Thanks again Alex. Will try to look at these two ways of doing forms. Not sure I am the one to make a decision about which way is the best way to head with a view to getting as much fucntionality oput of these questionnaires as possible.
The other function I would really like (as if I can't I am condemned to export the data each time the questionnaire is completed) is the capacity to date and save the results so that a score at time A can then be compared to one done later at Time B. Best, Dickon On Apr 19, 8:46 am, Alex Hough <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
