- From: Daniel Montalvo <dmontalvo@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 09:31:55 +0100
- To: <public-wai-curricula@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <009e01d6e274$110ee1c0$332ca540$@w3.org>
Hello all, Happy new year! Tuesday January 5 we are going to have another WAI Curricula Task Force teleconference. Topic: WAI Curricula Task Force Weekly Meeting Time: January 5, 2021 5:00 PM CET (Central Europe Time) Teleconference link and password: https://www.w3.org/2017/08/01-eowg-info.html (W3C login required). IRC: http://irc.w3.org?channels=#wai-curricula Port 6665. Channel #wai-curricula Agenda: Agenda+ Rewording for "Recite related requirements" phrasing for cross-referencing other roles' responsibilities does not click with most of you now. Possible alternatives for "recite" could be "define", "describe", "identify", "articulate", "relate" Agenda+ Rewording for "Topics to support the teaching sequence" was "Topics to achieve the learning outcomes" It seems most of you prefer the previous iteration. Proposal: - [Section title] "Topics to extend the learning outcomes". - No explanatory sentence (making sure the title explains it all). Agenda+ "Code" versus 'implement/apply coding techniques" Mainly chose "code" as a shorthand for the above. Is there any value in adding the longer phrases to align our learning outcomes with standard curricula development practices? -- Daniel Montalvo Accessibility Education and Training Specialist W3C/WAI
Received on Monday, 4 January 2021 08:31:58 UTC