cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Who rated this idea

0 Kudos
(2)

If a teacher tries to publish an unpublished module that has a previous module as its prerequisite and no modules after it, the "Requirements Changed" warning appears and states:

"You have changed the progression requirements for an active course. There may be students who have already progressed to this module and to others that depend on it. Would you like to let students continue in the course or do you want to re-lock these modules until the new requirements are completed?"

This doesn't make sense in this particular scenario, and the language also has a general issue. The two confusing points are:

1) In the case of an unpublished module with no subsequent modules using it as a prerequisite, it is not possible that "students ... have already progressed to this module." Students cannot have progressed to a module that has never been published. So the message's language is misleading.
2) The second sentence says "do you want to re-lock these modules" without specifying what "these" refers to. This has caused some confusion for our faculty that would be resolved by a simple edit to specify that the previous modules will be re-locked.
 
Can this language please be clarified or the warning disabled in this specific case? I know it's supposed to be a standard warning, but it doesn't apply to every case and its language needs revision.
Who rated this idea