[PROPOSAL] A couple of changes to the Web Literacy Map
The Web Literacy Map was created by Mozilla and a community of stakeholders. This is how it currently looks:
On yesterday’s #TeachTheWeb community call I proposed a couple of changes to v1.0 of the Web Literacy Map. Both are driven by a need to agree on a tag structure for the competency grid to underpin our work this year:
Proposal 1: Split up ‘Sharing and Collaborating’ into two separate competencies.
Proposal 2: Change ‘Design & Accessibility’ to simply ‘Design’.
There was lots of great feedback and, as expected, the second proposal generated more discussion than the first (which seems relatively unproblematic.
Here’s what people said (my emphases):
‘Accessibility’ feels more a cross-cutting theme that we can reference through skills under a variety of competencies. Removing it from ‘Design & Accessibility’ could remove some ambiguity from the competency grid.“
Design is clearer on its own.
Prefer design/e-‘creativity’ having its own space (groups like Telefonica Think Big have asked for this, too).
I’m trying to go back and recall all the discussion that led to some of the existing strands/competencies. There were several strands/elements that were cross-cutting and I recall that we struggled a lot to figure out how to handle that… My recollection is that it was determined that Accessiblity was an important enough topic that it deserved to be called out specifically. Not saying that it should (or should not) change, just trying to keep in mind the logic we originally applied.
Agree that Sharing and Collaborating are related, but ultimately distinct competencies.
Accessibility across all competencies seems to make sense - need to consider in code, in design, etc.
Are there other cross-cutting themes that maybe need to be called out alongside the map? Storytelling, Identity, Accessibility, Others? Can we be clear about why they’re themes and not separate competencies?
I have to wonder if it’s context-bound, a bit. For example, I’ve had to merge the WebLit with some external skills/competencies for our context, which has helped to clarify the ‘fit’ for some of these strands. To some degree, we’re each talking about a use-case specific to a slight different implementation context… (is there then a single standard structure for all contexts?)
I think that my preference (right now - after just having this conversation with my team) would be to make designing ‘for’ accessibility a specific bullet under the Design heading so that this piece is there explicitly somewhere and points to the fact that there should be value placed on considering access in design.
My feeling is that for the next version of the Web Literacy Map (v1.1?) separating out ‘Sharing’ and ‘Collaborating’ is relatively uncontroversial. However, I’m keen to gather more feedback on the potential move to a ‘Design’ competency – and making ‘Accessibility’ an explicitly-referenced cross-cutting theme.
Comments? Questions? They’re probably best on this thread of the Webmaker list.