2010/8/23 Karsten Wade <[email protected]>:
> the first through fifth edits.)  Are you just providing a model for
> consideration that I can apply across all of them?  Or am I lucky and
> that's the only one with problems? :)

It was kinda a model, but I'm happy to provide detailed feedback. I
was in-between block-building and book-reading when I wrote my
message.

> I'm not sure what I was planning on doing with them at the end; I
> don't think I really visualized how they would be inline or not.

> In my mind, this is an exercise in confirming or rewriting the
> existing chapter.  I am reverse engineering what we did, making sure

OK, perhaps I missed that purpose at some point in the recent past, or
failed to spot it somewhere else. Your lack of certainty works just
fine for me. I don't necessarily have answers to your questions, but
this kind of exercise is similar to strategies I've used in my own
writing in the past. That is, this is a focused kind of outlining of
the existing text that will, potentially, become part of the text, or
help refine it. Or, perhaps something else entirely.

> I'm thinking beyond all of you, to newer educators and their grad
> students leading discussion sessions and such.  Is an appendix of
> learning objectives useful, ever?  (Sounds painful to maintain, at
> least.)

Good questions.

> Anyway, seems worthwhile to continue, and to tighten the objectives,
> which could help tighten the content.

Agreed. I now understand what you're trying to achieve with these,
which... isn't exactly defined yet. But that you're exploring is
clear, and that makes it easier to comment/know how to comment on the
process at this point.

> Just keep calling those balls and fouls, 'kay?

Was that a cricket reference?

Cheers,
Matt
_______________________________________________
tos mailing list
[email protected]
http://teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos

Reply via email to