Skip to main content

Retrieval of Educational Resources from the Web: A Comparison Between Google and Online Educational Repositories

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Web-Based Learning – ICWL 2019 (ICWL 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 11841))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The retrieval and composition of educational material are topics that attract many studies from the field of Information Retrieval and Artificial Intelligence. The Web is gradually gaining popularity among teachers and students as a source of learning resources. This transition is, however, facing skepticism from some scholars in the field of education. The main concern is about the quality and reliability of the teaching on the Web. While online educational repositories are explicitly built for educational purposes by competent teachers, web pages are designed and created for offering different services, not only education. In this study, we analyse if the Internet is a good source of teaching material compared to the currently available repositories in education. Using a collection of 50 queries related to educational topics, we compare how many useful learning resources a teacher can retrieve in Google and three popular learning object repositories. The results are very insightful and in favour of Google supported by the t-tests. For most of the queries, Google retrieves a larger number of useful web pages than the repositories (\(p < .01\)), and no queries resulted in zero useful items. Instead, the repositories struggle to find even one relevant material for many queries. This study is clear evidence that even though the repositories offer a richer description of the learning resources through metadata, it is time to undertake more research towards the retrieval of web pages for educational applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://digitalcollections.uncw.edu/digital/collection/ilumina/search/.

  2. 2.

    https://www.fit.fraunhofer.de/en/fb/cscw/projects/mace.html.

  3. 3.

    http://old.isn-oldenburg.de/projects/SINN/sinn03/proceedings/dolog.html.

  4. 4.

    http://info.melt-project.eu/ww/en/pub/melt_project/welcome.htm.

  5. 5.

    http://www.ariadne-eu.org.

  6. 6.

    https://www.oercommons.org/.

  7. 7.

    http://www.prolearn-academy.org/.

  8. 8.

    http://www.merlot.org.

  9. 9.

    https://cnx.org.

  10. 10.

    https://www.wisc-online.com/.

  11. 11.

    Google is queried by using the Google Custom Search service expanded to the entire web.

References

  1. Learning object metadata, IEEE-LTSC. https://www.ieeeltsc.org/working-groups/wg12LOM/lomDescription/. Accessed 14 Feb 2019

  2. Allan, J., Croft, B., Moffat, A., Sanderson, M.: Frontiers, challenges, and opportunities for information retrieval: report from swirl 2012 the second strategic workshop on information retrieval in Lorne. SIGIR Forum 46(1), 2–32 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bozo, J., Alarcón, R., Iribarra, S.: Recommending learning objects according to a teachers’ contex model. In: Wolpers, M., Kirschner, P.A., Scheffel, M., Lindstaedt, S., Dimitrova, V. (eds.) EC-TEL 2010. LNCS, vol. 6383, pp. 470–475. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16020-2_39

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Curlango-Rosas, C., Ponce, G.A., Lopez-Morteo, G.A.: A specialized search assistant for learning objects. ACM Trans. Web 5(4), 21:1–21:29 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dietze, S., Yu, H.Q., Giordano, D., Kaldoudi, E., Dovrolis, N., Taibi, D.: Linked education: interlinking educational resources and the web of data. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 366–371. ACM (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Drachsler, H., Verbert, K., Santos, O.C., Manouselis, N.: Panorama of recommender systems to support learning. In: Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B. (eds.) Recommender Systems Handbook, pp. 421–451. Springer, Boston, MA (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7637-6_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Learning Technology Standards Committee: IEEE standard for learning object metadata. IEEE standard, 1484(1), 2007-04 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Estivill-Castro, V., Limongelli, C., Lombardi, M., Marani, A.: DAJEE: a dataset of joint educational entities for information retrieval in technology enhanced learning. In: Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 681–684. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Estivill-Castro, V., Lombardi, M., Marani, A.: Improving binary classification of web pages using an ensemble of feature selection algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference, p. 17. ACM (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Krieger, K.: Creating learning material from web resources. In: Gandon, F., Sabou, M., Sack, H., d’Amato, C., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Zimmermann, A. (eds.) ESWC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9088, pp. 721–730. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18818-8_45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Limongelli, C., Lombardi, M., Marani, A.: Towards the recommendation of resources in coursera. In: Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 13th International Conference, ITS 2016, 7–10 June 2016, Zagreb, Croatia, Proceedings, vol. 9684, p. 461. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Limongelli, C., Lombardi, M., Marani, A., Taibi, D.: Enrichment of the dataset of joint educational entities with the web of data. In: 2017 IEEE 17th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 528–529. IEEE (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lombardi, M., Marani, A.: A comparative framework to evaluate recommender systems in technology enhanced learning: a case study. In: Lagunas, O.P., Alcántara, O.H., Figueroa, G.A. (eds.) MICAI 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9414, pp. 155–170. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27101-9_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Maloney, S., Moss, A., Keating, J., Kotsanas, G., Morgan, P.: Sharing teaching and learning resources: perceptions of a university’s faculty members. Med. Educ. 47(8), 811–819 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mao, J., et al.: When does relevance mean usefulness and user satisfaction in web search? In: Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR 2016, pp. 463–472. ACM, New York (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Marani, A.: WebEduRank: an educational ranking principle of web pages for teaching. Ph.D. thesis, School of Information and Communication Technology, Griffith University (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ochoa, X., Klerkx, J., Vandeputte, B., Duval, E.: On the use of learning object metadata: the GLOBE experience. In: Kloos, C.D., Gillet, D., Crespo García, R.M., Wild, F., Wolpers, M. (eds.) EC-TEL 2011. LNCS, vol. 6964, pp. 271–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23985-4_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Palavitsinis, N., Manouselis, N., Sanchez-Alonso, S.: Metadata quality in learning object repositories: a case study. Electron. Libr. 32(1), 62–82 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rehak, D., Mason, R.: Engaging with the Learning Object Economy, pp. 22–30 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tumer, D., Shah, M.A., Bitirim, Y.: An empirical evaluation on semantic search performance of keyword-based and semantic search engines: Google, Yahoo, Msn and Hakia. In: Fourth International Conference on Internet Monitoring and Protection, 2009. ICIMP 2009, pp. 51–55. IEEE (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wiley, D.: Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: a definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. Learn. Technol. 2830, 1–35 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Yu, H.Q., et al.: A linked data-driven & service-oriented architecture for sharing educational resources. In: Linked Learning 2011: the 1st International Workshop on eLearning Approaches for the Linked Data Age. ESCWC 2011 (2011). http://oro.open.ac.uk/28856/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carla Limongelli .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

De Medio, C., Limongelli, C., Marani, A., Taibi, D. (2019). Retrieval of Educational Resources from the Web: A Comparison Between Google and Online Educational Repositories. In: Herzog, M., Kubincová, Z., Han, P., Temperini, M. (eds) Advances in Web-Based Learning – ICWL 2019. ICWL 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11841. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35758-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35758-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35757-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35758-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics