[sakai2-tcc] Draft 2 - Re: Preview of Upgrade Survey
Neal Caidin
nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org
Mon Jan 21 12:12:51 PST 2013
Hi All,
I paid $24 for one month of SurveyMonkey so we are not constrained by the number of questions nor the number of responses.
That being said, we should consider how useful this information will be to the TCC for planning and to the community at large, and whether there is any risk by making it more complex, if less folks will fill it out. Just sayin'. It is only 13 questions, so perhaps that is not too onerous, though it started out as 7 questions and we've doubled it in size.
I had difficulty with the question about Contrib tools because I'm guessing that the Contrib tool page is out of date - https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/MGT/Contrib+Projects , so other than the ones Anthony listed, I'm not sure how many of these I should include. Also it seemed to me that some institutions may be piloting contrib tools or stealthing them, or both, so I thought if we asked, it might be good to capture that.
I also made a stab at including the other questions suggested, just to see how it would look and what questions would come up for me. I'm trying to wrap this up. Would the easiest process be for me to take all the input and make a final decision, and send out the survey? Or does the TCC want to take ownership of this in some way and make a final decision on which questions are included, how they are worded and how we might use the data once collected?
I would like to get this out to the community this week and give them a 2 - 3 weeks, with a few reminders, to answer.
Preview mode of the survey:
http://svy.mk/VVN3qi
Cheers,
Neal
On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Neal Caidin <nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org> wrote:
> I just looked up the limitations on SurveyMonkey for the Basic (free) version :
>
> http://www.surveymonkey.com/pricing/upgrade/quickview/?ut_source=header_loggedIn
>
> 10 questions per survey
> 100 responses per survey
>
> That is a bit limiting on both counts, though I tend to think we should keep the survey as short as possible and get the maximum number of responses (up to 100 responses anyway). Is it worth spending $24 to remove those limits on this survey (that would buy us one month use of SurveyMonkey, assuming they allow that)?
>
> I think the in-house vs vendor upgrade question would need to be clearer. Schools may use a number of hybrid approaches.
>
> The Basic LTI question sounds like an interesting one to me too, and may indicate a trend for using LMS's as a hub to connect wth other tools. But not sure how we would use this unless we saw a decline in the use of a particular internal Sakai tool in favor of an external LTI equivalent.
>
> The Contrib tools question seems interesting because it might indicate interest in putting resources behind certain tools for further development and certainly should be of use to the Contrib teams. Would be nice to have a comprehensive list (Confluence?).
>
> The timing thing could be good to know, but then I doubt we could capture the variation of answers and experiences in a multiple choice question. Maybe put in an open-ended comment box.
>
> This is what I meant by scope creep. I'm not saying that it is a bad or wrong thing to do, but I doubt everyone is able to keep up with this email thread in "real time". I was hoping to just tweak what Aaron did and get it out.
>
> Now you are asking me to think. Is that fair, I ask you? Nowhere in my job description does it say anything about thinking.
>
> -- Neal
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Anthony Whyte <arwhyte at umich.edu> wrote:
>
>> Re: additional questions and data use.
>>
>> 1. BasicLTI. I think it would be useful to have a sense of the degree to which the spec has penetrated the community and the kinds of integrations that have been configured.
>>
>> 2. In-house vs vendor upgrade. Who does the work may well influence the pace of local upgrade planning and execution. Then again, perhaps not. Gathering general data on this question could yield interesting insights.
>>
>> Of course, now that I look again at the survey I see we are missing an important question--one that asks about the frequency of upgrades across a given period.
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>> The CLE team is considering instituting shorter release cycles featuring more frequent maintenance releases. How many opportunities do you have to upgrade your CLE installation in a given year?
>> Once a year
>> Twice a year
>> Three times a year
>> Four times a year
>> No limits on the number of upgrades we can perform
>>
>> We should ask this question (in one form or another).
>>
>> 3. Contrib. Always good to know the community's favorite contrib tools. The list I provided is a quick knock-off, it is by no means exhaustive.
>>
>> You should check with Aaron as to whether or not there is a 10 question limit to the survey. If we are limited to the basic plan there is a limit to the number of questions we can ask.
>>
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2013, at 12:19 PM, Neal Caidin wrote:
>>
>>> I think just because there was so much back and forth, I lost track. Hard to keep "requirements traceability" on email threads. That's my excuse. There's always an excuse ;-)
>>>
>>> Do you know how we would use the data collected?
>>>
>>> Is the list of contrib tools complete?
>>>
>>> -- Neal
>>>
>>> On Jan 18, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Anthony Whyte <arwhyte at umich.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I suggested three sets of other questions, two involving contrib tool usage, two involving BasicLTI usage and one asking if an organization's upgrade will be handled in-house or via a vendor.
>>>>
>>>> Any reason why they are not included in the survey? If I had to choose between them I'd prefer to capture data on BasicLTI usage first, vendor assistance second and contrib adoption third.
>>>>
>>>> Anth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> II. Additional suggested questions (not sure if we are limited to 10 questions on the "Basic" plan):
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you add contrib tools to your production installation?
>>>>> Yes
>>>>> No
>>>>> Unsure
>>>>>
>>>>> Please list the contrib tools you utilize.
>>>>> Assignment2
>>>>> BigBlueButton
>>>>> Clog
>>>>> Gradebook2
>>>>> iTunesU
>>>>> JForum
>>>>> Kaltura
>>>>> Melete
>>>>> Mneme
>>>>> Sign up
>>>>> Yaft
>>>>> etc. . . .
>>>>> Other
>>>>>
>>>>> Note. Checkboxes for the options.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you integrated your Sakai CLE installation with any third-party apps utilizing BasicLTI?
>>>>> Yes
>>>>> No
>>>>> Unsure
>>>>>
>>>>> What BasicLTI integrations have you configured?
>>>>>
>>>>> Note. Textbox short answer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you plan to utilize in-house staff or the services of a third-party vendor when performing your next CLE upgrade?
>>>>> We will do it ourselves.
>>>>> A third-party vendor will perform the upgrade.
>>>>> I'd rather not say.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Anth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 18, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Neal Caidin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I hope this link works. It should take you to a preview of the survey.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to everyone for the input, and special thanks to Anth for the wording on a couple of key questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan, I added a question that relates to community connection that may fit well in the survey (uh oh, scope creep!). See what you think.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?PREVIEW_MODE=DO_NOT_USE_THIS_LINK_FOR_COLLECTION&sm=k9jAoowiQWlWZBMtA16M6SqcHghw9Q3O30D92kXEwCU%3d
>>>>>
>>>>> When I get the TCC blessing, I'll send this out next week, probably Tuesday/Wednesday. (That's also the time I figure to announce 2.9.1 plans to the community, by coincidence. I don't think the two messages will get muddled, do you?)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Neal Caidin
>>>>>
>>>>> Sakai CLE Community Coordinator
>>>>> nealcaidin at sakaifoundation.org
>>>>> Skype: nealkdin
>>>>> AIM: ncaidin at aol.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sakai2-tcc mailing list
>>>>> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/attachments/20130121/407ce4d4/attachment.html
More information about the sakai2-tcc
mailing list