Difference between revisions of "Oversight Board/Deployment Survey 2015"

From Sugar Labs
Jump to: navigation, search
(Introduction)
m (FGrose moved page Oversight Board/Deployment Survey2015 to Oversight Board/Deployment Survey 2015 without leaving a redirect: deCamelCase)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Introduction ==
 
== Introduction ==
  
With the objective of get more information about deployments to help us evaluate alternatives for future developments at SugarLabs, the SLOBs run a
+
With the objective to get more information about deployments to help us evaluate alternatives for future developments at SugarLabs, the SLOBs ran a survey at the beginning of 2015.
survey at the beginning of 2015.
 
  
The questions were send by email, and we received 15 replies, with information about 21 deployments (some respondents are involved in more than one deployment). Then the first conclusion is that we need improve our communication with the deployments, but the results are representative enough. In particular, we couldn’t communicate with some of the biggest deployments.
+
The questions were sent by email, and we received 15 replies, with information about 21 deployments (some respondents are involved in more than one deployment). The first conclusion is that we need to improve our communication with the deployments, but the results are representative enough. In particular, we couldn’t communicate with some of the biggest deployments.
  
The questions we send were:
+
The questions we sent were:
  
 
* Describe the actual population using Sugar in your deployment (number of people, public/private schools, ages, etc.)
 
* Describe the actual population using Sugar in your deployment (number of people, public/private schools, ages, etc.)
Line 19: Line 18:
 
== Results ==
 
== Results ==
  
The replies received are compiled here [File:Deploy_survey_2015_summary-v1.1.pdf]
+
The replies received are compiled here [[File:Deploy_survey_2015_summary-v1.1.pdf]]
  
This is the summary version 1.1, if more replies are received, will be updated.
+
This is the summary version 1.1, if more replies are received, this page will be updated.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
== Older versions ==
 +
 
 +
Version 1.0 [[File:Survey_summary.pdf]]

Latest revision as of 09:37, 4 June 2015

Introduction

With the objective to get more information about deployments to help us evaluate alternatives for future developments at SugarLabs, the SLOBs ran a survey at the beginning of 2015.

The questions were sent by email, and we received 15 replies, with information about 21 deployments (some respondents are involved in more than one deployment). The first conclusion is that we need to improve our communication with the deployments, but the results are representative enough. In particular, we couldn’t communicate with some of the biggest deployments.

The questions we sent were:

  • Describe the actual population using Sugar in your deployment (number of people, public/private schools, ages, etc.)
  • Projections for the next year(s): number of schools (teachers & students), platform (hw&sw)
  • What type of communication do you have with SugarLabs?
  • What is the level of satisfaction with the use of Sugar and activities in your deployment.
  • What are the main issues you find in the use of Sugar and Activities in your deployment.
  • Are other options of hardware/software in use in your deployment right now?
  • What are your plans to the future one/two years, with respect to the use of Sugar?
  • Would you pay for support or services? What type of work would be needed by you?

Results

The replies received are compiled here File:Deploy survey 2015 summary-v1.1.pdf

This is the summary version 1.1, if more replies are received, this page will be updated.


Older versions

Version 1.0 File:Survey summary.pdf