Re: [Bodington-developers] Questionnaire Functionality

[Alexis O'C. <ale...@ou...>]

M Thomas wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> 
> Hope you are all well.
> 
> Could I get your opinion(s) on a piece of functionality that Melandra 
> are working on for Leeds. I've copied the original text from the Library 
> docs, see below:
> 
> Library's current questionnaire work package
> Objective : Provide a mechanism to monitor completion of module feedback 
> questionnaires without infringing anonymous submission.
> 
> Overview
> Allow a deadline to be set after which the owner can view a standard 
> HTML list of all the students that have access to the questionnaire who 
> have not completed it. This list will not be displayed if less than 50% 
> of the students who have record access have not completed it.
> _________
> 
> I understand why this functionality has been requested, but in it's 
> current state I feel that it will not work particularly well.
> 
> I believe the rules, that determine when the function is enabled are to 
> simplistic (see Overview). This could allow tutors to infringe on the 
> anonymous submission.
> 
> I have discussed some possible solutions with Peter Crowther, but I'd 
> appreciate your ideas on the issue.
> 
> -- 
> m.cha3l

After having a quick think about this with Matthew, we came up with the 
following rules of thumb:

- *1* respondent is always a special case; *never* release who did not 
respond.
- until everyone has responded or a deadline is reached, do not release 
the results. (A deadline is required when one or more respondents really 
is knocked over by a bus. You need some kind of termination point to 
release the results!).

I appreciate that the way I've done it at the moment is dumb - :-[ - 
(return respondents >=2 ) but that was just intended as a placeholder(!) 
Clearly that will leak anonymity over time. It'll be good to see what 
other people think.

Alexis