Re: [wbs] response to '[Curricula] Review of changes before Butterfly Approval'

Hi Daniel,

top posting for  convenience.

1. Your rationale seems fine so I'm content to leave the learning outcomes as they are.

2. heading text is fine.

3. In terms of the use of "code" as a verb: again your rationale makes sense.  I am just not used to seeing learning outcomes expressed in this way so am happy for this to remain unchanged if so desired.

Regards,

Donal

> On 16 Dec 2020, at 08:34, Daniel Montalvo <dmontalvo@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hey Donal,
> 
> Many thanks for going through the survey and providing such great comments.
> 
> Please see some follow-up questions below.
> 
>>> General Changes
>>> 
>>> ----
>>> The following is a list of general changes affecting the whole resource.
>>> 
>>>     * Changed introductory paragraph at the top of each of the
>>> modules from "Courses based on this module:" to "Courses based on this
>>> module should:" Example at Introduction for module 1Rationale: This
>>> clarifies that the below bullets are expected goals or objectives for
>>> the courses and not actual courses that we are listing.
>>>     * Changed order of bullets in the introductory paragraphs for
>>> each of the modules. Example at Introduction for module 1Rationale: New
>>> order better reflects how accessible coding benefits people with disabilities.
>>>     * Changed "summarize" to "recite" when providing sign posting
>>> references to other roles responsibilities in learning
>>> outcomes. Rationale: It better communicates the importance of knowing
>>> such requirements, instead of just summarizing them.
>>>     * Change explanatory sentence at the "topics to teach level": from
>>> "Optional topics to achieve the learning outcomes"to "Topics to
>>> achieve the learning outcomes".Rationale: A specific order or teaching
>>> method is not required, but all topics are recommended for the teaching sequence.
>>>     * Changed idea to assess knowledge for module: "Practical —
>>> Students are guided to use mechanisms that assistive technologies
>>> provide to [...]"
>>>    from "Short answer questions"
>>>    to "Practical",
>>>    Rationale: It better reflects the assessment type.
>>>    Is there anything from these changes that you would disagree with?
>>> Please provide comments on the below box or open a GitHub issue on
>>> general changes
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Comments:
>> I note an inconsistency in the bullet points in Module 1.  The first two use "demonstrate" the third "explain".  A suggestion might simply be
>> to use "Demonstrate and explain" across all three points (and in other modules).
>> Rationale:  This covers both theoretical and practical knowledge and suggests that students must not only understand the coding concepts,
>> but demonstrate their use.  This rationale is also supported by many of the suggested practical activities throughout the various modules.
> 
> Good point. I wonder if demonstrate then would be the right word, as it may also exist the risk that some people understand it as just demoing, and it turns out to be very passive. There is also a thought process involved in this, first courses 'demonstrate' how people with disabilities interact with websites and applications, and then they "explain" the coding techniques. Opened to change these three so that they match, but that may even out these two different things. Do you have further suggestions to better convey these?
>> 
>> In the topic "Section Headings:
>> Practical — Students are presented with headings that do not describe the sections they entitle and are asked to replace the heading’s
>> text..."
>> could I suggest a rewording here to replace "heading's text" with "textual content of the heading".
> That might get a bit worthy. What is the difference between text and text content in this context? What about "text of the heading"?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> [New] Module 7: Rich Applications
>>> 
>>> ----
>>> Module 7: Rich Applications has been added to clarify scope for rich
>>> applications, such as Single Page Applications (SPA), and others
>>> generated by JavaScript.
>>> This is a thorough review of this module.
>>> What you're reviewing is everything in the final draft.
>>> * This is EOWG's pre-publication review, our internal "last call".
>>> * Review and comment on anything and everything, including
>>> copy-editing as needed.
>>> * Speak now or forever hold your peace.We hope there will not be any
>>> more new comments after this review.For more details about EOWG's
>>> review process, check Review Stages and Levels Please provide comments
>>> in the below box or open a GitHub issue about module 7
>>> 
>>> 
>> Comments:
>> In the third, fourth and fifth learning outcomes, I would suggest replacing "code" with "apply coding techniques to...".  Indeed, as an aside,
>> this wording might be considered for other modules also.  The sixth again refers to 'recite' which is not a word I feel best fits the learning
>> objective.
>> 
>> 
>> In all sections, the learning outcomes should, in my view, be looked at in the context of my suggested rewording from earlier in both this
>> section of the questionnaire and 2 above.  I note that the learning outcomes use excellent terms such as "describe", "ensure that" etc.  I find
>> these to be excellent and applaud their inclusion.
> 
> I wonder how much value would "apply coding techniques" add here as opposed to "code". I get the point that often you do not solve an accessibility issue with just code but rather with involvement from all roles but, is that aspect not clear through the whole resource? Aren't we getting too verbose, especially given that this is a phrase that we would be using all throughout the resource?
> 
> --
> 
> Daniel Montalvo
> 
> Accessibility Education and Training Specialist
> W3C/WAI
> 
> 
> 


-- 
*

*Séanadh Ríomhphoist/Email Disclaimer*

*Tá an ríomhphost seo agus aon 
chomhad a sheoltar leis faoi rún agus is lena úsáid ag an seolaí agus sin 
amháin é. Is féidir tuilleadh a léamh anseo.  
<https://sites.google.com/view/seanadh-riomhphoist>*

*This e-mail and any 
files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for use 
by the addressee. Read more here. 
<https://sites.google.com/view/dcu-email-disclaimer>*



*

-- 

 <https://www.facebook.com/DCU/> <https://twitter.com/DublinCityUni> 
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/dublin-city-university> 
<https://www.instagram.com/dublincityuniversity/?hl=en> 
<https://www.youtube.com/user/DublinCityUniversity>

Received on Wednesday, 16 December 2020 12:47:56 UTC