Anil,

Thanks for the kind words. I am happy to help.

Wayne,

Thanks for posting your thoughts. I've reallocated your comments into three
areas for our continued consideration:

*Audience*
I want to start by commenting on a point Wayne makes throughout his post --

Who is the audience for instructional materials designed to help beginners
learn how to use a computer and select open source software tools? A few
statements in Wayne's post,

--"my passion is to see the development of high-quality teaching materials
supporting basic ICT skills development using free software."

--course materials should be "available for use in multiple contexts."

--"A key question for our group to consider will be whether the course
materials should meet the requirements of the ECDL/ICDL curriculum."

support the creation of instructional materials for all who might need them,
and not limiting our scope to the purposes of ECDL/ICDL --
European/International Computer Driving License -- certification, that we
should consider creating a collection of instructional materials on how to
use a computer and select open source software tools, and design it such
that relevant modules meet the needs of ICDL.

I like this idea. It fits well with my broad educational vision (a pool of
well-designed modular instructional content from which users/learners take
what suits them).

*Versioning*
One of the issues we have is how to structure content modules that we know
will be updated regularly in the future (e.g., software applications), and
where we suspect that users will move to the newer versions of
software/hardware at different times. In our discussion of revamping CCNC we
had taken the approach that maybe the whole project should reflect the fact
that the instructional materials reflect Open Office 3.0. But Wayne's
comment about "...confusing subpages like Version 2, Version 3..," suggests
that users will find this aspect confusing. But we need to have some sort of
mechanism to manage the content written for different versions of software.

Let's say we want to create a structure that has no WE-imposed version
numbering, what guidelines might we implement to maintain such a structure
into the future? Some thoughts:
1. Top page points to most current content first, older content is
referenced in later sections of the page.
2. Page titles include version numbers according to publisher's naming
convention, e.g., OpenOffice 3.0, Firefox 3.0 version. (Although we may want
to use #.x for these to indicate that conent is kept relevant for most
recent release within major version).
3. Page titles include distribution names as appropriate, e.g., Ubuntu 9.0
4. For instructional materials designed to be generally applicable to many
applications (maybe file managment and printing fall into this category?),
content is regularly updated to keep it current and appropriately general
and new pages are started when content seems to be a somewhat large break
from previous content. Avoid using version numbers in titles.

My expertise is not in computer hardware and applications, so please comment
on these guidelines. I believe that we will be much more successful in
creating these instructional materials, if we can establish a shared vision
for how to structure and manage them.

*Naming*
Wayne suggested "Open Computer Navigator's Course (OCNC)" as an alternative
name. It's a good beginning (I like the inclusion of "Open"), but let's
consider more options before we settle on something. Here are a few issues
for us to think about:
1. If our vision is to create instructional materials to support basic
information and communication technologies (ICT) skills development, are we
creating a "course"?
2. The name is long and probably should include an apostrophe (although
Wayne didn't include one), not practical for a url.User's may find it more
difficult to work with long urls.
3. New, and therefore uncommon, abbreviations, e.g., OCNC, contribute to a
steeper learning curve. The audience for this content is beginners.

Other options here?

I think we want something simple and direct, that clearly communicates the
instructional contents within, which is "how to use a computer and select
open source software tools for beginners". Let's not dwell on these issues
too long, but rather have a bit of discussion and then decide. Of course WE
can always change it later.

If you have some thoughts on this, please contribute.

Alison
http://www.wikieducator.org/User:ASnieckus

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org
To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to