Wikipedia Education Program/Training modules/Ambassadors feedback
You can leave a message here to let us know what you thought of the training.
Skunze[edit]
--Skunze (talk) 18:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
BriannaMaxim (talk)[edit]
- What I liked
- Everything was explained really clearly and the resources were very helpful
...
- What I didn't like
- Some of the subpages were confusing to maneuver and during the case study, I didn't realize that by clicking the week number at the bottom of the page would lead me to another page with more information or how many pages there were tied to it. Providing clearer explanations for that may be beneficial.
...
- What was missing
- I don't think anything was missing
...
- What was unnecessary
- I wouldn't take out anything.
...
--BriannaMaxim (talk) 17:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
I liked that there was mixed media presentation of some of the material and that it was all high quality in content and delivery.
- What I didn't like
Some of the pages had almost no content so I didn't really understand why some of the material had been separated into multiple pages.
- What was missing
...
- What was unnecessary
...
--Cloud1900 (talk) 19:30, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
...
- What I didn't like
...
- What was missing
...
- What was unnecessary
...
--NanoLib (talk) 11:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
... The practical application module was the best one; I liked the sample syllabus.
- What I didn't like
... It was still a lot of slides to click through; I wish the same information was condensed a bit more.
- What was missing
... Nothing that I can think of
- What was unnecessary
... Nothing --131.247.152.4 17:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
I loved the application part when it came to using Wikipedia in the classroom. It gave me ideas how to implement a Wikipedia assignment in the future. The videos were a nice touch as well.
- What I didn't like
I liked it. Some parts were a little boring (the personal side of Wikipedia, showing all the people who edit Wikipedia) but that was just my personal taste.
- What was missing
I cannot think of a single thing that was missing.
- What was unnecessary
I think it all flowed very well, so nothing.
--Jastha08 (talk) 02:59, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
...
Short and to the point
- What I didn't like
...
You could put have just put all the information in 3 pages. No need for 100 separate page.
- What was missing
...
- What was unnecessary
...
--99.248.251.238 00:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
...Information about Wikipedia community, made me more excited about Wikipedia
- What I didn't like
...
- What was missing
...
- What was unnecessary
...
--Studentkittenhead (talk) 00:39, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
... clearly explained and detailed instructions
- What I didn't like
... nil
- What was missing
... more in depth in explaining how to do the did you know process and also how to check the talk page
- What was unnecessary
...
--99.247.97.84 04:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC) thank you Tsotiffany Tiffany Tso
98.207.95.15 07:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Makselrod (talk) 07:01, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
Video clips are a fantastic way to engage the trainee and effectively communicate the content! It also breaks up the monotony of the slides.
This being said, some of the videos were not working for me, in particular: Watchlists, Nice People, and Click the Edit Button. ...
- What I didn't like
N/A ...
- What was missing
I think it might be helpful to create a summary of all of the information that the trainee has just gone over at the very end. Potentially even make it a downloadable PDF so that they can keep it for future reference.
Another thing to consider might be some interactive slides to engage trainees further. ...
- What was unnecessary
N/A ...
--24.84.178.81 23:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
24.67.187.215Feedback[edit]
- What I liked
...thorough presentation
- What I didn't like
... I could not open the videos
- What was missing
...
- What was unnecessary
...
--24.67.187.215 14:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
...How clear and comprehensive it was.
- What I didn't like
... That the links for the videos weren't able to play and I could not get the information from another format.
- What was missing
...Video links did not play
- What was unnecessary
...N/A
--Lope9730 (talk) 22:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
- What I liked
- Overall this is a well-designed, concise, and straightforward overview of many aspects essential to collaborating with students and faculty on Wikipedia assignments - I particularly appreciate the template syllabus, getting started guide, videos, and other resources - I will definitely leverage these in coming semesters.
...
- What I didn't like
- The formatting of navigation buttons within tutorial sections jumped around a bit depending on the length of the content of the page - it would be great for purposes of navigability to have consistent page dimensions, a good rule of thumb in online instructional design (keeps learners focused on content rather than container).
...
- What was missing
- I'd like to see links to more information about the pilot program in the form of research findings if any are available, and perhaps more testimonials in video or other form from faculty/students involved in Wikipedia projects - the section with videos of Wikipedians was useful, but a similar section with educator/learner insights would be much appreciated. Also, a longer treatment of potential pitfalls and snafus of working with classes: perhaps a general "Troubleshooting" section or something of that nature.
...
- What was unnecessary
- Skipping over the five learning outcome areas involved with educating via Wikipedia in the final module (e.g., media & information literacy, communication skills) - this resulted in a lot of jumping around in this section. I think the pages should just navigate fully through this content like the rest of the tutorial, as it's pretty essential and helpful stuff (e.g., sample assignments).
...