[Portfolio] 3 OSP requirements, proposed changes

[Charles Hedrick]

I think fewer than 10% are dual discipline. It turns out that given  
the way we're going to set things up, they'll submit wizard pages for  
evaluation, not full wizards. Thus it will just be one extra click to  
be able to see the wizard page, complete with display names of all the  
forms. We're going to tell them to use their discipline as the display  
name. It's kind of kludgey, but I haven't been able to come up with a  
design for code that's really convincing.

It's pretty clear though that I'm going to have to do some reportting  
screens. One will be to let faculty to get a summary of the status of  
students they're responsible for (which we can tell using groups).

Given that we're going to have multiple wizard pages in the wizard,  
I'm looking at a wizard status page that has

                unit plan | unit plan 2 | next thing | next thing 2
smith          C                P                      
R                 R
jones         C                C                      
P                  R

This is going to be ambiguous for the students in multiple discplines,  
but I don't see quite what I can do about that.


On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:39:41 PM, Noah Botimer wrote:

> Hello Charles,
>
> Nice to hear from you. I think I have some good news. These aren't  
> immediate answers but this might save you some time by listing  
> ongoing work.
>
> 1) There has been discussion on the calls about letting handled  
> items persist in the evaluations screen. I don't have the JIRA  
> ticket handy, but someone else probably does.
>
> 2) There are a number of reporting initiatives underway, which we  
> plan to summarize in Confluence and discuss on next Monday's call.  
> One or more of these may interest you as a starting point.
>
> 3) There are permissions to allow reviewers/coordinators to use  
> "Manage Status" on a matrix cell and take it back to another state.  
> This might give an escape hatch in case of a real mistake. More  
> directly, it seems that the only way to know exactly which  
> discipline is represented is if the student makes a selection. I can  
> think of the beginnings of a few solutions, but don't have a clear  
> winner in mind. It might help to know what proportion of students  
> are dual-discipline and what the overall collection is like in  
> thinking about usability of possible solutions.
>
> Thanks,
> -Noah
>
> On Jul 14, 2009, at 8:27 PM, Charles Hedrick wrote:
>
>> We're in the process of doing a portfolio for our grad school of
>> education. They're interested in several things. I'd like to do
>> something for them, but I prefer not to change code unless there's
>> agreement:
>>
>> 1) They want to be able to see workflow items that have been
>> completed. Faculty find it very unsettling that when they approve
>> something they can't look at it again. They want to be able to come
>> back to it for advising, etc. I looked at the code. It looks pretty
>> easy to add an option to getEvaluatablexxx to allow completed as well
>> as pending items to be returned.
>>
>> 2) They're interested in various reports. I'm probably going to
>> generate them outside the OSP application.
>>
>> 3) They have a problem that you might have some advice about: In NJ
>> teachers can be certified to teach in a specific subject area.  
>> They're
>> going to be submitting examples of work, which should be evaluated by
>> faculty in their subject area. That could normally be handled by  
>> group
>> constraints. However some students are in dual programs. In that case
>> they'll be in two groups. So faculty may open a page for evaluation
>> and find that its intended for a different group. If they don't
>> realize that immediately they could end up processing it anyway, thus
>> setting the status to completed, which they wont be able to undo.
>>
>> We don't want to create a separate site for each discipline, both
>> because of the maintenance overhead and because students will want to
>> produce web portfolios that use their work from both disciplines.  
>> We'd
>> like a way for the workflow screen (Evaluations) to have additional
>> information so the faculty know whether or not the item pertains to
>> them. The easiest thing to implement would be to take the displayName
>> from the first form in the page. Another would be to define a  
>> specific
>> form variable that the code checks for and displays. Do any of these
>> approaches seem sensible?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> portfolio mailing list
>> portfolio at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/portfolio
>>
>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to portfolio-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org 
>>  with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2421 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/portfolio/attachments/20090714/9fed269a/attachment.bin