Missions pedagogy: Difference between revisions

Missions pedagogy (view source)

358 bytes added , 9 years ago

no edit summary

Anonymous user

Revision as of 06:07, 31 October 2011 (view source) imported>Mchua (→‎About this page) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 23:17, 15 July 2014 (view source) 2602:306:37fe:7040:5a94:6bff:fe89:e48c (talk) No edit summary
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 6: The missions do not all conform to this yet, but if we can agree on how they ''should'' work, in terms of teaching style, then we can adjust them to be like that. ~~It is a draft; not officially anything. But we're hoping to gather feedback here.~~ You can think of it as similar to other projects' "Human Interface Guidelines" documents, and to Debian Policy. Thanks to Mel Chua for working with Asheesh Laroia and other people on this document! == A training mission should fill all three elements of the curricular triangle == Line 42: Right now, the level of "hints" varies wildly between mission steps. Sometimes we tell you exactly what command to type; sometimes we don't give you much advice. Sometimes we tell you to look at a separate page called "Hints." (refs: [http://openhatch.org/bugs/msg2105 issue459]) == It's okay if parts are blocked so long as there is a "See anyway" == Some training missions require the user go through the steps in a particular order. It is okay if the UI prevents the user from skipping to a page that he/she can't use so long as there is a link that lets the user preview what the page would look like (even if slightly broken).