Hi,
I'm female and am not an active code4lib participant. I'm subscribed
to the code4lib listserv and don't religiously read the discussion but
do scan them every so often in case something in my area comes up. I
didn't take the survey because I didn't think it was aimed at me.
However, I
Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results!
While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among
Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw
the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the
Ross,
I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but
according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the
survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I
put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population
size
Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but...
Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the
assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample.
If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely
is this to
Right, what I'm saying is that this survey is subject to response bias
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_bias - It also occurs in situations of
voluntary response, such as phone-in polls, where the people who care enough to
call are not necessarily a statistically representative sample of
delurking from all the gender-related threads
That was my understanding as well.
I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the
document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks
who may not be familiar with the existence of such biases.
] Gender Survey Summary and Results
delurking from all the gender-related threads
That was my understanding as well.
I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the
document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks
who may not be familiar
PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
delurking from all the gender-related threads
That was my understanding as well.
I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the
document, such as response and selection
I'd been staying out of this discussion, but the thought occurs to me that
someone with access to the list of subscribers might run that against a list of
traditional boy/girl names, and be able to make some guesses….
On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Hmm, it's quite
Which, if I read you right, Ross, is you're saying the results were
overly optimistic in terms of % of women on c4l list. I, too, thought it
sounded higher than I would have expected. I looked to see if the
subscriber list is available, but couldn't find it. That would have its
own problems,
of Becky Yoose
[b.yo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:39 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
delurking from all the gender-related threads
That was my understanding as well.
I would at least like to see
I filled out the form and submitted my answers (male, not part of the
community) before seeing I can call myself part of the community
according to Ross's example Are you part of the community questions.
But that's just me :)
On 5-12-2012 20:56, Bohyun Kim wrote:
I just want to say BIG
i think ross only brought up this point to see if i could still maintain
the pretty formatting in addition to adding something extra to the summary.
well ross challenge accepted and met. so :P
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Rosalyn for
Sara Amato sam...@willamette.edu
On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but...
Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on
the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering
On 06/12/12 09:05, Sara Amato wrote:
I'd been staying out of this discussion, but the thought occurs to me that
someone with access to the list of subscribers might run that against a list of
traditional boy/girl names, and be able to make some guesses….
That idea runs into problems both
So rather than focusing on statistics and math, I'd like to steer the
conversation in a different direction. Let's say Ross is right and more
women chose to take the survey based on the topic -- maybe that's a way to
get women involved in Code4Lib.
Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib
[mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Bohyun
Kim
Sent: Thursday, 6 December 2012 8:56 a.m.
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I just want to say BIG thanks to Rosalyn for running this survey and putting
together the summary for all of us
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote:
Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can
be a place to start.
I understand the motivation to create a safe space for women, but
please let's not do this. Separate but equal has never
I second this, in its entirety.
Michele
-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Roy
Tennant
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 4:35 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
On Wed, Dec 5
I think a coed group would be great. It might be nice to have a separate IRC
channel for testing things out where people wouldn't have to worry about
bothering people or looking foolish.
I think an intro to IRC and quick rundown of all the zoia commands would be a
great thing to do in the
I'm fine with naming it code4lib-learning or whatever. It must be clear
that it is an area for testing, hanging out, learning (we could even
schedule learning times to meet there -- following Esme's suggestion of
having a time at Chicago, and could include folks who aren't at c4l13).
And, as
And it's not like there is some limitation to the number of rooms you
can hang out in. Someone could hang out in #code4lib and
#code4lib-something-else just as easily (perhaps participating in
different ways in the different spaces). I wouldn't see a second room
as pulling away participants from
22 matches
Mail list logo
