I've just used plugins and help to build my capacity. I guess it has taken me months to kind of solve how to do the questions, but once i found the plugins, understood how they worked, messed about with questionnaires I can duplicate them quite quickly. I am still not sure this way is the right way to go.
Saq has a method whcih works with TiddlyWeb which uses another way to generate the forms. This might be better in the long run so that multiple questionnaries can be colleceted togtrher. It might not be so great a jump to get from here to > allocating a score to each item according to whether it is not true, > somewhat true or certainly true? It has scores: 1= not true , 2= somewhat true , 3 = certainly true. These scores are captured in the tiddler with the help of DataTiddler The for each tiddler plugin sorts the questions into not true etc. using the numbers. To change the scores to 1 -5 lickert scale, you would have to add the tiddler 'lickertTemplate' to your questions, rather than lickertSD which is the one for the strenghts and difficulties. Erics story plugin makes it possible to open a collection of tiddlers - a "story"- after closing all the other open tiddlers. In the questionnare are two stories, the questions and the traffic lights To make a story you make a tiddler and tag it "story". then add [[links to other tiddlers]] in that tiddlers to all the tiddlers you want including in the story You then make a button with the macro thus: <<story [[name of tiddler tagged with 'story']] [[text to display on the button]] [[tooltip]]>> Alex Re:I am blown away by how quickly you did that. Thanks again, Alex. I'm inspired by the help I have got here from Eric, FND etc. Its an enormous pleasure to be able to do something of value in the TiddlyWiki realm. Must be some kind of psychology behind that, some group theory, the way the TW community has grown (and been nurtured?)? > > Best, > > Dickon > > On 18 Apr, 17:49, Alex Hough <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I can feel some more late nights ahead. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> I only have rare opportunities to help out in the TiddlyVerse - I am >> usually the recipient of Eric's, FND's and others' kind help >> I put your questions into the my questionnaire TW [1] - I hope they >> might be of some help to you or anyone else. >> >> Psychology, Linking, Tags and TiddlyWiki >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Interesting to be made aware of Wilfred Bion. I'll have a look at his stuff. >> >> Alex >> >> [1]http://r.a.hough.googlepages.com/StrengthsandDifficultiesQuestionnai.... >> >> The final point in your comment is >> >> > particularly relevant and interesting to me - about the APPLIED side >> > of TW's as opposed to (or //alongside//, rather) the technical >> > developments that mostly leave me scratching my head at present >> > (though I have high hopes...) >> >> > I have been playing with the content of my TiddlyWiki manual for a >> > long time now, but certainly would not claim any specific competencies >> > (at all!) in the programming side of things; rather, it is the >> > APPLICATION of this elegantly different writing format that fascinates >> > me, and what it can bring to real life tasks, like running a team who >> > are trying to do a complex set of tasks better, and in a more joined- >> > up way. >> >> > I am fascinated in the way that TW works not just as an *analytical* >> > tool (splitting a complex area up into branches/tags, much as a 'mind >> > map' can do on paper) but that simultaneously it works as an >> > *integrative* tool (linking distant branches/twigs) so that I >> > sometimes envisage the web of information in a TW as being 3- >> > dimensional: Tags spreading out over the surface of a sphere, Links >> > diving through the core to their targets, though of course this is too >> > simple in reality. >> >> > Hence I am very interested in rather abstract notions such as "What, >> > precisely (semantically and pragmatically, that is), is a link, and a >> > tag?" and "what does non-linearity offer to the reader and writer that >> > more conventional linear text forms lack? - and what do we risk losing >> > by not having a linear statement of an argument?" Clearly this is a >> > Both-And rather than an Either-Or situation. No doubt others have >> > thought long and hard about these questions already, and I would be >> > most interested if there are any pointers to where I can connect up >> > with this conversation. >> >> > There is a seminal paper (1959) in the field of psychoanalysis by a >> > British analyst called Wilfred Bion titled "Attacks on Linking", and >> > to summarise this very complex and dense piece of writing, he is >> > saying that unconscious processes (which might be construed as having >> > a "vested interest" in remaining unconscious) "conspire" to keep apart >> > material that could and probably "should" be linked in the mind >> > ("Don't bore me with the facts, I like my story the way it is!"). I >> > think this goes for a great deal of the different schools of >> > psychology and psychotherapy, as well as the neurosciences, which >> > until recently have ploughed surprisingly separate furrows, without >> > paying very much attention to links that are (or almost certainly >> > should be) present. A generous understanding of this is that >> > researchers have been focussed on their own skills and areas of >> > interests, and that the branches of the "tree of knowledge" have >> > extended out so quickly over the past 100years that common fruits on >> > separate twigs have been easily overlooked, not least because the >> > technology to suggest, explore and make links between, say, cognitive- >> > behavioural theories and those of psychoanalysis, have been lacking. >> > On the other hand, most of us would also recognise that (mainly >> > unconscious) things like envy, empire-building and straightforward >> > protectionism (academic and economic) have played their part, too. >> >> > This is very much the theoretical position that IMP (Integrative >> > Multimodal Practice - the therapeutic stance that we are manualizing >> > in TW) tries to take - that paying more conscious