-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Brainstorm and create draft of the course learning outcome and objectives #4
Comments
Outcome:
Objectives:
|
Feedback:
|
@lwjohnst86 Here's a revised version of the learning outcome and objectives: Course learning outcome: Be able to:
Objectives: Be able to:
I'm thinking that the parentheses can be removed if we want to avoid jargon completely. They're just there for clarity/for us right now. EDIT: I guess the "be able to" can also be removed. |
Great starting point!! Here's an expansion on those, refining them to be clearer on the outcome and expectations. Learning outcome:
Learning objectives:
We'll probably need to include a definition of collaboration and teamwork and teams somewhere. |
@lwjohnst86 I very much like the addition of learning objective 1 and 2 that "set the scene" and help learners reflect on collaborative workflows! Yay. I think this looks really good 👍 I mainly have questions about what you mean or think to include in specific parts of the learning outcome and objectives: Learning outcome:
In relation to the learning objectives:
Agree that we should define collaboration and teamwork and teams somewhere. Just to make it explicit what we mean by those words in this setting 👍 |
For the learning outcome, the "compared to other workflows" is to look at different types and say they don't have that makes a workflow effective. The first sentence is tool-agnostic (it isn't about Git and GitHub, and more about, what makes a workflow effective?). For point 1, probably not a full session, but a few discussion and reading activities throughout the course. For point 2, the point would be to discuss this and get them thinking, not to necessarily feed them the answer (there isn't really a true answer, only what works better in a given context). For point 3, you got it For point 4, it's so common to have people be contributors, but not really reviewers. This is to highlight, the reviewer role is just as important maybe even more important and people need to recognize and incorporate that into how they work. By recognizing and incorporating it, it by definition becomes explicit. If it isn't explicit, it's implicit, and implicit is generally not great because it assumes everyone knows already (which they don't). |
Amazing - thanks! |
Outcome is something bigger ("I will travel to the moon"), while objectives are more concrete and shorter term that fulfil the outcome ("I will make a propulsion system to get into space", "I will make a pod to support life in space", etc).
Put into the
sessions/syllabus.qmd
file.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: