Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Instructor Training Application checkbox to opt-in for Open review process #1501

Open
karenword opened this issue Apr 12, 2019 · 11 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@karenword
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 12, 2019

This is not urgent, but if it is a quick fix, it would be a fantastic improvement.

Currently, applications are routed to our Open Instructor Training program when they are missing a Registration Code. This means that anyone who forgets to enter a code ends up taking time for unnecessary application review.

It would be much more straightforward to have a checkbox with text like this: "OPEN INSTRUCTOR TRAINING APPLICANTS: Check here if you would like this application to be reviewed for admission to our Open Instructor Training program. If you have already been invited to attend a training, please do not select this box."

@maneesha

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 12, 2019

Thanks @karenword. This sounds like a good idea.
I'll discuss this with @pbanaszkiewicz in our upcoming workflows.

@pbanaszkiewicz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 16, 2019

We already have some features implemented for v2.8, but I can try to squeeze this into master some other way than before and therefore make a v2.7.1 release.

@maneesha

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 24, 2019

Thanks @karenword
To be clear, would we also want them to use the Group Code box for anything? We can still leave it as is otherwise. Should we have some information about what "Open Instructor Training" means? Perhaps to say not to check this box if they are with a member site?

What if we had two options:

  1. If you are joining with a member site, please enter your registration code or member site name here.
  2. If you are not affiliated with a member site and are applying through our open application program, check this box.

And then we'd want validation to be sure they didn't do both.

@maneesha

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 24, 2019

@karenword I'm assuming your answer will be 1, but please let me know:

Which of the following applies to when you want to see this fixed?

  1. Would like to see this fixed as soon as possible, in the next 1-2 development cycles (i.e., by September 2019)
  2. Would like to see this fixed later (by the end of 2019)
  3. Would like to see this fixed, but possibly as part of a larger project that needs more planning
  4. Not sure
  5. No longer relevant - OK to close
@karenword

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jun 24, 2019

Definitely # 1! :) I like the options. Maybe this should be a drop-down choice so that they are mutually exclusive? Options could be: 'Member Affiliate (pre-approved for training)' vs 'Open Applicant (submit application for review to receive an Open Instructor Training scholarship)' -- pinging @elizabethwilliams8 for thoughts on my use of "scholarship" here. Then the "Registration Code" field could be identified as "Member Affiliates only: please enter your Registration Code here."

@elizabethwilliams8

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jun 24, 2019

@karenword I like it. There may be a better word than scholarship in the future, but this is consistent with what we have been saying so far.

@maneesha

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 10, 2019

I like this idea - that they choose "member" or "open" (and we can fine tune the language used here) and then if member they get a box to put in a code; if open they don't have that box.

@maneesha maneesha added this to the v2.9 milestone Jul 10, 2019

@maneesha

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 11, 2019

@pbanaszkiewicz says:

Changing the form to behave like this is tricky and may cause unpredictible challenges

Piotr, could you clarify what might happen? Are there other ways we could distinguish between open and member applications without relying on whether the group code is blank?

@pbanaszkiewicz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 12, 2019

@maneesha: sorry for not being clear. What I meant about changing the form and unpredictable challenges is that adjusting the HTML in the form may require some tricks / hacks / special JavaScript. I don't know upfront what that may be, but it could affect how long does the issue take to implement. The bottom line is that I'm sure I can change the form for you, just the time may vary.

@karenword

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 12, 2019

@pbanaszkiewicz is this unpredictability specific to adding a checkbox or dropdown choice alone, or is it related to @maneesha 's proposal that the registration code box appearance should depend on the checkbox being checked? The latter feature seems less important to me than having the checkbox/dropdown itself.

@elizabethwilliams8

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 22, 2019

@karenword and @maneesha Upon reading the options for the check-boxes again, I think we should make the current 'Member (pre-approved for training)' a bit more broad and intuitive. What about 'Pre-Approved Group Registration (through Membership or other agreement with The Carpentries)' and ' Individual Open Training Application (submit application for review to receive a scholarship for Instructor Training through our Open Application Program)'.

My thinking here is that we have groups that are not members (i.e. the DOE) who have instructor training seats through a contract and we have the waived instructor trainings through the scholarship program and the a la carte training form. In both of these cases, as well as Membership, a registration code should have been provided. And, if there are other things in the future, this covers them too!

I would love to hear your thoughts on the wording for the Open Training Applications, Karen. My thinking is that using the word 'Individual' will clue people in memberships that they are part of a group and need that code (if it hasn't been given to them), and empower individuals thinking about applying for training and not sure if it is for them to make the decision alone.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.