attention to the >> > links between theories and practical applications is very powerful in >> > terms of providing a better integrated (and thereby *integrative* for >> > the poor client and family) service. In IMP we do that via two >> > significant routes; firstly by training keyworkers in the basics of a >> > whole range of evidence-based interventions (that have traditionally >> > been "owned" by different professional groups), and secondly by using >> > TW as the manualization allowing/promoting/sustaining this linking, >> > and encouraging local team edits to the manual to create a marriage of >> > "top-down" expert material with "bottom-up" local expertise. >> >> > To get back to the point of TiddlyWiki (given that this is the TW >> > group!) there seem to be features embedded within TW that suit it >> > quite uniquely for the job: >> >> > - its self-contained-ness, so that there can be clear editorial >> > control over content, rather than a free-for-all. >> > - the ease of basic editing so that non-experts can adopt it ...even >> > technophobes (perhaps a little way to go to fully realise this!) >> > - the lack of expensive additional (desk- or server-bound) software >> > that any health service would baulk at paying for/maintaining. >> > - the size of a tiddler; by which I mean that a tiddler is "bite- >> > sized" rather than a full essay, and this makes the document >> > approachable from a user's perspective. >> >> > I have strayed from the original topic of Forms, and have changed the >> > title to reflect this. >> >> > Best, >> >> > Dickon >> >> > On Apr 18, 9:13 am, Alex Hough <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Dickton, >> >> >> I make no claim for the questions on the questionnaire. That credit >> >> goes to Tudor Rickards [1]. The questions are part of his "Team Factor >> >> Inventory" for creative teams, documented in Handbook for Creative >> >> Team Leaders [2] The TW is a work in progress for the teaching of >> >> creativity and creative leadership, and helping creativity and >> >> creative leadership in organisations. >> >> >> Credit for the TW plugings: Eric and Udo for the story plugin and Udo >> >> for the forms and for each tiddler. >> >> >> You are welcome to change the questions and adapt the TW for your own use. >> >> >> If anyone has any ideas / suggestions on how to make the questionnaire >> >> [3] more user friendly and appear more attractive, I would be very >> >> interested to read them. >> >> >> Finally, thanks for the compliment on a my TW! It's sometimes heavy >> >> going being a TiddlyAdvocate in a 'real' world where the mention of a >> >> tiddler raises eyebrows. >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_Rickards >> >> [2]Rickards, T. & Moger, S., 1999. Handbook for Creative Team Leaders, >> >> Gower Publishing Company. >> >> Amazon.com Link. Available at:http://www.amazon.com/dp/0566080516 >> >> [Accessed January 8, 2009]. >> >> [3] ttp://r.a.hough.googlepages.com/TFI.html >> >> >> 2009/4/17 dickon <[email protected]>: >> >> >> > That is great, Alex. The Likert scale is exactly the kind of thing I >> >> > would need to use. Your questionnaire is very thought-provoking too, >> >> > and I like the way it generates instant feedback with traffic-light >> >> > gradings! >> >> >> > Thanks, >> >> >> > Dickon >> >> >> > On Apr 17, 10:59 am, Alex Hough <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Dickton >> >> >> >> I am working on two quesionaires, the most complete and most simple is >> >> >> on the web [1] >> >> >> Its work in development. >> >> >> >> The second is more 'in development but more complex. The order of the >> >> >> questions depends on previous answers. I am working with a proper IT >> >> >> professional using an method which focuses on user involovement. I can >> >> >> show you this one as well in due course, but there is some bugs in the >> >> >> system at the moment. >> >> >> >> Best Wishes >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> [1]http://r.a.hough.googlepages.com/TFI.html >> >> >> ps. coincidentally I am working in mental health. another of my TW >> >> >> projects is on a NHS creativity in mental health project. >> >> >> >>http://r.a.hough.googlepages.com/TFI.html >> >> >> >> 2009/4/16 dickon <[email protected]>: >> >> >> >> > Thankyou Mark. My HTML is definitely not up to this job, but at >> >> >> > least >> >> >> > I have some pointers of where to head. Entirely see your point about >> >> >> > being both Nervous and Not nervous - both from an existential and a >> >> >> > programming perspective! >> >> >> >> > Best, >> >> >> >> > Dickon >> >> >> >> > On 16 Apr, 17:54, "Mark S." <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Following some help from Eric Shulman, I wrote myself a routine that >> >> >> >> collects information from an HTML form, runs it through a format >> >> >> >> string, and places it somewhere inside of an existing tiddler. >> >> >> >> >> This kind of routine could probably be modified to create a brand >> >> >> >> new >> >> >> >> tiddler with questionnaire results. I haven't posted it anywhere >> >> >> >> (except once somewhere in this forum) but I could again if there is >> >> >> >> interest. >> >> >> >> >> You would have to rewrite your quiz as a real HTML form, though. You >> >> >> >> use checkboxes throughout, but radio buttons would be more >> >> >> >> appropriate. As it is, someone could be simultaneously Nervous and >> >> >> >> Certainly Not Nervous. You know, I've had days like that. >> >> >> >> >> In order to be useful for later processing, you would want to think >> >> >> >> about how the results are organized. I'm guessing that putting each >> >> >> >> answer into a slice would be most appropriate >> >> >> >> >> q1: 1 <answer is 1 to 3> >> >> >> >> q2: 3 >> >> >> >> ... >> >> >> >> >> In any event, the final results need to be in some format that TW >> >> >> >> can >> >> >> >> easily grab. There are also sections, data fields and the <data> >> >> >> >> plugin, but to me this seems most easy to edit any mistakes. >> >> ... >> >> read more » > > > -- t: 0161 442 2202 m: 0781 372 50 17 skype: alexhough delicious: alexhough --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
