User talk:Chris Tyler/OPS235 Updates

msaul:

• I like lab #1 - I think it is very useful. I wanted to make a YouTube video on practical use of skills used in lab #1...
  
  
• I'm OK with ditching written test #2 (but then how does this affect mark weighting?)
  
  
• I think it could work if we just took one assignment and split it into 2 sections. I got idea from Chris Jankul when he was teaching OPS435. He had two stages (the second built upon the other). In this way, marking doesn't have to be "massive". I believe that students gain the most experience from performing the labs any-ways...
  
  
• Which official version of Fedora are we using? (Fedora 16 live CD, and Fedora 16 DVD)? Need confirmation, so I can test-out the labs.
  
  
• In the future, I will just add content into this discussion area, but perhaps create a section in "user page" to preview my editing suggestions for feedback and confirmation to proceed by fellow OPS235 instructors. I want to start on this asap...
  
  
• I also want to create some YouTube videos placed prior to the "Review Questions" section to "connect the dots" so to speak. These would be short videos to provide reasons why they are using these tools. Especially LAB1!! Hint, Hint, (i.e. I don't want students to lose lab1!!!!)
  
  
• Which lab (i.e. in relation to "fall lab line-up") would be affected by SysVInit -> Systemd ?
  
  
• Strong agreement with "re-factoring" web pages. I strongly believe in "forward" and "backward" linkages as well. In addition to preamble about what student will be performing, it would be nice to "tie-in" the previous lab to allow a "flow" ("end-to-end"). This would relate to a "forward linkage" of what students can expect in the next lab. I strongly believe that well designed courses provide a "flow". This is NOT to indicate "spoon-feeding", but some "fit". I like the steps listed in the "re-alignment".
  
  

As a "follow-up" to this "flow":

• For debugging, I would stress common problems that students have made in the past, and a general suggestion that the student take to remedy the situation. Careful "check-points" should be indicated (perhaps with a "check-point icon" to have students CAREFULLY confirm their contents with the suggested output, and then direct them to debugging. I would NOT recommend YouTube videos, since this is where the students would benefit most from "learning" and "calling over the instructor"...