Menu
▾
▴
bodington-developers — Mailing list for Bodington developers
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(41) |
May
(353) |
Jun
(133) |
Jul
(534) |
Aug
(401) |
Sep
(219) |
Oct
(86) |
Nov
(144) |
Dec
(61) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 |
Jan
(200) |
Feb
(130) |
Mar
(345) |
Apr
(153) |
May
(247) |
Jun
(338) |
Jul
(222) |
Aug
(70) |
Sep
(39) |
Oct
(27) |
Nov
(76) |
Dec
(30) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(81) |
Feb
(44) |
Mar
(9) |
Apr
|
May
(3) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(34) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(6) |
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(5) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(7) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Colin T. <col...@ou...> - 2006-03-06 15:33:10
|
Jon Maber wrote: > Matthew Buckett wrote: > >> Ok here was the gotcha. The logging from SoftCache only tracks >> PrimaryKey hits/missed so although my stats were looking good it wasn't >> tracking the missed indexkey lookups. I'll add some logging to SoftCache >> so it also tracks the ratio of IndexKey lookups and logs them separately. >> >> The reason I had terrible performance was that I hadn't implemented >> matchesKey in Resource so it was going to the database every time. >> >> > How about a little IndexKey "how to" page from the current expert? We even have a Wiki at bodington.org now ;-) Colin -- ____________________________________ Colin Tatham VLE Team Oxford University Computing Services http://www.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ltg/vle/ http://bodington.org |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 14:33:21
|
Matthew Buckett wrote: >Ok here was the gotcha. The logging from SoftCache only tracks >PrimaryKey hits/missed so although my stats were looking good it wasn't >tracking the missed indexkey lookups. I'll add some logging to SoftCache >so it also tracks the ratio of IndexKey lookups and logs them separately. > >The reason I had terrible performance was that I hadn't implemented >matchesKey in Resource so it was going to the database every time. > > How about a little IndexKey "how to" page from the current expert? |
|
From: Peter C. <Pet...@me...> - 2006-03-06 14:28:07
|
> From: Alistair Young > how cheerful Jon - nice to speak you again ;) Of course,=20 > we'll all end up in the same "facility"... Yeah. Recycling... - Peter |
|
From: Matthew B. <mat...@ou...> - 2006-03-06 14:22:36
|
Matthew Buckett wrote: > Jon Maber wrote: > >>Matthew Buckett wrote: > >>>I'm probably going to take a profiler to it so I can get some proper >>>numbers and ideas about where exactly the problem lies but was wondering >>>if anyone else has any ideas. >>> >>> >>> >> >>First thing would be to see if the delay is in the Java execution or the >>database query. You could just try the various queries in the pgadmin >>query tool and look at execution time and the execution plan. > > > It's all Java as I am running on a database with 30 resources at the > moment and looking at the statistics outputted by the logging in > SoftCache most of the lookups hit the cache. Ok here was the gotcha. The logging from SoftCache only tracks PrimaryKey hits/missed so although my stats were looking good it wasn't tracking the missed indexkey lookups. I'll add some logging to SoftCache so it also tracks the ratio of IndexKey lookups and logs them separately. The reason I had terrible performance was that I hadn't implemented matchesKey in Resource so it was going to the database every time. -- -- Matthew Buckett, VLE Developer -- Learning Technologies Group, Oxford University Computing Services -- Tel: +44 (0)1865 283660 http://www.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ltg/ |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 14:22:21
|
Possibly in one of my previous lives, since he was buried in 1911. Sean Mehan wrote: > This could be read as you having something to do with the death? > > > s |
|
From: Sean M. <se...@sm...> - 2006-03-06 14:18:12
|
This could be read as you having something to do with the death? s On 6 Mar 2006, at 14:08, Jon Maber wrote: > Perhaps we should change the recycling building to the graveyard > and then the ghost of Sir Nathan can live in it and.... (somebody > stop me!) > > Readers may be interested that Nathan is a about 5 minutes walk > from my house and I can act as a guide for anyone who would like to > visit him. > > Alistair Young wrote: > >> how cheerful Jon - nice to speak you again ;) Of course, we'll all >> end up >> in the same "facility"... >> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting > language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the > live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding > territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel? > cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 14:08:39
|
Perhaps we should change the recycling building to the graveyard and then the ghost of Sir Nathan can live in it and.... (somebody stop me!) Readers may be interested that Nathan is a about 5 minutes walk from my house and I can act as a guide for anyone who would like to visit him. Alistair Young wrote: >how cheerful Jon - nice to speak you again ;) Of course, we'll all end up >in the same "facility"... > > > |
|
From: Alistair Y. <ali...@sm...> - 2006-03-06 14:03:45
|
how cheerful Jon - nice to speak you again ;) Of course, we'll all end up in the same "facility"... --=20 Alistair Young Senior Software Engineer UHI@Sabhal M=F2r Ostaig Isle of Skye Scotland > Of course all good Bodington coders will follow sir Nathan > eventually....... > > > |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 14:00:55
|
Of course all good Bodington coders will follow sir Nathan eventually....... |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 13:49:29
|
