Join our WikiEducator discussion group or Register now for free skills training.

WikiEducator talk:Quality Assurance Framework/Featured Works

From WikiEducator

Jump to: navigation, search

[Add header]


Sorting order:
Start a new discussion
View archived threads

Great work on the featured resource templates! (1)

There have been no changes to this discussion for at least 14 days. If it is concluded, you may want to write a summary.

He Peter,

Great start on the featured resource templates! This is coming along very nicely.

A few thoughts, ideas and questions we need to think about in relation to template:Featured_Works_Request and Template:Featured_Works_Reviewer

  • To do list
    • minimising errors in the use of the template: Once we have fine-tuned the templates we should also provide lowercase options for the parameters (sometimes folk don't remember to use the uppercase first letter.
    • After completing the prototype review -- we will need to provide instructions on the template pages on the use of the templates with links back to the QA review guidelines portal.
  • Thoughts and ideas
    • There are clearly identifiable phases in the process and I'm wondering whether we can include a visualisation of these phases in the template (eg an automated status bar showing 25%; 50%, 75% and completed) -- The phases would be:
      1. Requesting a featured resource review
      2. Review commenced -- i.e. once two reviewers have agreed to review the resource
      3. Recommendation phase -- i.e. the phase where authors are provided with feedback from the reviewers and given the opportunity to implement recommendations
      4. Approval phase -- Once recommendations for improvement have been implemented, an opportunity for the WE community to vote on the approval -- i.e. that they agree with the assessment of the reviewers
      5. Approved featured resource!!!
    • We should incorporate an automated categorisation in the template for featured resources, corresponding with the respective phase above.
    • I'm wondering whether we shouldn't incorporate the template:Featured_Works_Request template within the Template:ContentInfobox -- much in the same way as we include Userboxes in the Template:Infobox_personal template
    • I'm think that we may want to specify the requirement for the person nominating a featured resource that they must insert the [[Template:ContentInfobox onto the home page of their content resource -- this is a good way to encourage authors to include basic metadata on the resource -- but is also necessary information for the reviewers to consider when reviewing the resource -- eg level and intended purpose.
    • Is it better to have one template:Featured_Works_Request for all categories (ie. featured resource, featured collaboration) -- or a separate template for each category?

Just a few thoughts inspired after seeing the first prototypes :-)

Cheers

Featured Institution and Project (1)

There have been no changes to this discussion for at least 14 days. If it is concluded, you may want to write a summary.

Should these two featured works be more based upon the attributes found in eMM?

Good question --

I think that Featured institution and project should be based more on the eMM attributes.

Classification of featured works (1)

There have been no changes to this discussion for at least 14 days. If it is concluded, you may want to write a summary.

Hi Peter,

Wow -- this is an impressive start.

Reading the list of featured works, I'd suggest moving:

  • Featured institution and
  • Featured project

under the other featured items category. These are not content resources per se -- but do see how featured projects and institutions contribute to the overall health of the quality eco system.

Retrieved from "http://www.wikieducator.org/WikiEducator_talk:Quality_Assurance_Framework/Featured_Works"