...
- Minors: I suggest we do not refer to them at all on the topic pages, rather use the tag "UG" and explain more fully on the degree page. If we leave it in then use tool tip to explain. Action: will mark at UG and explain on programme page
- Pre-degree: We have four such programmes. Do we have a tag for these? Might require some creative mapping from subjects. Action: Will tag as Pre-degree.
- Anne Nelson (Unlicensed) to draft tool tip text for Pre-degree
- Topics available in two UG degrees: Need careful though on how to present without confusing (especially when not all subjects are available in both), as well as assisting the user know which one is the "best fit" for me. Or is this "best fit" a programme page function? Or the "compare programmes" wish list item? Action: For exceptions only, list applicable subjects in grey text under degree name
- Degree or programme: We need to decide on language. Action: With Anne Nelson (Unlicensed) and Chrissi Dean (Unlicensed)
- Sample courses: Consultation supported this idea. Anne has a different view but is open to discus and if it proceeds has a good suggestion re the tool tip. This difers from Anne's view, but even if we proceed. See Anne's comments about tool tip. Requires a user story to define the rules and behaviours.
- Is this where we would suggest elective courses that "support" a major? Sounds more like a programme feature or that of a planning tool.
- Paul Seiler (Unlicensed) to write user story
- Content at mega-area level: Seems like we have settled on an image and a short description. Is this all? Action: Have intros for all components and will use whatever ones we need. User feedback may refine what is displayed.
- User testing plan: We need one.
- Joe Lobotka (Unlicensed) to lead. Paul to support
- Support images and video: With headings and text if required. Action: Will wait and see what we need.
- Contact block: Needs some discussion as to how many and what links are included. Should align with content strategy, as in what do we want people to do on this page. Will same ones work for VI? PG? Action: Have already refined number down. Wait and see user testing.
- Topic filter: A good idea but the presentation of the results needs work. Need to show user the "deeper" result than mega-area and even than topic. Needs to work in with search strategy and other applications. Is a specific instance of the "contextual search" mentioned in WIP-247. I think I should write up another user story for discussion at (dev team) story time? Need to be careful about what result set we use, the depth we search, the display of the results, and keeping the user in the same page/section.
- Paul Seiler (Unlicensed) to write user story
- Keywords and search: The above point leads nicely in to a concern about how we handle people looking for something that is taught at Victoria but not mentioned in our taxonomy? This is partly search, partly keywords or metadata. Related to/tied up with item directly above
- VI: Not all degrees are suitable to promote internationally. Do we vary the mapping (based on master data) or use disclaimers on the degree page?
- Paul Seiler (Unlicensed) to discuss further with Charles
- PG programme options: Do we list or have one link to a way finder page?
- Paul Seiler (Unlicensed) to write user story
- Distance filter: At the wrong level (as it is probably a programme attribute) and even there problematic (in that very few programmes can be studied fully by distance). Action: Remove from topic page. Build in to COO and programme pages.
- International filter: Is this a good idea? How would it work? Action: No. Remove.
- "like X if you liked/studied Y at school": Might unnecessarily exclude many future students who are not (or were not recently) in school. Action: With Anne Nelson (Unlicensed)
- Specialisations: Academic staff will desire (and might require) that we list specialisations as subjects on the topic page. They can have more meaning/appeal to students than the major on its own. How would this work?. Action: Can and will treat as subject if required.
- Subject links on taxonomy page: Will this too strongly encourage people to jump straight to the subject, thereby missing our marketing content and any related topics?
- Joe Lobotka (Unlicensed) to revisit page and may simplify/shorten.
- Victoria's strengths in the discipline: We may not yet be meeting this aim. Thoughts on how to improve? Action: Wait and see content writing and user testing
...