Since @zmitchell runs the learning journey WG, editorial lead would be lead by the WG
@zmitchell: Not sure what my authority and boundaries are.
@fricklerhandwerk: Outline of the plan should be enough, questions can be discussed in the team, those who do the work take responsibility
@zmitchell: Expectations are important still, also for personal reasons
@fricklerhandwerk: How about writing something down for this to include in the project description?
@zmitchell: Thinking of an editorial lead, it’s about content and direction, but planning talks more about schedules, breakdown.
@fricklerhandwerk: Paid person should have responsibility to take care of logistics. Need to take time to get people onboarded, needs to coordinate with others.
@zmitchell: Have a didactics expert design the curriculum
@fricklerhandwerk: For that to work, needs contextual knowledge, takes weeks
@fricklerhandwerk: Person would start until money runs out, continue when we have more funds
@henrik-ch: Might be hard to continue the work when passing the same position onto somebody else later
@fricklerhandwerk: Yes, same person should continue work later on if possible. We should make sure we get funding while work is still in progress.
@infinisil: Not sure if it’s a good idea to start already, funds will run out, a month passes fast, might not be able to continue.
@fricklerhandwerk: Will use it anyway at some point, would rather start sooner, also takes some time to start still, I don’t think it’s blocking
@zmitchell: By producing something with value, we could get more funding, that’s how grants work
@fricklerhandwerk: Idea: Flipped classroom, what would we want the editorial lead to do for us in the first weeks
@zmitchell: Look at the current learning journey plan and give feedback to it, could get help from the nix expert, figure out if it’s too much for a new student
@fricklerhandwerk: Not sure if they can answer this, even with an expert. Maybe assess how long it takes to complete the learning journey instead?
@infinisil: I feel like it’s somewhat required to be technical, they’ll be involved in a very technical topic
@zmitchell: Agreed, not needed to be technical with Nix
@fricklerhandwerk: Experience with past UX workshop, which worked out well, despite the workshop leader Elton not knowing about Nix. Expecting for a didactic expert to be able to do something similar
Agreement it’s important, but not sure about it being a requirement
@infinisil: Depends on the person, if somebody has been doing this for a long time successfully without technical knowledge, might work
@zmitchell: Want it to be goal based (e.g. reaching a complete integration test project), they can help us determine whether goals are suitable, figure out pitfalls, whether it’s a reasonable goal.
Should show certain pain points, how to get unstuck, what amount of pain is appropriate in the journey.
@fricklerhandwerk: Should be a tractable task; figure out what’s too much, needs to be pulled apart, but no need to know too many technical details
@fricklerhandwerk: Would it be useful to assess the use case we want to cover? Backwards design: Map out use cases, trace back steps to get there in terms of skills and knowledge. Requires figuring out where users come from. Would doing that be useful?
@fricklerhandwerk: Can be done collaboratively between the editorial lead and the expert, with help of the team. Can collect material first and then go over it.
@zmitchell: Just talked about backwards approach in todays learning journey WG