On 13 June 2012 16:38, Thomas Dalton
It might be worth talking to potential accreditors
earlier rather than
later in the process (although not having already spoken to them two
days in is forgiveable!). One thing you'll need to agree with them in
the learning objectives, and they should be worked out before you get
too far with producing content.
So getting into more detail: what I'm proposing to do for WMUK myself
includes four "baseline" tasks. One of those I didn't mention as a
subproject, but it is the step of taking the baseline list of topics
and rendering it into a baseline list of specifications of modules. So
the spec here will be a standardised "what you will learn" at least.
Technically you'd work with separate "aims" and "objectives", and
having been told by a Board member that "objectives" should be at
least potentially measurable, getting that deep at the baseline stage
might be too much. I think I have to work out version control and
categorisation of modules before knowing everything about what to do
here. Spec might just mean a sensible two-category system first.
By the way I intend to use A, B, C and X for assumed Wikimedia
knowledge, for a coarse audience categorisation. So A = entry-level, B
= intermediate, C = advanced: merging two articles appears first at B
level, with added history merge at C level with some indication that
the audience is admins or those who want to be. X is for self-styled
expert. One thing that would fun would be the "So you think you know
about?" series of quizzes. Think copyright mavens ...
Charles