Subject: [edu-team] Involving ADs in tutorial development

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 17:23:02 +0200

Hi,

See Benoit's recent suggestion to involve the relevant ADs in the 
development of new tutorials.

I cannot think of any reason why we shouldn't do this. But I am not sure 
how this was handled or discussed in the past. If there are no 
objections, I suggest whenever we offer or develop a new tutorial, we 
also pass it on to the relevant ADs for review. The more feedback, the 
better. What do you think?

Kind regards,
Mirjam

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:38:51 +0100

> better. What do you think?

Good idea. However, these are busy people so you need to allow at least
2 weeks for their feedback on anything substantial. I think we'd need
a summary of each proposal, like a textbook proposal:

Title
Author(s)
Target audience
Intended learning outcomes
List of topics

All that would need to be agreed before starting to develop slides,
and then they would need another review cycle.

I think that means it's now time to develop proposals for IETF 86 ;-)

   Brian

---

From: Radia Perlman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 09:04:26 -0700

I agree that the more feedback, the better.  It might be nice to
provide surveys, after the tutorial, not just of "liked it" "didn't
like it", but instead, "things I couldn't understand", "things I think
were incorrect", "things that are really too detailed for a tutorial",
"things that I wish would be included".

But also, we could do a wider net of soliciting ideas for tutorials
and getting volunteers to read over slides and make suggestions.

Radia

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]> wrote:
> I cannot think of any reason why we shouldn't do this. But I am not sure how
> this was handled or discussed in the past. If there are no objections, I
> suggest whenever we offer or develop a new tutorial, we also pass it on to
> the relevant ADs for review. The more feedback, the better. What do you
> think?
>
> Kind regards,
> Mirjam
> _______________________________________________
> edu-team mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-team

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:35:50 +0200

Hi Brian,

Good idea to provide these kind of templates. We could that information 
even put on the external edu pages so people know what to expect.

And yes, we should already start thinking about tutorials for the next 
couple of IETFs. Would be great if we could plan ahead a bit better 
rather than hastily trying to put something together before each meeting.

Would it be an idea to organise a short edu-team meeting/lunch during 
IETF 84 in Vancouver. Unfortunately, I won't be there. Radia, will you 
be there? Would you like to organise this (doodle etc.)?

Mirjam

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:37:59 +0200

Hi Radia,

I like the idea of short "satisfaction surveys" after each tutorial. 
That would also provide useful feedback for the speakers. Has the edu 
team done this before? Is there a template we could use as a starting point?

Mirjam

On 9/7/12 6:04 PM, Radia Perlman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Mirjam Kuehne<[email-masked]>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>