Fools rushing in

[Sean Keesler]

Since you are on the topic of the new assignment tool, I am interested 
in hearing if anyone believes that something akin to Goal Management 
should be "basked in" to the new tool. The integration of the Goal 
Management helper with the original Assignment tool made for an awkward 
experience (to say the least). Do you think that this new approach would 
allow a nicer integration in the new assignment tool?

Is anyone facing accreditation issues in the next few years? It may not 
be a big consideration now, but these needs don't always make themselves 
evident until it is a bit late to do anything about it (says the guy who 
just a left a school that ran face-first into it).


Sean

Clay Fenlason wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Daphne Ogle <daphne at media.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>   
>>  Is there someplace we can see the current design thinking for assignments2?
>>     
>
> I think I'll be steadily working this into Confluence over the course
> of the next two weeks, but I can start with some high-level points:
>
> - the design has taken on more of a role-based separation (or, better
> put, the families of common tasks associated with certain roles).
> - the assignment functionality naturally orbits around 4 gravitational centers:
> 1) Assignment authoring (and related management)
> 2) Submission handling (and providing feedback/grading)
> 3) The "To-Do" list dashboard view for submitters (as well as
> returned feedback)
> 4) The individual submission itself
>
> * We find that faculty personae tend to be oriented around #1 and #2,
> in that order, though a significant fraction of them deal only with #1
> * Teaching Assistant/Tutor personae tend to be oriented around #2 and
> #4, in that order.
> * Student Personae tend to be oriented around #3 and #4, in that order.
>
> The legacy assignments tool tries to do all of this from a basecamp of
> more or less a single assignments tabular listing.  I think the new
> structure we're pursuing allows us to both do more and do less -
> provide more pertinent information across all the contexts, and yet to
> limit the amount any particular context throws at you.  It also takes
> pains to address a class of user that's really only been an
> afterthought with the legacy tool - the submission "reviewer" as
> distinct from the assignment author.  In the simplest case these are
> the same people, but in many courses (especially the larger ones) they
> are entirely different sets of people.  A further resultant benefit is
> greater transparency of the submission-feedback workflow, to each
> respective audience (or families of tasks).
>
> ~Clay
>
> ----------------------
> This automatic notification message was sent by Sakai Collab (https://collab.sakaiproject.org/portal) from the DG: User Experience site.
> You can modify how you receive notifications at My Workspace > Preferences.
>
>