Elevator evaluation

Some numbers 26 Ideas 2300 votes230,000page views 650 from supporting 3500 300 notes visitors mentions on twitter 160 80 emails comments All for 30k.....

The ideasdeas submitted by 22 different institutions What were the ideas about? 24% 76% research interoperability FE HE Three Quarters of the ideas submitted reached their voting target information management teaching

The ideas What were the How much money were dominant themes? people asking for?badges III FundingAugmented reality II 2.5kTeaching using games IIII IIII 5kDigital literacy IIIIMobile devices IIII IIII 10kSocial media III 0 5 10 15visualisation IIII No. of Ideas I

The votesPeople from 234 Which institutions cast the most votes? institutions 1 Oxford University 125 voted 2 Nottingham University 111 3 Edinburgh University 108 4 Hertfordshire University 104 5 Southampton University 85 96% 6 City University 69of votes were 7 Reid Kerr College 68 unique 8 Leeds University 53 9 Carnegie College 49 10 Bath Spa University 48 4 most votes by All of these institutions had one person ideas on the elevator....

What could we do differently? Voting Submitting ideasSet the targets a bit higher as Find a way to permit a widerthey were a little too easy to range of people submit ideasreach Allow projects more leewayLet a wider range of people vote about when they runThink about whether we get Make it clearer that FEC is notpeople to register before they required for budgetsvote Promote more to studentsMake role of supporting notesclearerClarify what we can do withvoting data

To do listVoting AdminAllow votes to exceed target Add area for markersVisualise how many institutions Revamp access management andhave voted identificationShow vote targets in public Consider releasing locallyinterface installable version of elevator for institutions to useIdeas Develop admin interface toShow countdown clock to close allow editing of contentdate Automate twitter accountAllow sorting of ideas bypopularity Add general discussion forumMore space for commentsAllow authors to edit ideas oncesubmitted

Things for JISC to think aboutWe need to move it to a new hosting service. Preferably a cloudprovider with elastic capacityWe need to think about how we administer the site and who does itWe need to think about whether we can allocate funding in moreflexible waysDo we want regular open calls on the site as well as targetedcalls?We need to think about how we manage multiple calls at once on thesiteWe need text to link this to our strategyWe need to revisit the terms and conditions

http://www.jisc.ac.uk	565
http://feeds.feedburner.com	160
http://www.newsblur.com	2

Elevator evaluation

by andymcg on May 14, 2012

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

3 Embeds 727

Statistics

Elevator evaluation Presentation Transcript