[sakai2-tcc] Lazy consensus proposal on CLE upgrade information survey

[Anthony Whyte]

While I think this survey an ideal instrument for adding an additional question that attempts to gauge how often schools are willing/able to perform upgrades over the course of a year I'm going to hold back from raising an objection in the interests of keeping this initiative moving.

Typos/missing/out-of-date text:

Q4.  "What version of Sakai CLE . . . --> What version of the Sakai CLE . . .
Q4  (as of Jan 2013) -> (as of Feb 2013)  [already noted by JFL]

Cheers,

Anth




On Feb 6, 2013, at 9:40 AM, May, Megan Marie wrote:

> Agreed!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [mailto:sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Francois Leveque
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 4:51 AM
> To: sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> Subject: Re: [sakai2-tcc] Lazy consensus proposal on CLE upgrade information survey
> 
> "as of Jan 2013" could be updated to Feb.
> 
> Otherwise, it looks good.
> 
> J-F
> 
> On 05/02/2013 18:08, Neal Caidin wrote:
>> I guess having a date for the decision to be made wouldn't be a bad thing.
>> 
>> How about lazy consensus decision by Friday, Feb 8, close of business 
>> on Eastern standard time, as the crow flys?
>> 
>> -- Neal
>> 
>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Neal Caidin 
>> <nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org <mailto:nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi TCC,
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure if I'm doing this lazy consensus thing right, but here goes.
>>> 
>>> Survey from last year - http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/38PWRKG
>>> Survey for this year -
>>> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_LINK_
>>> FOR_COLLECTION&sm=k9jAoowiQWlWZBMtA16M6SqcHghw9Q3O30D92kXEwCU%3d
>>> <http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_LINK
>>> _FOR_COLLECTION&sm=k9jAoowiQWlWZBMtA16M6SqcHghw9Q3O30D92kXEwCU%3d>
>>> 
>>> The main question I've been trying to figure out is whether to 
>>> include a question about the frequency of upgrades. It seems like a 
>>> useful piece of information to have. As I was going through the 
>>> process to think about it's inclusion, it occured to me that it would 
>>> be important to know Why an institution chooses to upgrade with a 
>>> particular frequency. It also occured to me that there might not be a 
>>> set frequency that is used for each upgrade and upgrade timing might 
>>> vary based on a number of factors. For these reasons, it seems to me 
>>> like this kind of information might be best gathered by talking with 
>>> the schools directly or some other means.
>>> 
>>> My rationale for deploying the survey as it is written now:
>>> 
>>> * It seems to me to be a short well-defined survey is more likely to 
>>> get a high response rate from the community
>>> * This survey is almost the same as the survey last year, which had a 
>>> good return rate
>>> * If we plan to ping the community on a semi-regular basis, it would 
>>> be good to establish credibility that our surveys are "tight", don't 
>>> take long to answer and add value to the community
>>> * Some of the additional questions raised by the TCC might make sense 
>>> for inclusion on additional surveys or by exploring alternative means 
>>> of gathering the data.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Neal Caidin
>>> 
>>> Sakai CLE Community Coordinator
>>> nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org 
>>> <mailto:nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org>
>>> Skype: nealkdin
>>> AIM: ncaidin at aol.com <mailto:ncaidin at aol.com>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc