Show Advanced KnowledgeHide Advanced Knowledge

Making Learning Objectives-Driven Course a Type of Course instead of a Setting

1 Initial Problem

Setting a Course setting to  Learning Objectives-Driven Course has the most severe consequences of all Presentation Settings. 

2 Conceptual Summary

The  Learning Objectives-Driven Course Setting should become a Type selected in the Create-dialogue. 
A similar case is the 360° Feeback Survey. 

3 User Interface Modifications

3.1 List of Affected Views

• Course > Settings
• Course > Create Dialogue 

3.2 User Interface Details

3.3 New User Interface Concepts

None

4 Technical Information

{The maintainer has to provide necessary technical information, e.g. dependencies on other ILIAS components, necessary modifications in general services/architecture, potential security or performance issues.}

5 Contact

• Author of the Request: Tödt, Alexandra [atoedt]
• Maintainer: Meyer, Stefan [smeyer]
• Implementation of the feature is done by: {The maintainer must add the name of the implementing developer.}

6 Funding

If you are interest in funding this feature, please add your name and institution to this list.

• …

7 Discussion

Kunkel, Matthias [mkunkel], 28 NOV 2017: I like the suggestion to separate a setting like 'Learning Objectives-Driven Course' from views like 'Simple View' and 'Sessions View'. And I support the idea as well to give this setting a prominent position. But I see several problems in the current suggestion:

• The option 'Type' on the creation screen and in the 'Edit ***' block of the 'Settings' tab is currently used to offer one or more didactic templates for an object type and to modify the object's permission setting accordingly. This setting can be changed anytime. The mentioned '360° Survey' is an exception of this rule and the only example where the decision made at the create screen cannot be revoked at a later stage (one time 360°, always 360°).
• If the course should behave like the survey and choosing 'Learning Objectives-Driven Course' could not be changed later, course authors already need to know at the very beginning of their course creation process if they want to run a course using learning objectives or not. Because a later change won't be possible. Is there any technical reason for such a strict behaviour - as it exists for the 360° survey? And would this type enable or disable other course settings or show new course tabs besides the already existing presentation of the 'Learning Objectives' tab - which makes it difficult or even impossible to change the setting later?
• If we remove 'Learning Objectives-Driven Course' from the list  'Presentation Type', why handling the course with timings differently? It also comes with new functionality and does not only present course items in a different view. Why does it not become a type and stays just a view?
• See also current discussion and Jour Fixe comments in Improve Setting Group „Presentation Type“ and Abandon „Grouped-by-Type View“.

Kruse, Fabian [Fabian], 04.12.2017: I basically suggested the same thing in my comment from 11/20/17 in the wiki entry linked by Matthias. If we want to improve the settings group, tackling LOC and Timings is required. While I agree with Matthias' list of downsides, there are also a few pros:

• Visibility of LOC: By putting the LOC choice into the creation dialog, it gains visibility. Hiding this huge functionality in the settings form as it’s currently done doesn’t seem to do it justice. It may even prevent users from giving it a try.
• Usability of course in general: It would allow us to unclutter the Settings form. It would also be a clear statement that it doesn’t make sense to convert a normal course into LOC or vive-versa. While this may not be a technical limitation, we are free to reduce user options where we see fit for didactical or usability reasons. To be fair, I’m not in a position to make this call - but JF is!
  • As an indicator: Nobody has responded so far to my request for comments where such a conversion would be needed. Nobody in ILF sees the need, either.

JourFixe, ILIAS [jourfixe], 18 DEC 2017: We like the suggestion to move the setting for a learning-objective driven course away from the 'Presentation' settings. But we reject the current suggestion to make a type out of it that cannot be changed anymore. Especially for courses generated by a Campus Management System, changing the type of a course is necessary. Please work out a general concept for the suggested distiction between type and modus and suggest a way how to keep a certain flexibility in changing such types.

Kunkel, Matthias [mkunkel], 11 JUN 2018 : IMHO we are not far away from a feasable solution for the requested distinction between 'type' and 'mode' as pointed out by the Jour Fixe in December last year. Instead of making the setting 'Learning Objectives-Driven Course' a type that has already to be chosen when creating the course object and that can not be changed afterwards, we should introduce a new and independant setting to choose between the four possible 'didactic designs' of a course:

• Learning-Objective-Driven Course
• Timings View (a better name is welcome)
• Sessions View (it is no longer only a view → new name is welcome)
• Simple View (it is no longer only a view → new name is welcome)

This setting should no longer be part of the block 'Course Presentation' but moved up to the top settings in block 'Edit Course' under 'Description'. The current setting 'Presentation Type' in block 'Course Presentation should be re-labeled to 'Presentation of Content' (to remove the word type) with the following settings:

• Simple View
• Grouped-by-Type View

As long as our form class is not able to control dependencies of settings, the byline of 'Grouped-by-Type View' should mention that this option is not applicable to learning-objective-driven courses and courses with timings view (both have their own rules of content presentation).

8 Implementation

{The maintainer has to give a description of the final implementation and add screenshots if possible.}

Test Cases

Test cases completed at {date} by {user}

• {Test case number linked to Testrail} : {test case title}

Approval

Approved at {date} by {user}.