Talk:Teacher documentation

Page styling

I know it makes more sense stylistically, but i'm not sure it makes sense to provide a list like this horizontally as opposed to vertically. Even though it is alphabetical, it doesn't seem right. --D.I. von Briesen 17:13, 30 January 2006 (WST)

Hi Divb, I agree with you that the page doesn't look quite right. I hope our theme developer Urs Hunkler will be able to help. --Helen Foster 23:44, 31 January 2006 (WST)

Conflict: Activity modules vs Blocks, (Developer page vs User page)

Activity modules page is developer page, but similar Blocks page is user page. I think must be both page for both target auditory - modules for developers, modules for user, blocks for developers and blocks for user. What we will do?--Nenashev Ilya 06:20, 9 February 2006 (WST)

Hi Nashev, thanks for highlighting this issue. How about we use the Wikipedia solution - disambiguation pages e.g. Blocks and Modules. --Helen Foster 05:30, 14 February 2006 (WST)

Incorrect Link

I know that I made the link to https://docs.moodle.org/en/Book incorrectly. I will figure out how I should have done this and come back.--Art Lader 10:09, 19 February 2006 (WST)

Gosh, that was easy --Art Lader 10:36, 19 February 2006 (WST)

Page style (again)

How about collumns, like this

*Assignments	*Chats
*Choices	*Forums
*Glossaries	*Hot Potatoes
*Lessons	*Quizzes
*SCORM	*Surveys
*Wikis	*Workshops
*Non-standard modules

--Koen roggemans 04:39, 20 February 2006 (WST)

Yes, that would be an improvement.--Gustav Delius 04:08, 23 February 2006 (WST)

What's the point???

I have been doing some work on this page based upon a suggestion I made (and helen agreed) in the docs forum which changes the lists to paragraphs. I feel this has made things better but the page obviously now needs a lot of work. I was wondering what the point / outcome of this page is? What does it hope to achieve? That may sound pretty obvious but it still isn't clear to me. Sure it introduces moodle features to teachers but there are so many ways to do that. Is it just an explanation of the features? Is it a human, friendly explanation of the features? Should it cover application in real life? Should there be a tutorial element to it? All of the above?

Also I was thinking that it is still a long page and will only increase in length. How about splitting it up further into smaller pages so you can navigate like a book. A bit like this site with a TOC for the pages and next links but only clearer and nicer of course :-). Darren Smith 19th March 2006

I think we need different pages for the different purposes you mention. Yes, there should be a tutorial. Yes, there should be a comprehensive explanation of all the features. And yes, there should be a human-friendly explanation of the essentials. This last page is the one that Helen was asking for to replace the current teacher help file in Moodle. It should be distributed with Moodle. It should be a single page, not much longer than the current teacher help file but more up-to-date. --Gustav Delius 16:12, 20 March 2006 (WST)

Darren, a big THANK YOU for your work on the Teacher documentation page - it's looking so much better now. :-)

Gustav, I agree with all your points apart from the human-friendly explanation of the essentials being distributed with Moodle - it should be the Teacher documentation page (see Bug 4803 - Redirect help link in course administration block to Teacher documentation). --Helen Foster 16:54, 23 March 2006 (WST)

Thanks Helen. A big thank you to you for this docs project! I am feeling better about the page now I finally removed the upload section. A lot of this stuff exists elsewhere so I am using the intro page as a jump station - seem fair enough? Also, is it possible to tell a page not to display a TOC as I think it would be more friendly if visiting teachers were presented with the introduction rather then a hyperlink list. --Darren Smith 04:57, 24 March 2006 (WST) (Is it possible to change the time in the sig?

Hi Darren, please note that typing __NOTOC__ removes the TOC. Your "jump station" plan sounds good to me :-) The signature time seems to be a bug. At least it's consistently wrong ;-) --Helen Foster 16:57, 24 March 2006 (WST)

Hey Darren, ditto wonderful work here. I have not looked at this section in a couple of months. While I would like to assume that anyone looking at Moodle undertands links, I would still point out the obvious to teachers that there are links that lead to other pages with more details, right at the top. Just a clue will do.

Gets me thinking about cross linking the Demo Moodle to the appropriate MoodleDoc page(s). For example, if I look at the lesson topic, there is not only the lesson example but also lesson references in the topic that could serve as the overview, which contain links to MoodleDoc pages. That would assist potential new moodlers as well as serving as an example of walking the Moodle walk. Again - thanks for your effort.--Chris collman 2 21:08, 25 April 2006 (WST)

Changed intro

I moved the instructions about logging in and troubleshooting logging in to their own pages so a) they can be expanded and b) it keeps the intro section concise. I have also restored the instructions stating that you need a teaching editing account or admin account as I feel that is an essential starting point. I have tweaked the new introduction but was tempted to remove it. Do we need to explain what moodle is here as it is covered elsewhere in the wiki? --Darren Smith 04:52, 5 April 2006 (WST)

You're doing a great job Darren! Please feel free to remove the Moodle explanation. --Helen Foster 18:16, 10 April 2006 (WST)