We just want to send a thank you out to everyone for the wonderful, lively, and insightful participation in our OER activities this week. We consider you, our peers, to be “real world protagonists” in this market, and are very happy that our efforts to involve you in the process of refining and expanding our OER were successful! Also thank you for providing excellent feedback and suggestions for improvement, we will be meeting to implement changes this week.
– Group 7, Angela, Nidal, Milorad, Yuki, Colleen & Bobbi
Here were the results from the Activity #1 Poll:
And here are the condensed results for the Activity #3 horizons review:
Looks like 2:new accreditation programs; 6:curriculum integration; and, 7: development of ‘smart code’ were the favorites although there were excellent reviews posted on some of the others. Interestingly, 5: segmentation and diversification was not well received, but is something that start-ups and corporate ventures are in some ways supporting with closed initiatives.
Thanks again everyone for participating. Just thought we’d include a list of the changes made to the site based on everyone’s feedback: The activity error found by Kendra has been fixed as well as the typo that Chris found. Kirsten’s suggestion of Mozilla Webmaker Suite, Kendra’s SkillCrush, Shaun’s StackSocial and Max’s Arduino suggestions were added (the last lead to a creation of a hybrid open/closed category). James’s concerns about traversing back and forth between the two blogs for activities has been remedied by integrating the discussion directly into the resource pages (which alined with our goal of starting the commenting fresh for submission to NMC). Monique made a helpful suggestion of just strictly making hyperlinks and addition information tool-tips red, so we also incorporated this. Ashley’s mention of “conversational fluency” lead to a new horizon addition (#8 Changing attitudes regarding code as a new and prevalent “language”). We also re-arranged the horizons in order of importance as identified by our peers. Most of this was done on a new ‘clone’ of our WordPress site at the following address: http://met.bgraphicstudio.com/code-ed/
Thanks group 7. I found your Weebly easy to navigate and it was clear what we were expected to do. Very well organized. I also enjoyed looking at the two different perspectives with regards to open source and closed. The only thing that I found difficult was navigating between our course website for the posts and the weebly for the activities.
Great work,
James.
An excellent module group 7. The launchpad started the week off well, the site design was well laid-out, attractive and intuitive (although for some reason, the tab in Google Chrome listed the site title as ‘Code Edcuation’), and I found the information and discussion activities to be interesting. I also like the fact that links to a large number of resources were provided, the activities linked to the course website in an effective manner, and there was an activity checklist at the end of the module.
Awesome job!
Chris
Thanks James,we appreciate your feedback. We didn’t actually use Weebly, rather we used a custom self-hosted wordpress install, to stray away from Weebly as David recommended in his announcement just before our week launched. Our apologies as we did muck up on one of the activity links, but fixed it as soon as we discovered the issue. Otherwise, links were provided right in the instructions for each activity, that brought users directly to the page on the 522 blogwhere each activity was to be answered.
http://etec522m.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2014/06/direct-links.jpg
We also made sure to include return links on each activity page to bring visitors back to the same spot they had left off:
http://etec522m.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2014/06/return-link.jpg
We tried to be as clear as we could in the instructions and had hoped that this would help streamline the flow. I’m sorry if this somehow didn’t translate well. As we didn’t want to include the 522 peers answers in our OER submission (rather we wanted to use the feedback to refine our OER) we chose instead to host this discussion on the 522 platform that everyone is already accustomed to.
Also we tried to make the activity stream easily visible/accessible and ordered in a logical sequence through the normal weekly navigation:
http://etec522m.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2014/06/activities-list.jpg
What would you recommend to do differently if you were to improve this experience?
Thank you very much for letting us know Chris, it was an unfortunate (but humorous) typo in the WP site tag-line that caused this. Ha! Many thanks for pointing it out, it has been fixed! : )
Hi Group 7,
Your site was laid out well and it had a nice balance between catching people up on the basics and incorporating new information. I especially enjoyed the discussion and the engaging questions. Great job!
Thanks again everyone for participating. Just thought we’d include a list of the changes made to the site based on everyone’s feedback: The activity error found by Kendra has been fixed as well as the typo that Chris found. Kirsten’s suggestion of Mozilla Webmaker Suite, Kendra’s SkillCrush, Shaun’s StackSocial and Max’s Arduino suggestions were added (the last lead to a creation of a hybrid open/closed category). James’s concerns about traversing back and forth between the two blogs for activities has been remedied by integrating the discussion directly into the resource pages (which alined with our goal of starting the commenting fresh for subission to NMC). Monique made a helpful suggestion of just strictly making hyperlinks and addition information tooltips red, so we also incorporated this. Ashley’s mention of “conversational fluency” lead to a new horizon addition (#8 Changing attitudes regarding code as a new and prevalent “language”). We also re-arranged the horizons in order of importance as identified by our peers. Most of this was done on a new ‘clone’ of our WordPress site at the following address: http://met.bgraphicstudio.com/code-ed/
Dear Group 7 – Congrats on a fantastic job! Not only did I learn quite a bit from the activities, I thought it was very well organized and well produced. What really stands out for me, was how “on” the group discussions you were. I don’t think a single post was offered that wasn’t responded to or acknowledged. Your feedback to posts was very positive, encouraging, but also promoted further discussion – not easy to do! Your facilitated discussion definitely increased the learning opportunities, and challenged us to think deeper. Great work!
This is a bit late but I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed the past week! The introductory page was great, it clearly defined the problems, the number of activities and how to identify them throughout the site. I found the amount of information included on the site to be “just right” and very clearly written. The activities had that Goldilocks feel as well, they were very valuable without being overly time consuming and related well to the site content. I agree with the other posts that the facilitation was excellent and really added to the experience. Nicely done Week 7 : )
Our group’s project has now been successfully submitted to the NMC Horizons Report channel.
Thanks for noting submission.
dp
Yw. We tried to be clear and concise so it was well represented there in the submission form. I hope they publish it, that would be cool!