Brian Peter Clark wrote: >This is all part of my lifelong mission to speak out against and fight the misuse >and abuse of authority wherever I find it. > > I'm in favour of your mission and I hope you keep it up. However, personally I think we would make better use of our powers of persuasion if we know the motivation behind wanting to implement compulsory anonymous questionnaires. The best option for changing it is to suggest an alternative, but we can't do that unless we know where the idea is coming from. I can speculate - probably the main thing the GMC want is to make it compulsory for medical schools to give their students course satisfaction questionnaires so they can complain if the course is crap. Then someone suggested that the medical schools might rig the questionnaire to stop the students from using it (like not tell them there is one). (Much like the joke in Hitchhikers about the planning proposals being in the cellar of the council offices etc. etc.) So to counter this the GMC decides to require not only that a questionnaire is offered to the students but that they must fill it in, working on the theory that the only guaranteed accessible and well advertised questionnaire is one with a 100% completion rate. If this is the origin of the regulation then I would suggest to the GMC that they change the rule so that the medical schools must tell them the number of students who responded and if it is pityfully small grill the medical school on how they admnistered the questionnaire. Better still - get the GMC to set up an on-line questionnaire on their own web site and advertise its availability to the students nationwide so the course satisfaction information goes direct to the GMC. Question 1) did your medical school provide adequate opportunities to comment on the quality of your course? Some student might even volunteer not to be anonymous so they can be asked to participate in further discussions etc. if they know the questionnaire isn't be run by their own school they might be more forthcoming. So, yes I'd like to say 'i'm aggin it' but I'd also like to be able to supply a good alternative too. Jon |
|
From: Peter C. <Pet...@me...> - 2006-03-06 13:02:12
|
> From: Brian Peter Clark [...] > Ultimately, in this case, the specs are reasonably clear, but not=20 > very good. The 50% rule is too wishy washy.=20 What would you prefer? - Peter |
|
From: Brian P. C. <bm...@bm...> - 2006-03-06 12:47:23
|
> Brian, > I suspect that your righteous anger is coming over a bit more > agressively than you intend. Can we find out what is behind this before > you let rip on behalf of the poor students? No, Jon, my mother was not frightened by a compulsory questionnaire when I lay in her womb. Vehemence, but no aggression lies in my breast. This is all part of my lifelong mission to speak out against and fight the misuse and abuse of authority wherever I find it. > Paul, > I'm interested (genuinely!) in how the GMC regulations work. Perhaps, as > Brian thinks the GMC have come up with a silly regulation - but I think > we need to give them the benefit of the doubt. (And if the regulation is > silly it still has to be complied with until they change it.) In my experience, the practice of compulsory anonymous questionnaires is not very common in this country, and I think for good reasons: one of which Jon mentions below - force a student to do something that he or she doesn't want to and you are likely to get lots of Mickey Mouses, all As, all Cs or all Es as a reply. I'm not fully apprised of the facts, but I'm absolutely amazed that the GMC has demanded compulsory anonymous feedback questionnaires (if this indeed is what we are talking about here.) It demands compulsory questionnaires from the Medical Schools themselves, but...stop, even boring myself to tears here. > > I have often been asked to add functionality to Bodington code which I > have considered to be unethical, impractical or silly and it's important > to put the functionality on one side and ask questions about what the > client really wants to acheive. There are two good ways out of this - > a) I realise that they where right, b) we come up with different > functionality that acheives the same goal. > > Sometimes some functionality is genuinely needed but can be misused. > This is the trickiest situation but it isn't down to the programmers - > it's down to the people who shape policy in the university/college. So, > for example at Leeds I was extremely concerned about the use of > uninvigilated on-line MCQs for formal assessment but there wasn't > anything I could do in the software other than right guidance notes in > the help file - it's up to the various examinations committees to regulate. > > Similarly, the issue of badgering students to fill in questionnaires is > less to do with the software development and more a matter for > institutional decision making. In some circumstances it may be necessary > to badger certain groups of students and in the normal run of things the > realisation that it will put the students in a very negative frame of > mind while they give their opinions on the questionnaire will lead to > anti-badgering policy. > > Having said all this, personally I would only use on-line course > satisfaction quesionnaires in certain circumstances if a) the class size > is so big that I don't care if only 50% fill it in or b) the class is > small and I've asked them how they would prefer to respond and they have > opted for on-line. In other cases I would hand out a paper questionnaire > and an optically marked card for the multiple choice element. I'd do > that in a lecture and allow 30 minutes for them to fill it in. In this > situation, if the student doesn't complete the questionnaire it's > because they don't want to, not because they forgot and need badgering. So... your class contact time is illegally set at 33 hours this week, and has been averaging around 27 for the past 10 weeks. You're about 5 hours behind in your syllabus and have been feverishly preparing handouts for the last 2 weeks to cover one of the topics that is in an exam question. You're knackered and can't wait until the Christmas break. The final official act before the marking onslaught to come is to get your questionnaires done. Devise several ways to deliver a questionnaire? Give the wee darlings a choice? Put aside 30 minutes? Here's the URL, chaps! Students don't deserve to be badgered (even medical students), but there's no need to pamper them. One advantage of the automated approach is that all students are treated equally (a Good Principle). If it was left to me as a module leader, I'd be off to the pub, whereas others might badger vigorously. Ultimately, in this case, the specs are reasonably clear, but not very good. The 50% rule is too wishy washy. Regards, Brian > > Jon > > > BRIAN CLARK wrote: > > >Oho! Now we've got interfering busybodies... My hat, the salt and pepper are still safely stowed away... > > > > Brian > > > >Paul Davis <pau...