Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by alistair killick -
Number of replies: 11
Many people seem confused by meta courses (myself included). As well, it's not a correct use of the term "meta", & the "child" term seems back to front! (Children telling their parents who's in?)

I suggest changing the name:
  • call it a "derived enrolment" course. courses are deriving their enrolment, or supplying enrolment
  • call it "push" enrolment & "pull" enrolment. Courses would be called "push courses", or "pull courses". This is obvious, & neat.
I'd like to see a better wording to appear on the settings page.
Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to alistair killick

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Thomas Hanley -

Hi Alistair,

I agree with you. Moodle docs says "Meta courses inherit their enrollments, (and other role assignments(*), from these other course(s) instead of having students added manually".

I also thought that this was the wrong way around and thought that logically the meta course would be the course that other courses inherit from.

Of your two suggestions 'push' enrolmenent and 'pull enrolment' seem more user-friendly to me.

~thomas

In reply to alistair killick

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Simon Walters -
I think everyone agrees that these are at least the wrong way around and/or need renaming.

I don't like "derived enrollment" as that seems the wrong way around as well smile

BTW I don't know how long meta-course have been around but I've been moodling for about 3-4 years and I've only just worked out what they do and its saving me the trouble of arranging user surnames into class orders (working in six UK primary 5-11 year old schools) so teachers can pick out their pupils for each course.

I think the child courses should not be called courses - something like enrollment groups but since group is already a used term, I've put a thesaurus onto it and I'd suggest enrollment pool or club smile

Then all courses could have option to use enrollment pools and no need to call them anything special - after all, we don't call courses that use groups anything special smile

regards

Simon


In reply to alistair killick

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Chris Collman -
Picture of Documentation writers
Hi all,
Several of us, as Mary points out, recently woke up to the function vrs common English language/logic usage that was preventing intuitive understanding of metacourses.

Metacourse has been around a while, I do not see a name change in the futuresmile I had to look up "meta"and found wikipedia helpful. The Ancient Greeks used it to mean "with", "after" and "following". From the student standpoint (our ultimate user), a Metacourse, can not be accessed or stand on its own until it is linked to a course that comes before it.

No offense to the initial concept, what is wrong with the terminology is that what comes before a metacourse is called "a child"! This does not boggle the mind of an Anthropologist who enjoys reading Science Fiction, but most common folks are not going to consider this as merely a strange cultural concept.

Why not simply use the words "linked courses" for the teacher to select, instead of "child". We can further explain it by saying that the linked courses "push" their enrolments to the metacourse. I personally would try to avoid the words"dependent" or "conditional".

Excellent set of posts, which I found helpful to sharpen my own MoodleLogic. I guess if I feel strongly about it, I should make one of my rare visits to Tracker and suggest changing "child".

Chris
In reply to Chris Collman

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Chris Collman -
Picture of Documentation writers
Hi,
I created a tracker entry MDL-21545 and made some suggestion. If anyone wants to change the language pack on their own via an edit, I also supplied the same suggestions on Metacourse's talk page.

I like the "push" because that is what happens when Cron runs (in my mind anyway).
Chris
In reply to Chris Collman

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Simon Walters -
Hi Chris
"I like the "push" because that is what happens when Cron runs (in my mind anyway)."

Sorry - is Moodle only for geeks smile

Wheres the campaign for plain English around here wink

(Meta-course sounds as if is the God of all courses which of "course" its not at all - its a little bitty baby course smile )

Anyway - hope somethings done so those that follow on in future don't waste years of their lives like I have smile

regards

Simon

In reply to Simon Walters

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Mary Cooch -
Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Testers Picture of Translators
It's NOT for geeks else I wouldn't be here, not being onesmile I only worked out what push meant about months ago. (on the other hand, as a linguist, I am very interested in Greek etymology..so maybe I'm more Greek than geek!.wink
In reply to Mary Cooch

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by alistair killick -
Well, "meta" in Greek means across, around, with... why are we using it here?

My issue is just the confusing terms. Teachers are mystified, but when I explain a course can "pull" its enrolments from another course, or "push" them to another course, the lightbulb comes on.

I love the feature! Please keep it.
In reply to alistair killick

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Simon Walters -
I've had a break (sleep) and I'm all for the "pull" terminology now. smile

I think "is the course a meta course" should just be inside the enrollment box and be replaced with "Pull enrollments from another course?"

Simple - no need for child / metacourse concepts at all. smile

regards

Simon


In reply to Simon Walters

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Mike Green -

You can conceptualise  either side of the relationship as  the "meta" side, really. I'm now used to the idea of  metacourses having enrolled  courses, and  normal courses having enrolled students: so  the metacourse sits on top of normal  courses.  This fits my understanding of 'meta' - It seems analagous to metadrama, or metatheory. But I remember it taking a while to force my head to think that way smile

Combining the terms meta" and  "child" isn't very pretty - "parent" should be the inverse  role of "child". Actually, I like Simon's idea of abandoning the whole need to designate a course as a metacourse - It would be great if ANY course could have members  directly enroled to it, AND also have courses (and their members) enroled to it, if you wanted. So the whole problem of what to call metacourses would go away, because it wouldn't exist as a course type - courses are just courses, which can have a variety of ways of acquiring their members. I've had  lots  of users wanting, legitimately, to join  metacourses, but they haven't been able to because they weren't enroled to one of its child courses.

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Mike Green

Re: Usability: "meta" course: term is confusing, replace with...

by Oleg Sychev -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Plugin developers

Did you look at the "Subcourse" contrib module (contributed by David Mudrak, who now is core developer)? For now it is work with metacourses, but coupled with a good enrollment plugin (for 2.0) it could work even better and (hopefully) eliminate the need of quite buggy and complex metacourses at all.