From: Tom Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 3) Before using an item-submission system, we must settle on unique
> ID's for objectives and test items.
>
> * In lpi-updates and lpi-ac I tried starting a discussion on the best way
> to expand this for L2. My current preference:
> - L1 objectives have an ID <exam>.<area>.<objective> . For L1, <exam> is
> 1 or 2, and has no relation anymore to the actual 101 or 102 exams. So I
> propose to change this to a <level> indicator: all objectives currently
> labeled 2.a.o would become 1.a.o. This is possible since the <area>
> numbers are unique too. So for L2, objectives would start with 2. Also
> note that moreover, I also proposed unique <area> numbers for L2, because
> the area's that Kara & lpi-examdev defined after the L2 JAS, do not map
> well to the areas defined for L1.
>
> * Test items apparently have been numbered sequentially as they came
> in. I believe we have numbers into the 800's. I propose to start
> numbering L2 items at 2001, so we have room for new test items for L1.
>
> Alan, can you please confirm the above?
I'm not sure what you want me to confirm but with our switch of item banking
solutions, we can do whatever we want. I don't think we need to make any
special "room" in the item ID for L2 items because we'll be tracking
objectives and intended level.
-Alan
--
This message was sent from the lpi-examdev mailing list.
Send `unsubscribe lpi-examdev' in the subject to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to leave the list.
