Wikiversity:Introduction Overhaul Taskforce

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Favicon.gif Action required

Favicon.gif Templates


Favicon.gif Development


Favicon.gif Reference


Favicon.gif Events and news

Welcome to the taskforce on improving Wikiversity's introductory pages! Please help us in improving Wikiversity - particularly from the perspective of a newcomer. (If you'd like to make suggestions about this taskforce, including its name or scope, please do so on the talk page.)

Aim[edit]

This taskforce's aim is to improve the "points of entry" to Wikiversity for the newcomer - from the Main Page, to definitions of and introductions to Wikiversity, to help pages - to make them as clear, concise, and as user-friendly as possible.

Project pages[edit]

Pages needing improvement[edit]

Guided tour update - Looks great everybody. The layout is tops. There is a markup error on the Community Portal leg of the tour. Something is up with the {{Wikiversity:Community Portal}} line. I can't get it to work, but anybody willing to give it a shot gets brownie points. Cheers --=Benjamin= (t)·(c)·(e) 15:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Ideas[edit]

Brainstorm about what needs improvement, and how it could be improved.

(from Colloquium)

  • I agree the main page is in a dire state, and the introductions seem to be a mess. For example, in one place I read that the "course" concept was rejected by the board last year, but when I try to find information about how to structure connected pages, I get back to a page which tells me how to set up a "course" on Wikiversity. The project boilerplate is pedagogically inadequate - multiple examples, tailored to different purposes, are needed for newcomers. I assume there's been a lot of discussion of this, but it's not obvious to me where the discussion is centered. McCormack 17:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • On courses, the board's directive was never clear nor clarified, and I honestly think you'd be better off ignoring it - bearing in mind that we're experimenting with what kind of learning model fits best in this wiki format. As for pedagogical templates, I'm with you there - it'd be great to be able to "templatise" (or at least give examples of) how people could go about developing materials. Cormaggio talk 12:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • The guided tour could be made a better resource for new visitors and we could put some effort into a video presentation that would explain Wikiversity to new participants. --JWSchmidt 18:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Supporting Wikiversity participants has some older thoughts about "tracks" for different types of participants that I think are relevant. --JWSchmidt 16:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
      • I started Topic:Wikiversity as a content development project where learning resources about Wikiversity are planned, organized and developed.

Initiatives[edit]

Participants[edit]

Sign here if you would like to contribute to this project, and perhaps give a brief account of why you are here.

  • Cormaggio talk 19:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC) - I think our whole introduction is very messy, unecessarily overlapping in parts and chronically deficient in others. Overall, I don't think we're helping newcomers enough to get a sense of what Wikiversity is, and how they can use it and really get involved. I'd like our introduction section (for want of a better phrase) to be a well-presented, clear introduction to the project and an efficient funnel targeted at people's specific needs. If we had this, I think a lot more people would be getting involved in Wikiversity. Cormaggio talk 12:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • CQ 15:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC) - I think we should add the Wikiversity:About page to the worklist. Also we should have an entry path for those learning English for the first time.
    • Wikiversity:About is already there. :-) Increasing access for non-native speakers is also a good idea - thanks! Cormaggio talk 15:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • McCormack 16:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC) We need to say very clearly what makes Wikiversity different, and what makes it an experience that adds value to education rather than being just another wiki. Differences (starting to think):
    • exceptions to NPOV in the form of original content, but with disclosures (note: I think the disclosure system needs combining with peer review requests, templates with categorisation; needs clarification and depth).
    • interactive widgets (e.g. Rayc's drop-boxes - perhaps revise a bit - for simple reveal/hide operations; the quiz extension; memorize? more?
    • structural metaphors (faculty/school/etc) combined with much tighter category system than Wikipedia
    • molecular strucure of basic components - i.e. multiple-page projects rather than single-page articles; note that we need to provide greater help as regards setting up various types of molecule.
    • cohesion with OER projects such as OER commons (e.g. an automated feed to OER commons which sends over projects marked as mature; note that we need info box templates with OER commons metadata that can be attached to mature projects. Needs a bit of programming, perhaps.
That's a great brainstorm/wishlist - and there's a lot more here than simply the introduction section (which is what I hope this project will address). Kinda following on from my recent reply to you on the Colloquium, what do you think of having a series of pages on "Developing Wikiversity", "Defining Wikiversity", "Understanding Wikiversity", "Contributing to Wikiversity", which would integrate with pages on Wikiversity:Wikiversity outreach, and the welcome/introduction section? I think there are several projects here and perhaps they need to be organised by theme in order to attract more participation (potentially from the main page). Thoughts? (Keep 'em coming!) Cormaggio talk 11:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
  • PeterMG 05:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC) - The entry pages are apparently symptomatic of an overall organisation dysfunction. I posted an incomplete proposal on the talk page to address the issue holistically. My gripe is having the school namespace, but poluting the topic with school departments.

See also[edit]