@ou...> wrote: > > We're talking General Medical Council regulations here > >Paul > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Brian Peter Clark" > >To: > >Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:38 PM > >Subject: RE: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality > > > > > > > > > >>> > >>> > >>>>One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire > >>>> > >>>> > >is > > > > > >>>so > >>> > >>> > >>>>that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you > >>>> > >>>> > >only > > > > > >>>>know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date > >>>> > >>>> > >this > > > > > >>>>destroys the logic of the functionality!!! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to > >>>badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a > >>>questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. > >>>You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit > >>>declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a > >>>percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no > >>>badgers. > >>> > >>>No Brian, you miss the point > >>> > >>> > >>I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be > >>badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the > >>student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. > >> > >>Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin > >>regulation in the first place. > >> > >>Regards, > >> > >>Brian > >> > >> > >>>This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the > >>>form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod > >>>can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students > >>> > >>> > >aren't > > > > > >>>compelled to fill in. > >>>Paul > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>------------------------------------------------------- > >>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting > >>> > >>> > >language > > > > > >>>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live > >>> > >>> > >webcast > > > > > >>>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding > >>> > >>> > >territory! > > > > > >>>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Bodington-developers mailing list > >>>Bod...@li... > >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >>------------------------------------------------------- > >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting > >> > >> > >language > > > > > >>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live > >> > >> > >webcast > > > > > >>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding > >> > >> > >territory! > > > > > >>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Bodington-developers mailing list > >>Bod...@li... > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- > >This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > >that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > >and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > >_______________________________________________ > >Bodington-developers mailing list > >Bod...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 10:59:06
|
If you can't afford the Air-fare you could try visiting the village of Bodington, near Cheltenham. Photos attached. Jon (O.K. I lie, it's spelled Boddington) Andrew Booth wrote: >If Bodington is driving you mad, there is a Bodington site you should visit. > >Have a look at http://www.bodington.org.au/ > >Aggie > >____________________________________________ > >Andrew G Booth >Professor of On-Line Learning >and Associate Professor of Biochemistry >Garstang Building >Faculty of Biological Sciences >University of Leeds >Leeds LS2 9JT >U.K. >Tel: +44-113-343-3142 Fax: +44-113-343-3167 >email: a.g...@le... >personal email should be sent to: > an...@ag... >____________________________________________ > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >_______________________________________________ >Bodington-developers mailing list >Bod...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-06 10:46:05
|
Brian, I suspect that your righteous anger is coming over a bit more agressively than you intend. Can we find out what is behind this before you let rip on behalf of the poor students? Paul, I'm interested (genuinely!) in how the GMC regulations work. Perhaps, as Brian thinks the GMC have come up with a silly regulation - but I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt. (And if the regulation is silly it still has to be complied with until they change it.) I have often been asked to add functionality to Bodington code which I have considered to be unethical, impractical or silly and it's important to put the functionality on one side and ask questions about what the client really wants to acheive. There are two good ways out of this - a) I realise that they where right, b) we come up with different functionality that acheives the same goal. Sometimes some functionality is genuinely needed but can be misused. This is the trickiest situation but it isn't down to the programmers - it's down to the people who shape policy in the university/college. So, for example at Leeds I was extremely concerned about the use of uninvigilated on-line MCQs for formal assessment but there wasn't anything I could do in the software other than right guidance notes in the help file - it's up to the various examinations committees to regulate. Similarly, the issue of badgering students to fill in questionnaires is less to do with the software development and more a matter for institutional decision making. In some circumstances it may be necessary to badger certain groups of students and in the normal run of things the realisation that it will put the students in a very negative frame of mind while they give their opinions on the questionnaire will lead to anti-badgering policy. Having said all this, personally I would only use on-line course satisfaction quesionnaires in certain circumstances if a) the class size is so big that I don't care if only 50% fill it in or b) the class is small and I've asked them how they would prefer to respond and they have opted for on-line. In other cases I would hand out a paper questionnaire and an optically marked card for the multiple choice element. I'd do that in a lecture and allow 30 minutes for them to fill it in. In this situation, if the student doesn't complete the questionnaire it's because they don't want to, not because they forgot and need badgering. Jon BRIAN CLARK wrote: >Oho! Now we've got interfering busybodies... My hat, the salt and pepper are still safely stowed away... > > Brian > >Paul Davis <pau...