Re: [wbs] response to 'Approval of Changes after Thorough Review'

Hi Daniel

Thanks for the response! My reactions to yours below (identified with "Dave")…

> I agree with removing "optional" from "optional topics". But I'm uncomfortable with the phrase "Topics to achieve the learning outcomes".
> I propose a rewording "Topics to support students in achieving the learning outcomes" Rationale: It's students who achieve learning
> outcomes, not topics.

Daniel: Absolutely, topics by themselves do not achieve the learning outcomes. My perception is that the topics are more guidance for instructors to organize their courses than they are guidance for students. There are learning outcomes at a module and at a topic level, so splitting these into topics may help instructors organize their courses based on the proposed topics. Even if they do not follow a specific order, all learning outcomes for topic are covered (maybe more succinctly) in the learning outcomes for module. 

So maybe something like:
"Topics to support the teaching sequence"
Or
"Topics to support teaching the learning outcomes"

Dave: I think either of these would work for me, with a slight preference for the first one.

---

> Module 5 Topic Form Instructions: I'm confused by the word "consolidate", so this learning outcome is unclear to me. I'm not sure what
> change to address until I better understand what kind of requirements are being referred to.

Daniel: This refers to save & continue functionality, or more generally, to mechanisms that allow to save information in a form to come back and continue filling it in later.

Would something like: "summarize related requirements for designers to provide mechanisms that allow for pausing, saving, and resuming form completion" be more helpful from your perspective?

Dave: I understand better now, thank you! Yes, I think your revised suggestion is good.

---

> [Module 4] -- Clarifying assessment for module: I'm unclear about this text "they are asked to use an accessibility evaluation extension to
> provide all table header and data cells they have found". An accessibility evaluation tool would find and identify header and data cells, but
> would not provide them, so should the text be edited to reflect this?

Daniel: Good point. The idea here is to have students using an extension that would point them to the already available table headers, and then having them analyzing if these already present headers are enough for the table to be accessible. I have reworded this as follows:

"Short Answer Questions — Students are directed to a web page where there are several tables. Then they are asked to use an accessibility evaluation extension to find all table header and data cells and to compare these with the visual structure of the tables. Assess how students analyze if a table is coded appropriately to reflect its structure."

Dave: Yes, that revised description looks good to me.

---

> [Module 6] [Topic Accessible Names and Descriptions] I wonder if it would also be appropriate for the exercise to include how different AT
> announces the same coding patterns, to show how there might be differences there too?

Daniel: This is very good point. Indeed, to properly cover it, I feel extra additions need to be put in place for both teaching ideas and ideas to assess knowledge. Added in teaching ideas:
"Show how different assistive technologies present the contents of accessible names and descriptions. Explain that some present both types of contents consecutively, but others leave a pause between the accessible name and the accessible description. Mention that sometimes accessible descriptions require additional user input to be revealed by assistive technologies."

Added in ideas to assess knowledge
"Short Answer Questions — Students are asked about the different ways in which assistive technologies can present the contents of accessible names and descriptions. Assess students' knowledge of the different ways in which assistive technologies present the contents of accessible names and descriptions."

Is this what you meant?

Dave: Yes, I like the suggested teaching idea and idea to assess knowledge. Perhaps they could be combined with the corresponding browser ideas, but I like that they're called out separately.

Thanks Daniel!
Dave

Received on Monday, 26 October 2020 16:51:09 UTC