Qualification Dialog Feedback and Refinements

[Brian Lewis]

• Field trMinor appears twice on Qualification Dialog

[Ghislain Hachey]

Can we somehow make it clear the is also for certifications. Maybe

• the tab could be Qualifications/Certifications
• the descriptive text under that tab will have to be changed. Make sure it clearly states this is to manage qualifications and certifications.
• Only a subset of the fields are exposed. Can we have more fields. For example, expiry date for certification is definitely needed. Progress is not showing? Others are not showing too.
• I would have preferred qualifications and certification done in two different modals?! since they both of fairly different input fields. Thoughts?

[Brian Lewis]

Looking at the desktop app, Solomons requirements categorized PreService, InService, Partially Completed, and Professional Development

This is in the field trPRE. values P, I, D Preservice, InService, Professional Development, trComplete distinguishes the Partially completed.

So I propose:

• we introduce values for this field to distinguish between certifications and qualifications. These are tied to the classifiers on lkpTeacherQual.
• the Qualification field changes label and contents depending on this selection.
• Field contents change based on this selection.

Qualification - prompt for:

• Institution
• Major
• Minor
• Duration

Certification: prompt for

• Effective Date
• Expiration Date

Always prompt for

• Complete Y/N
• Comment

If Complete is NO, prompt for

• trProgressPerc

Note this version of the dialog should probably be in the FEDEMIS context folder.

[Ghislain Hachey]

That sounds ok. How much time are we talking about for this?

[Jeremy Kells]

Agree with @ghachey above that this would be best as two separate modal dialogs given the different sets of input fields.

However I suggest we go further, and have two seperate tables, so that the table views do not have several empty, not applicable fields for each item.

Following the current design, this would suggest a separate tab - and this would be the simplest way to do this.

Only downside I see is that there is a lot of wasted vertical space on all these views (tabs), possibly worth consolidating them (more than one table per tab).

[Jeremy Kells]

TeacherTraining.trPre is currently NULL for all rows in FEDEMIS - also I can't see anything constraining it to the 'P', 'I', 'D' values.

@softwords are you suggesting we use 'Q', and 'C' here?

Is there a reason we don't just use lkpTeacherQual.codeCertified?

[Brian Lewis]

However I suggest we go further, and have two separate tables, so that the table views do not have several empty, not applicable fields for each item.

Following the current design, this would suggest a separate tab - and this would be the simplest way to do this.

We'll stick with a single table and single dialog as per the spec above.

However, we'll use the codeGroup of the teacherQual to determine the dialog layout:

ie Prompt first for the year, then qualification code, then you can get the code group like this:

{{vm.model.trQual|lookup:'teacherQuals':'G'}}

To get access to this value, do issue #402 first display this on the form, and then use this expression in ng-show on two separate <div> to display the appropriate set of fields in a single dialog.

Note also that ng-required can take an <expression> as argument, so you can make fields required depending on the Group.

Again, note that this dialog version should go in FEDEMIS tree.

[Jeremy Kells]

Ok will look into it

[Brian Lewis]

feat(Views\fedemis\Teacher\QualificationDialog): Qualification Dialog Refinements

Remove Duplicate trMinor field from dialog Add fields to dialog to support FSM Certifications, and hide not applicable fields from view

Closes #394

→ <<cset d37ebebd6bac>>