WikiEducator talk:Quality Assurance Framework/Featured Works

From WikiEducator
Jump to: navigation, search


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Great work on the featured resource templates!009:45, 1 December 2008
Featured Institution and Project104:42, 1 October 2008
Classification of featured works004:41, 1 October 2008

Great work on the featured resource templates!

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 :-)


Mackiwg (talk)09:44, 1 December 2008

Featured Institution and Project

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

Prawstho (talk)08:30, 27 September 2008

Good question --

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

Mackiwg (talk)04:42, 1 October 2008

Classification of featured works

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.

Mackiwg (talk)04:41, 1 October 2008