[IAEP] Getting Involved

[Samuel Klein]

I'll throw in my 2 cents for no more than 5 options per page.

As you get more levels of precise detail,  you can branch out into 2
or 3 layers of navigation (with an icon/image and a sentence of
description for each) before getting to the leaf pages.

SJ

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Caroline Meeks
<caroline at solutiongrove.com> wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
>
> Caroline
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Gary C Martin <gary at garycmartin.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Caroline,
>>
>> On 21 Jan 2009, at 15:06, Caroline Meeks wrote:
>>
>>> How about combining Developer, Web Developer and Administrator into one
>>> and adding "Educator"
>>
>> Hmmm, developer and web-developer are pretty different skills/tasks to
>> fold into a role, I was actually in mind that really the developer role
>> should be split into core-developer and activity-developer as the
>> skill/knowledge sets can be so different (a teacher is unlikely to be a
>> core-developer, but hopefully very likely to be an activity-developer).
>
> I agree with the content of what you are saying.
>
> However my goal for *this* page is to encourage people to click to the next
> page without having to think deeply.
>
> On the follow up pages we can go into more details. For technical people we
> can talk to them about core-development vs activity-development vs web work.
>
> But if we show teachers a page that makes them think about whether they are
> a Core Developer or a Web Developer they are going to just click the back
> button.
>
> This first page needs to be a no brainer. It needs to be a simple choice
> where you look and you immediately know which 1, 2 or 3 buttons you want to
> click and you pretty much immediately know which one you want to click
> first.
>
> I think anyone brand new to the project *even a developer* would have to
> think about whether they are a core or activity developer.  Not that
> thinking is bad, but I am suggesting that all thinking should be done on the
> next page, where we can write more targeted content.
>
>>
>>
>> I agree that an educator role is an obvious add, but in reality I'd want
>> to put just about every other role skill under educator as I think we need
>> educators working in all roles! Anyway, perhaps having educator
>> skills/knowledge pushing all roles is enough; here's a quick stab at a
>> possible Educator role text (please do make some edits!!)
>
> Most of the teams need a mix of people, our job on the next page is to
> describe to them how someone with that skillset can contribute to the
> different teams.
>
> ex: Deployment teams need writer people to write and distribute press
> releases.
>
>>
>>
>> Description of this role: Focus on Sugar's educational needs.
>>
>> Skills you possess or want to learn: Explaining complex ideas well, people
>> skills, teaching through digital objects, understanding of educational
>> theories and obstacles, paedagogy, ability to communicate with and influence
>> develkopers.
>>
>> Teams associated with this role: EducationTeam, ActivityTeam,
>> DeploymentTeam
>>
>> Tasks typical in this role: Lesson plans, teacher guides, text book
>> templates/samples, articles, leverage Sugar as an ideal platform for
>> learning, provide guidance and feedback to those working on technical
>> aspects of Sugar, setting educational goals.
>
> looks like a good start to me. Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> For the record, from feedback so far (and my own opinion) leans me in the
>> direction of adding 3 new roles; an educator role, a testing-QA role, and
>> splitting out a separate activity-developer role from the core-developer
>> role.
>>
>> Anymore for anymore? :-)
>>
>> --Gary
>>
>>> I think technical people are more clueful about what their skills are and
>>> will click through to the next page where we can spell out specific skills
>>> and specific tasks.
>>>
>>> I think we need to be explicitly welcoming to Educators. I think a
>>> teacher looking at the current page would not know where to click.
>>>
>>> Caroline
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Bernie Innocenti <bernie at codewiz.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> Gary,
>>>
>>> your work on http://sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/GettingInvolved is
>>> TOTALLY AWESOME!
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for taking care of it.
>>>
>>> --
>>>  // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/
>>>  \X/  Sugar Labs       - http://www.sugarlabs.org/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Caroline Meeks
>>> Solution Grove
>>> Caroline at SolutionGrove.com
>>>
>>> 617-500-3488 - Office
>>> 505-213-3268 - Fax
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Caroline Meeks
> Solution Grove
> Caroline at SolutionGrove.com
>
> 617-500-3488 - Office
> 505-213-3268 - Fax
>
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>