Carl Hixson, VP, Digital Asset Management, McGraw-Hill Education

MM: So that then comes back to the underlying metadata structure. How do you develop taxonomies and metadata schemas to reflect not just file properties and content, but things like learning objectives and cognitive learning styles? Additionally, ways of measuring the effectiveness and/or consumption of digital content by a particular learner in a particular learning environment?

CH: That’s compelling. That’s a very important point. In our approach, we’ve developed a very dynamic and extensible schema and metadata model at MHE. It’s become our (McGraw-Hill) standard meta-model, and is utilized to tag and index our dynamic content. The attributes are all very much in line with our industry and business specific requirements. By design, the schema is very extensible. The same schema is also reflected in our digital asset management systems.

So when new opportunities present themselves, guess what? Our schema reflects that.

Our enterprise content management system is made up of multiple (best of breed) modules. However, we have one common schema (framework) that’s implemented across all of the repositories. So that one standard is very absolute. As dynamic as it is, it’s absolutely reflected (down to the attribute) in all of our enterprise content-management systems.

So that’s the way that we can maintain consistency and make sure that we stay true to our standard. This model also facilitates federated search across various environments. This method allows us to keep ourselves open and flexible enough to address new content development and distribution opportunities when they present themselves.

MM: One of the things that we’ve seen, Carl, has been the notion of the open or networked publication. Specifically, the potential for open-source user-generated content or user-generated feedback interacting with professionally generated content.

CH: Yes. We have to be very conscience of user-generated content and the emergence of social networking and Web 2.0. There are many opportunities as well as concerns for content providers that enter this arena. For example, copyright protection for professionally generated content is something that must be addressed when these assets co-exist with user-generated information.

MM: In particular, one of the things we’re seeing is something we see a lot of in the academic journal space. Content that is more specific to a very targeted or narrowly defined community of subject matter experts or practitioners.

CH: Definitely… User-generated content environments offer the ability to publish customized information that’s tailored to a specific audience or topic. That offers a great opportunity for McGraw-Hill to leverage its rich volume of content and establish online custom publishing systems. These systems (driven by XML) would have the ability to generate niche content to a vast user base, resulting from very specific queries.

MM: But specifically, where an author begins to create a book (a curriculum or some sort of a work) and then opens it up to comment. Perhaps using a Wiki or other sorts of collaboration tools. Inviting dozens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of people to comment if not outright edit, change, augment, annotate specific passages of a work. This would necessitate the editor to sift through, edit, incorporate and ultimately to refine and optimize an authored passage to reflect an ad hoc peer review.

CH: My immediate response is… How does McGraw-Hill embrace that? Should we embrace it? How do we incorporate that? How do we play in that space without de-valuing our content and/or our creditability?

MM: How do you avoid being run over by that runaway bus?

CH: Exactly. Does it add value? How can it add value to the very high quality content that McGraw-Hill has been producing traditionally for a considerable amount of time?

MM: What have been some of the early conclusions from that?

CH: We realize that we have to have a presence in that arena. The concern is how do we maintain integrity? How do we maintain certain levels of quality? How do we maintain our responsibilities with regard to copyrights? Security and rights management is a major concern.

If authors are being paid to generate content for McGraw-Hill, and there’s a certain amount of integrity and quality that comes with that content — how does that content intermingle with user-generated content? Or should it intermingle? How do we enable a seamless integration or collaboration with the online community concept, where basically it’s free reign. Everyone has the ability to publish and edit.

If you’re savvy enough or if you have an interest, you go ahead and submit content. How do we ensure a certain level of quality? How do we ensure that the quality of our professionally created content is maintained? That’s not saying that user-generated content cannot also be high quality.

These are some of the questions that we’re asking ourselves. But we do realize that this space is here. It’s here to stay. And I think we see more and more environments coming online. New wikis and blogs are coming online at an increasing rate. It’s clear that we’re going to have to continue to include this medium in our overall strategy.

MM: Any early indications of how?

CH: Although we’re taking a close look at this space, the strategy is evolving, and it may be too early to tell.

MM: Fair enough.

The most interesting question for me in this conversation and other related conversations really gets to, “What is value?” In terms of editorial product, copy, learning objects. What really constitutes or comprises a valuable piece of content?

CH: I think two important factors that determine the value of content is its revenue generating potential, and re-usability.

MM: That’s your business model speaking.

CH: Those elements are certainly part of our core digital strategy.

MM: That’s not your daughter’s talk.

