Course List Requirements Review

Dear Sharron,

Thank you very much for your feedback on the survey on the Course List Requirements.
Carlos (in cc) and I went through your comments and made a few changes in the document in order to better address some of them.
We also have further remarks on a few topics that you have brought up:

Objective
1. Is it accurate to say the tool "will gather information?" Are we proactively going out to identify and list courses? My understanding was that we were accepting self-nominated courses and not internally curating - is that not true?
(Agreed) Your initial understanding is correct. Modified to “establish a list of courses”.

Approach
2. There is reference here as well to the research so I guess it was my misunderstanding that we were not going to populate the list but were proactively choosing courses to include. If that is the case, somewhere in the timeline or approach must be an item to develop and approve the criteria for inclusion.
(Agreed) As above, you did not misunderstood our purpose. Modified “Research initial list of courses” to “Explore existing criteria for describing offers” in order to highlight that this first research is intended to investigate and gather information for further activities, not to populate the final list.
We recognize the relevance of discussing the approval criteria, and we consider this to be within the scope of the “Open issue: Reviewing offering submissions”. Furthermore, one of the resources included in this list being “Established workflow and documentation to ensure the authenticity of listed offers”, the approval of offers should be a part of all the resources being reviewed in the timeline.

Timeline
3. Somewhere in the timeline must be an approval of the criteria that will guide the research leading to the decision to include a course on the list.
See previous comment.

Open issues
4. Establish and approve criteria for inclusion in the list.
See previous comment.

Additional Comments
5. Just another question - are we working at all with TeachAccess?
It is a great resource and we will certainly consider it in further activities, in particular for the first phase of our approach (Explore existing criteria for describing offers). We could further explore potential approaches for collaboration.


Let us know if you have any further comments or thoughts and thanks once again for your input.

Best,
Letícia Seixas Pereira