@ou...> wrote: > We're talking General Medical Council regulations here >Paul >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Brian Peter Clark" >To: >Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:38 PM >Subject: RE: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality > > > > >>> >>> >>>>One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire >>>> >>>> >is > > >>>so >>> >>> >>>>that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you >>>> >>>> >only > > >>>>know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date >>>> >>>> >this > > >>>>destroys the logic of the functionality!!! >>>> >>>> >>>I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to >>>badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a >>>questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. >>>You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit >>>declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a >>>percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no >>>badgers. >>> >>>No Brian, you miss the point >>> >>> >>I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be >>badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the >>student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. >> >>Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin >>regulation in the first place. >> >>Regards, >> >>Brian >> >> >>>This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the >>>form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod >>>can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students >>> >>> >aren't > > >>>compelled to fill in. >>>Paul >>> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------- >>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting >>> >>> >language > > >>>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live >>> >>> >webcast > > >>>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding >>> >>> >territory! > > >>>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Bodington-developers mailing list >>>Bod...@li... >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------- >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting >> >> >language > > >>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live >> >> >webcast > > >>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding >> >> >territory! > > >>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >>_______________________________________________ >>Bodington-developers mailing list >>Bod...@li... >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers >> >> >> >> > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >_______________________________________________ >Bodington-developers mailing list >Bod...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > |
|
From: BRIAN C. <bri...@bt...> - 2006-03-06 04:14:35
|
Oho! Now we've got interfering busybodies... My hat, the salt and pepper are still safely stowed away... Brian Paul Davis <pau...@ou...> wrote: We're talking General Medical Council regulations here Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Peter Clark" To: Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:38 PM Subject: RE: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality > > > > > > > One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is > > so > > > that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only > > > know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this > > > destroys the logic of the functionality!!! > > > > I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to > > badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a > > questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. > > You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit > > declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a > > percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no > > badgers. > > > > No Brian, you miss the point > > I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be > badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the > student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. > > Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin > regulation in the first place. > > Regards, > > Brian > > This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the > > form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod > > can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't > > compelled to fill in. > > Paul > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > > _______________________________________________ > > Bodington-developers mailing list > > Bod...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bodington-developers mailing list Bod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers |
|
From: Paul D. <pau...@ou...> - 2006-03-05 11:24:08
|
We're talking General Medical Council regulations here Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Peter Clark" <bm...@bm...> To: <bod...@li...> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:38 PM Subject: RE: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality > > > > > > > One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is > > so > > > that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only > > > know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this > > > destroys the logic of the functionality!!! > > > > I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to > > badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a > > questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. > > You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit > > declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a > > percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no > > badgers. > > > > No Brian, you miss the point > > I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be > badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the > student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. > > Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin > regulation in the first place. > > Regards, > > Brian > > This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the > > form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod > > can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't > > compelled to fill in. > > Paul > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > > _______________________________________________ > > Bodington-developers mailing list > > Bod...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > |
