On 13 June 2012 16:38, Thomas Dalton
It might be worth talking to potential accreditors earlier rather than later in the process (although not having already spoken to them two days in is forgiveable!). One thing you'll need to agree with them in the learning objectives, and they should be worked out before you get too far with producing content.
So getting into more detail: what I'm proposing to do for WMUK myself includes four "baseline" tasks. One of those I didn't mention as a subproject, but it is the step of taking the baseline list of topics and rendering it into a baseline list of specifications of modules. So the spec here will be a standardised "what you will learn" at least. Technically you'd work with separate "aims" and "objectives", and having been told by a Board member that "objectives" should be at least potentially measurable, getting that deep at the baseline stage might be too much. I think I have to work out version control and categorisation of modules before knowing everything about what to do here. Spec might just mean a sensible two-category system first.
By the way I intend to use A, B, C and X for assumed Wikimedia knowledge, for a coarse audience categorisation. So A = entry-level, B = intermediate, C = advanced: merging two articles appears first at B level, with added history merge at C level with some indication that the audience is admins or those who want to be. X is for self-styled expert. One thing that would fun would be the "So you think you know about?" series of quizzes. Think copyright mavens ...
Charles