- From: Daniel Montalvo Charameli <dmontalvo@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:48:36 +0100
- To: brent.bakken@pearson.com, wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
Hi Brent, Thanks for your comments. On 12/12/2019 12:30 AM, Brent Bakken via WBS Mailer wrote: > The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'WAI Curricula > Requirements Analysis for Supporting Materials' (Education and Outreach > Working Group) for Brent Bakken. > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Course Types and Formats >> >> ---- >> Please have a look at Proposal for Course Types and Formats. >> * This proposal is linked to the use cases of the Primary Audience >> * These use cases would fall into the primary audience already >> defined in the Curricula Audience section of the overall requirements >> analysis. >> Please answer the following questions: >> * Do you think we need to provide supporting materials for these >> audiences and use cases? >> * What should be added according to your perspective? >> * What do you think should be removed? >> >> > Comments: > Yes, I think we should be providing this information (supporting materials) > in the resource. > > With "Duration" I worry about the use of the term "course duration" I think > we can talk about how long a topic or a module may take, but we need to > stay away from "course duration" as we are offering bits and pieces that > can make up a course. The true course duration will all depend on what the > user decides to add to, or leave out, of the course he/she creates. I get your point. I thought that message came through clearly with the phrase "examples of course duration". I changed that to "Duration -- Give examples of how long a module could take, expressed in hours, ECTS (European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System), etc." > > Would it be helpful to have something on audience tracks? Like if you are > only working with Developers, what is the track of curricula that > should/could be used. Or is that pretty self explanatory with the overview. > If the table may change into something else, then maybe a track listing > would help. I am not sure if I understood this comment. I think the remaining table still reflects what audience will be addressed with each specific curriculum. We decided to keep this reduced version of the table so that people can get this information at a glance. Below that table, in addition, we have now h3 headings with role names (developers, designers, authors, managers, and testers) and below those headings are the ideas for possible modules that were previously in the table. I think this layout could act as a tracking list, but as said above, I am not really sure if this is what you meant. > >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> Comparing Course Offerings >> >> ---- >> Please have a look at Proposal for Comparing Course Offerings. >> * This proposal is linked to the Secondary Audience >> * These use cases were already identified as a secondary >> audience in the Deliverables section (4, 5, 6, and 7) of the overall >> requirements analysis. >> Please answer the following questions: >> * Do you think we need to provide supporting materials for these >> audiences and use cases? >> * What should be added according to your perspective? >> * What do you think should be removed? >> >> > Comments: > Yes, I think this type of content would be helpful. > Nothing to add on this except that I think this information should be on > its own page somewhere. But okay with what the group thinks as it is built > out. > >> >> These answers were last modified on 11 December 2019 at 23:27:54 U.T.C. >> by Brent Bakken >> > Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/spra/ until 2019-12-11. > > Regards, > > The Automatic WBS Mailer >
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2019 16:48:41 UTC