CH: No. And I would also add reliability. Does the information that I gathered adequately answer a question? Does it solve or satisfy my research? Does it fulfill my query? Those are all important measurement criteria.

MM: Has McGraw-Hill or have you seen any kind of development or emergence of a general theory of information objects? Or a general theory of information consumption? In terms of categories of content?

CH: Yes I do. An example if this is the ability to correlate instructional content to State standards and learning objectives. Content consumers will require content categorization and management systems that will enable searching by learning objectives. Additionally, with other methods of categorization, consumers will be able to submit a query for educational content based on a specific State standard.

One of the challenging things that educational publishers face is that every State has a different standard. A book that was developed for the State of California would not be acceptable to the State of Florida — for many reasons. But there are different standards involved. We have to be very cognizant of that when content is being developed.

The short answer to your question is yes. Having the ability to categorize content, to have content become dynamic, mapping content to state standards and assessment items are all critical functions that will enable McGraw-Hill offer new tools and services.

Having the ability to assess the learning abilities of students, as well as the effectiveness of teaching methods is critical to the progression of the educational process. We must have a form of measurement and corrective processes in place to establish a standard for achievement, and continually strive for educational excellence. Categorization and distribution of “smart content” will help both students and teachers accomplish their learning objectives.

MM: How do you manage that complex correlation?

CH: There’s a framework involved that we’re in the process of developing. Once we know what the State standards are, then we can go about the business of mapping our content to those State standards.

MM: Are you going to be using a policy server or a business rules engine?

CH: Rules engines, policy servers and right management are all components of our enterprise content management development strategy. The framework essentially becomes part of our asset library. The business logic is an architectural layer that interoperates with the core system. You can see where we’re going.

So to your original question of, “How do we see categorizing content, learning objectives, et cetera…” This is compelling for us, because we truly believe that this opens up a whole new realm of content development and product development possibilities.

MM: This is a great place to close on a remark I heard attributed to ERP. ERP being Enterprise Resource Planning.

CH: Yes… Please continue…

MM: One definition of ERP is a salesman in a customer’s office can make a promise that the factory can keep.

CH: I understand the analogy, and can see how it applies to the media & information industry.

MM: When you think about a textbook salesman out there repping your textbooks, they can make a promise to a particular school system and know — with confidence — that your content factory can fulfill a promise that your salesman is making. Using the content factory and all the rules and correlations by which you characterize content down to its atomic level.

CH: That’s exactly within the view of our strategic vision. That’s where we’re headed.

When we say, “dynamic content,” it has a far-reaching definition. But you’ve just basically summarized what we’re really going after, here. I think McGraw-Hill and other publishers like McGraw-Hill really stem to benefit from a meaningful adoption of this digital technology, and the transition that’s happening as a result.

MM: As the ideation and creation process produces more brightly lit, fully profiled, independent learning objects, perhaps we should think about retiring the term, “content,” and more specifically — as you refer to your forward-looking focus as “dynamic content…” Not that I have a big say in it, but I perhaps you speak in terms of “dynamic learning objects,” or, “dynamic learning environments.”

CH: I think that all of the above terms are relevant. Content is still content… However the potential that’s unleashed once the content is created in a format that enables re-purposing and correlation, it creates the dynamic aspects. Once content is dynamic, those qualities can be applied to learning objects, environments and interactive user experiences.

MM: Then you’re no longer in the content business, but you’re in the business of structuring and provisioning learning environments with resources and fixtures in the specific requirements and needs of an individual learner or user.

CH: Sure. In addition to being in the business of creating high quality educational content, McGraw-Hill is also developing new and innovative learning solutions based on emerging digital technology. As we become more and more in tune with the mindset of our clients and demands of the global marketplace, we reflect that awareness in our developmental strategies.

I think you’re going to see more and more of those “dynamic environments” becoming a part of our digital offerings.

MM: On that note, I think we’ll call it a day, here.

CH: All right, my friend. Thank you for the opportunity to explore the possibilities and engage in the dialog.

Carl Hixson has the overall responsibility for defining and directing technology systems, strategic planning and specific key implementations for all digital asset management (DAM) and digital publishing processes across the McGraw-Hill Education (MHE) segment as Vice President, Digital Asset Management. As leader of the GenX initiative, and Digital Publishing/Enterprise Content Management group, Carl is also responsible for the development of digital workflow processes and the integration of emerging digital technologies into the design of McGraw-Hill Education’s enterprise content management systems. These digital systems will facilitate McGraw-Hill’s digital transition, and ensure that the Company maintains its competitive lead in the global marketplace.