|
From: Andrew B. <a.g...@le...> - 2006-03-04 14:13:04
|
If Bodington is driving you mad, there is a Bodington site you should visit. Have a look at http://www.bodington.org.au/ Aggie ____________________________________________ Andrew G Booth Professor of On-Line Learning and Associate Professor of Biochemistry Garstang Building Faculty of Biological Sciences University of Leeds Leeds LS2 9JT U.K. Tel: +44-113-343-3142 Fax: +44-113-343-3167 email: a.g...@le... personal email should be sent to: an...@ag... ____________________________________________ |
|
From: BRIAN C. <bri...@bt...> - 2006-03-04 11:32:43
|
A solution that would mimimise the height of the hackles on the back of the neck of a person such as I would be automated electronic badgering. It's clear that there has to be some sort of deadline, even if it is ultimately related to graduation day, in the same way that you don't get your degree if you haven't paid your library fines. Like Jon, I'd be interested to see the content of these compulsory questionnaires. I'd also like to see someone getting failed on a module or being prevented from proceeding due to failure to submit an answer to questions like, "Did you find the library staff helpful...." A university really only has one sanction - you don't pass - so you've got to watch about making anything compulsory. In the normal course of events the deadline would be a week or so before the meeting of the committee that is charged with monitoring the results. The owner of the questionnaire can get percentage completion figures at any time and even interim results. Meanwhile, one week (or whatever) to the deadline, the software sends out a polite email/sms reminder. This is an automatically generated message blah, blah .. This is a reminder that.... You are also reminded that the completion of this .... is mandatory (pe-tuh!)... 24 hours to the deadline an email with slightly stronger wording is sent out. A record of the emails sent would be kept in a secure place. When the deadline passes, the students lose their rights of anonymity due to the need for sanctions and the potential application of a visual diff on results before and after the deadline - I don't go so far as to suggest that the software should automatically debag someone. Or.... the computer could arrange a confidential meeting between a student who has missed the deadline and a holy person such as a minister, priest, rabbi or immam and the sinner would answer questions verbally. The holy person would then.... No, I think I'm getting a bit fanciful now. If a student hasn't got an email account then TT for him or her. I don't know the provenance of all this, but a pound to a penny I bet it's some quality committee somewhere that can only think of quality assurance in terms of paper trails. What if no-one fills in our questionnaire? Gasp!! What if no-one comes to the party? We'll lose a point in the next QAA inspection. Can't have that - make them compulsory! Petty gauleiters, as Jack Maclean in the Glasgow Herald would say. In this respect, I might be wrong... It might be a Health and Safety issue! In which case I might have to retract all I've said. The students' anonymity about reading a COSHH assessment must be protected at all costs, of course. Or perhaps their dietary requirements at the graduation reception? Brian Selwyn Lloyd <sel...@ph...> wrote: This might be slightly off the wall... So I will keep it simple. calling on experience of a similar scenario where users were required to fill in a form I believe you can keep the anonymous aspect of a mandatory form process and enforce compliance what we did was stop access to a given piece of an application until the mandatory form had been completed, only the user knew if they still had access and soon got access after completing the form required. We explained to the user that they must fill in the form or they could no longer do X I think this maps well to your requirement as you can be granular and choose what they cannot access any further... I think it maps well to a course of modules which need to be done sequentially. Your could make it time and % based, but if it really is mandatory then you can make it so... All the questionaire monitor needs to know at anyoone point is percentages... of course it may become quite embarrasing an apparant if a student cannot continue to do their work. You may want to add some bells and whistles such as informing the student that they must complete the questionaire and while the system knows they haven't done so yet, the other party does not, nevertheless they cannot continue using X until they have completed the questionaire... Well its a fine day today and why I'm looking at this... who knows Have a good weekend Cheers Sel Brian Peter Clark wrote: >> >> >>>One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is >>> >>> >>so >> >> >>>that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only >>>know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this >>>destroys the logic of the functionality!!! >>> >>> >>I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to >>badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a >>questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. >>You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit >>declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a >>percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no >>badgers. >> >>No Brian, you miss the point >> >> > >I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be >badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the >student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. > >Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin >regulation in the first place. > >Regards, > >Brian > > >>This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the >>form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod >>can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't >>compelled to fill in. >>Paul >> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------- >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >>_______________________________________________ >>Bodington-developers mailing list >>Bod...@li... >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers >> >> >> > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >_______________________________________________ >Bodington-developers mailing list >Bod...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bodington-developers mailing list Bod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers |
