g. comment, recommendation), not the URL of the actual resource itself.
"owner": "AN Other",
"payload_schema": "LR Paradata 1.0",
"displayName": " Student Name",
"University of Liverpool",
"Aerospace Engineering with Pilot Studies",
"context": "ENGrich website",
"content": "This resource was upvoted on the ENGrich website by a 3rd year student reading Aerospace Engineering with Pilot Studies MEng (Hons) at the University of Liverpool on June28, 2012."
- prevent individual user from making more than one upvote/downvote on a particular activity
- prevent users from upvoting (or downvoting) their own activities
Some quick jottings from today’s road-test for the next things we need to be doing on the technical front:
iLIKE widget in Student Portal
Encrypt user identity from iLIKE to ENGrich[completed 21 Jan 2013] Pass through student degree programme (course), degree type and current year of study, from iLIKE to ENGrich if at all possible[completed 21 Jan 2013]
- Add ‘My resources’ tab to iLIKE so users can quickly view their own contributions
ENGrich Search/Results Page
This is primary engine of the ENGrich site, using Google Custom Search and overlaying data from LR
Add Image searching functionality[added 7 Dec 2012] Consider adding text documents, if there is sufficient demand[added 7 Dec 2012] Check CSS for Internet Explorer 8[19 Feb 2013]
ENGrich Resource Detail Page
This provides metadata and paradata on an individual resource. Also allows verified users to submit paradata in the form of comments, module alignment and recommendations, likes/dislikes, etc.
We need to make a final decision as to how individual students (or other users) will be uniquely identifiable in our Learning Registry node. At present, we record students’ full name (given and family name), their degree programme and year of study. In the short term, this is likely to provide ‘unique’ enough, but perhaps we should consider either using the students’ University ID number or perhaps create a unique URL for each student and let that act as the unique identifier.[21 Jan 2013]
UPDATE 21 Jan 2013: A separate blog on this subject has since been posted.
Add free text comment field.[added 20 Dec 2012] Add ↑ and ↓ (or ‘Agree’, ‘Disagree’) UI controls after each paradata statement to allow users to endorse others’ recommendations, ‘alignments’, comments, etc.[added 20 Dec 2012]
- Add ‘privacy’ statement explaining that data submitted to Learning Registry may become publicly available.
Add check to avoid duplicate (<user>, <URI>, <module>, <action>) records being sent into Learning Registry[25 Jan 2013].
- Think about displaying aggregated data, e.g. John Smith and 21 other students recommended URI @ X for Module MATS213.
ENGrich Browse by User/Module Gallery
This is the page where you can browse resources already in the Learning Registry by module or by user (i.e. the person who submitted data). Other browse categories might be added in future.
Add a thumbnail gallery page to allow users to view their own resources[added 6 Dec 2102] The same page could also be used to display resources by module[added 6 Dec 2102] Add relevant links from the detail page paradata statements[added 7 Dec 2102]
- Add relevant links from iLIKE
Formatting of resource URLs in Learning Registry
Some of the URLs that we have already published into the MIMAS node contain ‘+’ signs as replacements to ‘ ‘ spaces.[resolved 23 Jan 21013] LR fails when we try to retrieve these URLs.[resolved 23 Jan 21013] Before publishing the same documents into the Liverpool node, we need to replace the ‘+’ with spaces.[resolved 23 Jan 21013]
Thanks to all the students who came along to road-test the first alpha test version of the ENGrich visual media search engine. We’ve got lots of notes and video to go through and analyse, but we were pleased to see how well it appeared to go down.
Thanks also to Simon Hatton and Paul Hagan in Computing Services for the work they’ve put in this week and to Phil Barker from CETIS for coming down from Edinburgh.
Following on from earlier work on the iLIKE widget that allows students to view relevant resources by module, we have met again with Simon from Computing Services to outline the functionality of a general search box. We hope to have this ready to try out by the end of this week.
This week we’re working on the functionality and UI of the resource detail page. As well as reading out and displaying relevant data from Learning Registry, we are also adding UI controls to allow Liverpool Engineering students to add their own paradata about the resource. The first set of trials with students will take place on Friday 30 November.