On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Walter Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Sameer Verma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Sameer thanks for making the spreadsheet world editable >>> By the way how are you defining the following terms:- >>> >>> Stability >>> Performance >>> Child Utility >>> Technical Utility >>> Grown-up utility >>> Lines of code >> >> >> I'm not. I just pulled out a few items that came to me. Ideally, the >> Sugar team should be making this list. >> >> >>> >>> Good definitions of these terms noted in the spreadsheet will reduce >>> ambiguity. >> >> Agreed. Like a good data dictionary. >> >> Sameer >> -- >> Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. >> Associate Professor of Information Systems >> San Francisco State University >> San Francisco CA 94132 USA >> http://verma.sfsu.edu/ >> http://opensource.sfsu.edu/ >> >> >>> Nothing like ambiguity to cause misunderstanding. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 21, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 21, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Sameer Verma wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Seth Woodworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Walter Bender >>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In fact, there is a great deal of data from the field in the form of >>>>>>>> the activity packs that Peru, Uruguay, et al. developed. These >>>>>>>> collections have been vetted and tested extensively and have a >>>>>>>> built-in community of support. They are learning-centric collections, >>>>>>>> but presumably, those G1G1 purchasers who are interested in other >>>>>>>> pursuits will run Fedora/GNOME or XP. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -walter >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not convinced that they are well-tested. They included News >>>>>>> Reader, >>>>>>> which hasn't worked for the last several releases. That doesn't >>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> me that their activities went through any kind of extensive testing >>>>>>> before >>>>>>> deployment. They have since been tested in the field by children. I >>>>>>> *haven't* seen much feedback from kids yet. At least not from South >>>>>>> American and not any broad spectrum. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ---Seth >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In an attempt to make the decision-making process more unbiased (or at >>>>>> least more multi-criteria) I've put up a basic spreadsheet for a >>>>>> scoring matrix at >>>>>> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=p_Xhb6KcXLyEViA50CnCaDg&hl=en >>>>> >>>>> Well I logged in to google docs, but I cannot edit this spreadsheet. I >>>>> wanted to add Chat to the matrix as this activity is an extremely useful >>>>> communication tool for both children and adults. I know G1G1 users that >>>>> spend at least 80% of their XO usage with Chat and they have reported to >>>>> me >>>>> that they have observed children having a wonderful time using Chat to >>>>> communicate with their friends even when their friends were in the same >>>>> room. >>>> >>>> I've made it world-editable. Alternatively, you can download the >>>> spreadsheet and play with it in Excel or OpenOffice. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Gmail activity seems redundant as Gmail is reachable from Browse. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, but it exists. Feel free to add as many activities as needed. >>>> >>>> Sameer >>>>>> >>>>>> In the spreadsheet, there are three main components. Column B has >>>>>> factors such as stability, performance, etc to assess against. I just >>>>>> made these up, but feel free to make your own. The weights (column C) >>>>>> essentially defines the importance of each factor as a percentage of a >>>>>> total of 100%. The rest of the columns are for each activity. Feel >>>>>> free to add your own. Score them on a scale of 1 to 10. Each score >>>>>> gets weighted and you'll see totals at the bottom. Sort for the totals >>>>>> in Descending order and skim off the top 10. >>>>>> >>>>>> There you have it. Multi-criteria decision-making made simple. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sameer >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. >>>>>> Associate Professor of Information Systems >>>>>> San Francisco State University >>>>>> San Francisco CA 94132 USA >>>>>> http://verma.sfsu.edu/ >>>>>> http://opensource.sfsu.edu/ >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Devel mailing list >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel >> > > These are the criteria for inclusion we developed for the original > G1G1 program... not really knowing the goals for the new campaign, it > is difficult to know if these are relevant... (From > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Creating_an_activity#Include_your_Activity_in_the_core.3F) > 1. Epistemological impact—to what degree does this activity > positively impact learning? (This is of course the most important > criteria.) > 2. Fun—is it fun? engaging? > 3. Quality—is the activity sufficiently robust in its > implementation that it will not compromise the integrity or > supportability of the system? Is the overall quality of the > implementation adequate to meet our standards? Can the community be > engaged in the process of testing and "certifying" and maintaining the > activity? > 4. Sugarized—to what extent has the activity been integrated into > Sugar, including UI, Journal, security, internationalization, etc.? > Does the activity require the folding in of additional libraries and > resources? (This has impact on robustness—positive and > negative—support, bloat, and the overall usability, aesthetics, and > perception of quality of the machine.) > 5. FOSS—is the activity and all of its dependencies free and open? > 6. Extensible—is the activity something the community can extend? > Does it span multiple needs? (And does it have—or the potential of > having—an upstream community of support?) > 7. Uniqueness—does the activity add a unique feature to the core? > 8. Expectations—does the activity meet the expectations of > (children, teachers, parents, G1G1 audience, etc.)? > 9. Discoverable—is the core activity discoverable? (This is not to > say that it shouldn't be hard work to fully exploit the power of an > activity, but it should have a low barrier to entry.) > > -walter > > -- > Walter Bender > Sugar Labs > http://www.sugarlabs.org >
This list looks fine as a good starting point. The items are broad in their reach. My list of items in the spreadsheet are only "example/filler" items. Feel free to throw those out and start afresh. In fact I would insist that we start afresh :-) Whatever factors go into the weighted scoring, we should make sure that we have a good way to quantify the score from something observable (say, # of outstanding bugs) and not just gut feel. Sameer -- Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Information Systems San Francisco State University San Francisco CA 94132 USA http://verma.sfsu.edu/ http://opensource.sfsu.edu/ _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