|
From: Selwyn L. <sel...@ph...> - 2006-03-04 10:05:32
|
This might be slightly off the wall... So I will keep it simple. calling on experience of a similar scenario where users were required to fill in a form I believe you can keep the anonymous aspect of a mandatory form process and enforce compliance what we did was stop access to a given piece of an application until the mandatory form had been completed, only the user knew if they still had access and soon got access after completing the form required. We explained to the user that they must fill in the form or they could no longer do X I think this maps well to your requirement as you can be granular and choose what they cannot access any further... I think it maps well to a course of modules which need to be done sequentially. Your could make it time and % based, but if it really is mandatory then you can make it so... All the questionaire monitor needs to know at anyoone point is percentages... of course it may become quite embarrasing an apparant if a student cannot continue to do their work. You may want to add some bells and whistles such as informing the student that they must complete the questionaire and while the system knows they haven't done so yet, the other party does not, nevertheless they cannot continue using X until they have completed the questionaire... Well its a fine day today and why I'm looking at this... who knows Have a good weekend Cheers Sel Brian Peter Clark wrote: >> >> >>>One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is >>> >>> >>so >> >> >>>that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only >>>know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this >>>destroys the logic of the functionality!!! >>> >>> >>I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to >>badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a >>questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. >>You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit >>declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a >>percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no >>badgers. >> >>No Brian, you miss the point >> >> > >I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be >badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the >student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. > >Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin >regulation in the first place. > >Regards, > >Brian > > >>This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the >>form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod >>can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't >>compelled to fill in. >>Paul >> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------- >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >>_______________________________________________ >>Bodington-developers mailing list >>Bod...@li... >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers >> >> >> > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language >that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast >and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 >_______________________________________________ >Bodington-developers mailing list >Bod...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-03 17:43:48
|
Paul Davis wrote: > No Brian, you miss the point > >This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the >form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod >can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't >compelled to fill in. >Paul > > Can you tell us about the kind of questionnaire you have in mind? I can think of non-anonymous questionnaires that a student would be required to fill in but I'm having trouble thinking of an anonymous one. Jon |
|
From: Brian P. C. <bm...@bm...> - 2006-03-03 17:43:46
|
> > > > One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is > so > > that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only > > know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this > > destroys the logic of the functionality!!! > > I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to > badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a > questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. > You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit > declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a > percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no > badgers. > > No Brian, you miss the point I don't think I miss the point - the right of a student not to be badgered. If, indeed, the questionnaire is obligatory, then the student still has the right not to fill it in and accept the sanctions. Now there is another point about who made up the blinkin regulation in the first place. Regards, Brian > This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the > form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod > can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't > compelled to fill in. > Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > |
|
From: Paul D. <pau...@ou...> - 2006-03-03 17:37:56
|
> One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is so > that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only > know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this > destroys the logic of the functionality!!! I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no badgers. No Brian, you miss the point This functionality is being devised because students HAVE to fill in the form in order to comply with regulations. With current functionality Bod can't be used. We have other types of Questionnaire which students aren't compelled to fill in. Paul |
|
From: Brian P. C. <bm...@bm...> - 2006-03-03 17:20:07
|
