Priorities from workshop

Thanks to everyone for coming to the workshop this morning.  In August.   The academic dead zone!

Just to quickly post here our priorities that Peter presented at the end of the morning.  I’ve tried to reorganise them into the implicit activities and deliverables that were felt to be essential and the more explicit deliverables that we collaborated on throughout the morning.

(Here is the original document)

Please feel free to comment if you think we’ve missed anything crucial or anything new has occurred to you.

Implicit

• Dissemination (user engagement emphasised as crucial)
• Language  (no technical jargon!)
• Usability / simplicity (e.g. RLO-CETL)
• Supporting the community of users (will comprise at least 2 distinct groups – those that simply use resources they find and those that use AND (re)deposit.)
• No authentication barrier for discovery (Open Access)
• Authentication required for depositing

Explicit priorities

1. Resources presented in the context of specific learning/assessment outcomes (will guide discovery)
2. Discovery / use from VLE (resources need to be easy to embed in VLE[s])
3. User commenting (optional authentication would allow practitioners to comment on resources potentially providing a mechanism to link theory and practice)
4. Use of existing authentication mechanism (LDAP)
5. Deposit from the VLE (not seen as a priority at this time and outside scope of current project)
6. Social networking integration (low priority – likely to be driven by community at later date)

Revisiting this list, it occurs to me that we’ve sort of skirted round the deposit question…is a simplified deposit tool (or tools) into the respective repositories an implicit or explicit deliverable do we think (technical issues not withstanding)?