[DG: Teaching & Learning] Syllabus related mini-spec discussion this Thursday , October 7, 3PM pacific 6 PM eastern, Friday 8AM NSW

[Ward, Lynn E.]

I agree that this sort of activity is important to document in the minispecs.  In addition to identifying the which outcomes are addressed in a given course, instructors may wish to make a connection between specific tasks and/or assessments and outcomes published by the department, college, or campus.

Lynn

==========================
Lynn Ward, Principal Systems Analyst, Academic and Faculty Services
University Information Technology Services<http://uits.iu.edu/>
Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
Information Technology and Communications Complex (IT 225D)
535 West Michigan Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202
Phone: 317-278-5713  E-mail: leward at iupui.edu<mailto:leward at iupui.edu>

From: pedagogy-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [mailto:pedagogy-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] On Behalf Of Sean Keesler
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:52 AM
To: Keli Sato Amann
Cc: pedagogy Learning
Subject: Re: [DG: Teaching & Learning] Syllabus related mini-spec discussion this Thursday , October 7, 3PM pacific 6 PM eastern, Friday 8AM NSW

The personas in this mini-spec are focused on the tasks of implementing their own course plan.
I wonder if the team considered a persona where a faculty is planning a course that must address and document certain outcomes that come from their department head or a professional association.

If that sort of activity was to occur, doing it during the planning of the sequence of the course activities would make a lot of sense, particularly when you start to look look at commenting/assessing student work as it would frame the discussion about whether the work done met the objectives.

Maybe this is sort of curriculum mapping should be considered or listed as a "non-goal".

Sean Keesler
130 Academy Street
Manlius, NY 13104
315-682-0830
sean.keesler at threecanoes.com<mailto:sean.keesler at threecanoes.com>


On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Keli Sato Amann <kamann at stanford.edu<mailto:kamann at stanford.edu>> wrote:
Hello
Notes from our meeting today about syllabus and how it's being addressed by the minispec process can be found here.
http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/UX/October+7%2C+2010
For convenience, the notes are also copied below.

Best to all,
Keli

What was discussed
1. Syllabus Manifesto: This is meant to be an overview of syllabus related issues; a placeholder has been placed here (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/Syllabus+Manifesto ). Jacques and Yitna have agreed to work on this together.

2. Minispecs related to Syllabus: minispecs address functionality, but starting with a user perspective rather than a technical one. There are various existing minispec just starting to be written that are related to Syllabus. I pointed out a few that are written now, as well as some prospective ones that might  be written to cover other aspects of Syllabus  (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/Related+minispecs+and+references)--however , it will be up to Clay to create actual minispec titles

3. Minispec on arranging structured flow of content and activities: Keli walked through one minispec (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/I+want+to+arrange+a+structured+flow+of+content+and+activities  ); everyone was encouraged to leave comments on this page (since those who will be editing it or referencing it may not be on this call or on T&L list). There were a few questions about the minispec as written.
        a. Why "activities" and not "tasks"? The term "task" was introduced in earlier minispecs. They are things that someone, or some group, is assigned to do, typically by a certain date, or that someone might give to themselves. Those early minispecs also described "activity" as the thing that someone was asked to do. Activities have an existence before they are assigned to someone or given a date. Case in point: the third persona in the minispec, an instructional technology associate named Amanda, is creating a standalone independent learning module made of activities. The module and the activities and content within it is not yet assigned (and I suppose could even be used by a someone without being required)
        b. Patrice's scenario seems more prescriptive than others. Girish represents a user creating a new course, so all his efforts to create a schedule is new. Patrice is there to represent an instructor with an existing schedule in Word. Jacques asked why she couldn't just paste her word doc into a page, in which case it could be taken care of with existing minispecs on page creation (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/I+want+to+create+pages+with+rich+functionality  ). I said that Patrice actually would like the benefits of a syllabus built on structured data, but might get discouraged if it is too hard. Her story (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/Patrice%2C+Content-10  ) is a reminder to the designers reading the minispec to aim for a design solution that will work for both of them, and not necessarily by putting a fork in the road. However, Patrice's scenario, if not her user story, does have more design thinking than a minispec should, though it was hard not to when you have the premise that the system should try to do as much as possible to assist Patrice. A functional analyst assigned to edit this might try to do better to take out the specifics from the scenario, but I think Patrice's story itself must stay.
        c. Is assessment related to tasks? There is a relationship, for sure. There were 4 minispecs on tasks, one on creation, one on fulfilling, one on evaluating a student's work, and one on students collecting the work they had turned in. Overall, I think Tasks are being moved down in priority to quarter 3, however the third one on evaluating student work (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/I+want+to+provide+feedback+on+completed+work  ) was taken out because it will be readdressed as part of a larger minispec tentatively titled "I want to comment on something." This is because commenting has value, even if reading a page or viewing some content was not an assigned task.