> One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is so > that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only > know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this > destroys the logic of the functionality!!! I was a student once and I spit on any help given to a university to badger students. A student should have the right not to fill in a questionnaire and not to be sought out and badgered for doing so. You might even make it clear that an abstention is a tacit declaration of contentedness. The course owner can get a percentage figure any time but no names, no pack drills, and no badgers. This fulfils the objective given: the progress is being monitored with no infringement of anonymity Mass badgering remains an option. Regards, Brian. > > If this is seen as important (which I think it is) I'd vote that results > can't be seen until the cutoff, but that who has filled in can be seen at > any time > > Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Dr Paul V Davis > Acting Head, Learning Technologies Group > Project Manager, WebLearn ( Oxford's version of Bodington.org) > Oxford University Computing Services > 13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN > Tel: 01865 283414 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: bod...@li... > [mailto:bod...@li...] On Behalf Of > Alexis O'Connor > Sent: 03 March 2006 16:46 > To: bod...@li... > Subject: Re: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality > > Jon Maber wrote: > > A difficulty is that if you use the functionality frequently enough > > either one or zero names will be dropped from the list compared to > > previous time. All changes to the results can then be attributed to that > > person. The 'less than 50%' restriction protects the anonymity of the > > first 50% of users but not the last 50%. > > > > The answer is (I think) to allow access to the tool at any time but when > > it's run the first thing to do is choose a date. The tool will list > > users who hadn't yet completed the questionnaire at midnight on that > > date. The date is chosen so that if the command was run at some unknown > > point in the past either the same list will be returned as was returned > > then or a list with at least N more names. The user will be told the > > date when the list is output and will be told the number (but not names) > > of people on the list who have now completed the questionnaire. > > > > Jon > > > > Hmmm... prehaps my original post wasn't clear enough ;-). > > I was also saying a cut-off date was required. Up until this date is > reached, the results can not be retrieved in any way, not via the > summary tool, nor CSV file, etc. As respondents submit a response, their > name drops off the non-respondent list. Once all the respondents have > replied or the deadline is reached (what ever comes first) the resource > owner can then get the results. As they have received the results all at > once, they do not have a clear way or attributing an individual result > with an individual user. Anonymity has not been leaked over time as it > would be if the results *and* non-respondents list were both available > prior to everyone having responded or the deadline being reached. (The > deadline is required because there can be perfectly legitimate reasons > for not everyone having responded). > > Alexis > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Bodington-developers mailing list > Bod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers > |
|
From: Jon M. <jo...@te...> - 2006-03-03 16:58:03
|
Alexis O'Connor wrote: > Hmmm... prehaps my original post wasn't clear enough ;-). Or perhaps I didn't read it. ;-) |
|
From: Paul D. <pau...@ou...> - 2006-03-03 16:57:26
|
One of the main points of knowing who hasn't filled in a Questionnaire is so that they can be targeted for badgering to go away and do so. If you only know who hasn't filled in the Questionnaire after the closing date this destroys the logic of the functionality!!! If this is seen as important (which I think it is) I'd vote that results can't be seen until the cutoff, but that who has filled in can be seen at any time Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Paul V Davis Acting Head, Learning Technologies Group Project Manager, WebLearn ( Oxford's version of Bodington.org) Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN Tel: 01865 283414 -----Original Message----- From: bod...@li... [mailto:bod...@li...] On Behalf Of Alexis O'Connor Sent: 03 March 2006 16:46 To: bod...@li... Subject: Re: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality Jon Maber wrote: > A difficulty is that if you use the functionality frequently enough > either one or zero names will be dropped from the list compared to > previous time. All changes to the results can then be attributed to that > person. The 'less than 50%' restriction protects the anonymity of the > first 50% of users but not the last 50%. > > The answer is (I think) to allow access to the tool at any time but when > it's run the first thing to do is choose a date. The tool will list > users who hadn't yet completed the questionnaire at midnight on that > date. The date is chosen so that if the command was run at some unknown > point in the past either the same list will be returned as was returned > then or a list with at least N more names. The user will be told the > date when the list is output and will be told the number (but not names) > of people on the list who have now completed the questionnaire. > > Jon > Hmmm... prehaps my original post wasn't clear enough ;-). I was also saying a cut-off date was required. Up until this date is reached, the results can not be retrieved in any way, not via the summary tool, nor CSV file, etc. As respondents submit a response, their name drops off the non-respondent list. Once all the respondents have replied or the deadline is reached (what ever comes first) the resource owner can then get the results. As they have received the results all at once, they do not have a clear way or attributing an individual result with an individual user. Anonymity has not been leaked over time as it would be if the results *and* non-respondents list were both available prior to everyone having responded or the deadline being reached. (The deadline is required because there can be perfectly legitimate reasons for not everyone having responded). Alexis ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bodington-developers mailing list Bod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bodington-developers |
19 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
