Hi David V & David P.
Can you please clarify if our pitch reviews are supposed to appear on each individual pitch page like the following:
(so that the thumbs up feature can be used to return for the second part of activities?)
There’s a mixture of pitch reviews being done this way, and many being done as separate posts (understandably some new pitch posts contain reviews). Clarification would be extremely helpful, as students who have previously taken ETEC 565M are accustomed to rating right on the item, but others are not).
I can/will happily contribute to fixing these by copying the posts and recreating them as pulses, assigned to the correct author (with your permission if this is the case).
Also it would be helpful for those posting new artifacts for rating, to know that they should turn commenting (not pulse rating) off on the back end before publishing, so users don’t see two input boxes and post to the wrong one.
If this is forgotten, we see two inputs like in the image below:
We should be using the bottom (pulse) input, not the comments input? I’d happily volunteer to fix posts to turn off comments if this gets forgotten.
Hey Bobbi –
I’m so sorry I missed your initial question in my feed review. Thanks for leaping forward with this clarification.
Yes, you have it right. For the current review activity EVAs are meant to use the “What do you think of this article?” response rather than post comment field.
The continuing confusion over discussions and reviews is entirely understandable as our current use of WordPress in this content curation mode is a “kludge”: it works mostly with patience and attention rather than design. This happens often in prototyping situations, where different components are forced together awkwardly in order to test their prospective functionality in a final, cleaned-up version. If I could automatically make the “Post Comment” and “”What do you think” fields disappear and appear exactly when appropriate, I would definitely do so, but that will require a programming resource and time that can’t be justified until we know it can work.
I’ll keep trying to explain the process as well as I can, and will appreciate your patience and co-researcher understanding in this exploration.
Cheers,
David
Thanks David for clarifying, it was confusing and ruined my confidence a bit. My last question relates to the content stream. There appears to be 8 or more new pitch reviews not located under the pitch forum. Are these going to be moved somewhere that people can find them to complete the final activity without great difficulty?
Your instructions were: “Recommendations: As close to the end of week 3 as possible, go back to any pitches you’ve reviewed and if there is more than one Review present, Recommend the single most helpful, insightful and valuable Review.”
It’s going to be pretty hard to compare the reviews and recommend the most helpful ones, if they all appear in different places. Should we skip misplaced reviews? Or should we then be sifting through the site and home page to attempt to locate and compare them? I should have been more clear, that my goal in questioning the loss of continuity was to help ensure that everyone would be able to complete the final activity, and receive recommendations for their work!