<div dir="ltr"><span style="text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">
<div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Thanks for raising this issue! As I have been in the trenches on this, I have lots of thoughts.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">One of the benefits of the way the certificate program is structured is that it works for all course types: professional workshops, short courses and full term/semester courses. This also makes evaluating course materials tricky. It's easy when an organization is known to the QGIS community. However, I think the criteria need to be set up so they work equally well for organizations who might be more geographically distant, or more involved in the educational side and are not well known to the core QGIS community.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">In addition to providing a revenue stream back to the QGIS project I think we all want the resulting certificates to mean something.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">This is how we have been operating so far:</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">We have established that if an organization isn’t one we are familiar with (outside QGIS “trust network”) they need to provide:</span></div><div><ul><li>Course outline/syllabus<br></li><li>Some sample exercises with sample data and lecture/presentation<br></li><li>Link to the course website (if it exists)<br></li></ul></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">I then go through their material and make sure they are representing QGIS accurately, that the materials are up to date (e.g., not based on v2.8), thorough, and generally look to be high quality. There are obviously judgment calls here. Translating materials can also be difficult.</span><br></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">We (Hans, Tim and Andreas) also discussed that having open course-ware, or an online MOOC should be encouraged and would be a positive attribute for a new organization seeking approval.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"> </span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">*snip*</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">* have a proved record of successful QGIS training, over at least 3 years</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">I think this is an good idea although I'm not sure what we would ask for to demonstrate this. # of courses taught? # of students passed?</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">* be an active member of the community, with a documented record in</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">participating to HFs, writing code (as either core or public plugins),</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">writing documentation, translating large parts of interface or</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">documentation, maintaining core infrastructure; simple awareness rising</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">is not sufficient, in my view</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">If this is the case then they likely already fall into the QGIS "trust network" and get approved automatically. This might preclude Universities, who have great programs, from becoming certifying organizations. While I love the sentiment software development and teaching are two different skill sets and most people don't possess both. This criteria would need to include writing text books or open course-ware as a contribution to the project. </span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">* be approved by the corresponding QGIS local user group.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"> </span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">What if there isn't a local QGIS user group? For example, where I live, I feel like a QGIS island in and Esri ocean. I don't have a local QGIS user group, although I would like to start one. It would mostly consist of my ex-students! </span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">*******</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">One last thought...Since this is about education, having qualified instructors is strikes me as important. Currently the initial approval of the organization is the only quality check in the system. Once certified, an organization can add new courses and instructors. Perhaps in the future when an organization adds new teachers we should have them provide a bio or resume and have some criteria for approving them? I realize it would add another layer to manage, but it would be a nice additional quality check in the system going forward. </span><br></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Best,</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Kurt</span></div></span><div><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><p><a name="UNIQUE_ID_SafeHtmlFilter_UNIQUE_ID_SafeHtmlFilter__MailAutoSig"><span style="font-size:10pt">**************************</span></a></p>
<p><span style="font-size:10pt">Kurt Menke, GISP<br></span><span style="font-size:10pt">Bird’s Eye View<br></span><br></p>
<p><br></p></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>