Hi Sanjaya, The discussions and thoughts on quality of WE materials is extremely important for the future success and sustainability of our our project.
At a personal level -- I'm very pleased to see these concerns and thoughts raised by members of our community -- It shows that we care about our project <smile>. Given the importance and substantive nature of these discussions -- I've suggest that we move the planning and discussions on this important topic into the wiki so that we have a permanent record of this development with the added advantage of working collaboratively on the relevant documents. So I've set up a page for us to begin discussing and drafting a policy on QA and review in WE: http://wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:Quality_Assurance_and_Review I'll post an invitation to the list inviting contributions ... BIG thanks for taking the initiative in asking the questions and moving this forward to the next level. Cheers Wayne On May 3, 10:31 am, Missan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Wayne, Leigh and Eric for your valuable thoughts. I am deeply > concerned about WE's progress as a resource for quality learning > materials. It should not turn into another Wikipedia. We do not want > that to happen. We want WE to have content that is useful for various > levels of learning leading to some certification. It is possible that > some of the materials can be taken up by reputed insitutions to offer > courses of their own. But, something of such a nature to happen, it is > more important ot have quality resources, and also organized > resources. The ContentInfo template is quite comprehensive and > provides most information that should be attached to all completed > paages. While thinking of the organization of content and its quality, > I thought of having a rating system, and also checked the Wikipedia > ratings. But, these are not suitable, as they are not dynamic like the > one with GoogleGroup. People do not use it, as they are not expected > to. Once, we annouce that the community is responsible for the quality > of the material, and its rating system, users will start rating the > content. However, for new uses it would be de-motivating. Thus, only > completed pages be put on rating. Also rating needs to be dynamic, and > may include number of hits, time a user stay on the page, and actual > user rating on quality as per the specified ContentInfo. The feature > article concept is good. There is also another system on math ratings > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Maths_rating). These are all > based on select editors. What I intend to is a community based one, > not just select users alone. May be as Eric has pointed out, in the > process of edits, and their familiarity with the system, there also > can be a rating system for the users as well. To start with the > Flagged Revison is also a good idea. Now, we must focus on quality > content development simultaneously with Wiki Skills training. May be > we can come up with an WikiEd Content Excellence Award in PCF 6. > > With regards, Sanjaya > > Sanjaya Mishra --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group. To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
