Confirm
610
edits
Changes
→Roadmap: More end of quarter checks
''[More detailed roadmaps for each experiment / pilot will be included on the related pages.]''
''[Open question: Is a roadmap process tied to the Foundation's fiscal year and the calendar year going to work for projects done in cooperation with institutions working to an academic year calendar? How much lead time will we need to have significant influence over what an institutions rolls out in the fall semester?]''
=== Q1 2009 ===
* Make contacts and have discussions with the OSS Watch FOSS Education project, the institutions involved in the "Integrating FOSS into undergraduate curriculum" activities, and others involved in general "teaching open source" activities.
End of quarter checkchecks:
* Do we have detailed plans and budgets for all proposed activities?
* Do we have agreement on plans and institutional commitments at Seneca and URJC.?
* Do we have qualified people committed to work on the Mozilla community courses?
* Is everything in place to have a successful first course at URJC?
* What worked with the first Mozilla community courses, and should be repeated for subsequent courses? What needs to be changed, and how?
* Do we have a solid plan for evolving EMO, including detailed budget and task lists?(Or, if we decide EMO is not the way to go, do we have a solid plan for how to meet the need we thought we were meeting with EMO?)
=== Q3 2009 ===
End of quarter checks:
* Have all Seneca-related issues identified the earlier review been addressed going into the 2008-2009 academic year?
* What worked with the URJC Mozilla Technology course, and should be repeated for subsequent courses? What needs to be changed, and how? What is the logical next step for URJC and Mozilla?
* Is the pace of Mozilla community courses meeting the needs of the potential audience? What do we need more of? Less of?* How useful is the new EMO functionality?
=== Q4 2009 ===
* Evaluate the success of the Mozilla Technology course and plan follow-on projects.
* Evaluate the success of Mozilla community courses, including the popularity of particular topics and whether the basic model of academic instructor plus mentor is working OK.
End of quarter checks:
* Seneca: See above.
* What further is needed from Mozilla and URJC to achieve Seneca-like success? Are there any quick wins? What needs to be done in order to achieve a significant step up in activity for 2009?
* Do any major tweaks need to be made to the Mozilla community courses for 2009? Should we bring all instructor duties inhouse (as part-time or full-time staff)?
* Is EMO important enough to evolve into a "first-class object" (e.g., comparable to SUMO, QMO, AMO, MDC) during 2009?
=== Beyond ===