4. Continue this meeting? Everyone agreed this meeting should continue. Jacques will organize, Daphne and John Hayes will serve as liasons to the managed project.

5. "homework" for next meeting in 2 weeks: Yitna and Jacques will work on manifesto (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/Syllabus+Manifesto ), all others should review and leave comments on minispec (http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/3AK/I+want+to+arrange+a+structured+flow+of+content+and+activities )



----- Original Message -----
From: "Keli Sato Amann" <kamann at stanford.edu<mailto:kamann at stanford.edu>>
To: "Yitna Firdyiwek (ybf2u)" <ybf2u at eservices.virginia.edu<mailto:ybf2u at eservices.virginia.edu>>, "Lynn E. Ward" <leward at iupui.edu<mailto:leward at iupui.edu>>, "Maryanne Mozer" <MMozer at csu.edu.au<mailto:MMozer at csu.edu.au>>, "Jacques Raynauld" <jacques.raynauld at hec.ca<mailto:jacques.raynauld at hec.ca>>, "Patricia Gordon (psg3a)" <psg3a at eservices.virginia.edu<mailto:psg3a at eservices.virginia.edu>>, "Daphne Ogle" <daphne at media.berkeley.edu<mailto:daphne at media.berkeley.edu>>, "Stephanie Conley (sbs8j)" <sbs8j at eservices.virginia.edu<mailto:sbs8j at eservices.virginia.edu>>, "Clay Fenlason" <clay.fenlason at et.gatech.edu<mailto:clay.fenlason at et.gatech.edu>>, "pedagogy Learning" <pedagogy at collab.sakaiproject.org<mailto:pedagogy at collab.sakaiproject.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2010 7:21:54 PM
Subject: Syllabus related mini-spec discussion this Thursday , October 7, 3PM pacific 6 PM eastern, Friday 8AM NSW

Hello
Two of the members of the S3 managed UX team, Daphne Ogle from Berkeley and myself, have been having meetings every other Thursday since the Denver conference with representatives of three schools who had developed syllabi that work in the S2 environment, to keep the conversation going about syllabus, knowing it would eventually be important, but not exactly knowing how we could roll this into the managed project.

Recently, the minispec process emerged as a way for the managed project to engage with the community. It's continuing to evolve but we are now starting to take on minispecs related to portfolio and syllabus. Thus, we'd like to get some input from both the syllabus BOF and the wider T&L community on what is starting to emerge. The intention of the minispec is to be an expression of user need, not a technical spec or an expression of design--that will come down the road.

Agenda: Overview of minispecs relating to syllabus as a sequenced list of content and activities (will send links closer to Thursday)
When: Thursday, 3PM pacific 6 PM eastern, Friday 8AM NSW
Where: Elluminate--please log in a little early  to set up whiteboard and voice (Elluminate was used to avoid international calls. It works like a walkie-talkie--you have to press the speaker button to talk). https://sas.elluminate.com/m.jnlp?password=M.C8FA6AF41842E2BCBFE0AA3BEBD24E

Please RSVP by writing your name on this page so we can get a sense of who is coming:
http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/UX/October+7%2C+2010

It's unclear if future meetings of the BOF are needed. I still think members of the managed project (someone other than me as I'm about to go on leave until February) will still ask for feedback and advice from this group as well as the wider T&L community, but it may be via comments and email, rather than a meeting.

Keli Amann
User Experience Specialist
Academic Computing Services, Stanford University
_______________________________________________
pedagogy mailing list
pedagogy at collab.sakaiproject.org<mailto:pedagogy at collab.sakaiproject.org>
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/pedagogy

TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to pedagogy-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org<mailto:pedagogy-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org> with a subject of "unsubscribe"

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/pedagogy/attachments/20101010/4ce512c4/attachment-0001.html