Difference between revisions of "FOSS4G2007 Workshops"

From OSGeo
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 19: Line 19:
  
 
The range of scores to be used is 0 through 5:
 
The range of scores to be used is 0 through 5:
−
   0 = does not meet the criteria
+
   0 = does not meet any the criteria
−
   1 = barely meets the criteria, and doesn't meet some of the criteria
+
   1 = barely meets some of the criteria, and doesn't meet some of the criteria
 
   3 = average
 
   3 = average
−
   5 = meets or exceeds the criteria
+
   5 = meets or exceeds all of the criteria
  
−
Score each workshop out of 5 for each criteria (4 criteria in total, so each workshop gets a score out of 20).
+
Score each workshop out of 5 total (the spreadsheet was made before our last meeting)...ignore the cells for the individual criterial.
  
 
== Timetable for workshop submissions review process ==
 
== Timetable for workshop submissions review process ==

Revision as of 11:45, 15 March 2007

Back to FOSS4G2007...

List of workshop submissions

FOSS4G2007_Workshop_Submissions

Criteria used by the workshop committee to review workshop submissions

  1. meets conference mandate:
    1. matches with the themes of the conference
    2. makes use of software that is both "free" and "open source"
  2. submission's technical requirements can be met by the conference facilities
  3. likelyhood of a quality workshop:
    1. successful workshop presented at prior FOSS4G conference
    2. expertise of the workshop presenter in the workshop subject matter
    3. any relevant input from workshop evaluations collected by FOSS4G2006, or personal experience of workshops presented by the presenter(s) at other conferences
    4. demonstrates practical applications
  4. expected level of interest in the workshop topic

Scoring

The range of scores to be used is 0 through 5: 

 0 = does not meet any the criteria
 1 = barely meets some of the criteria, and doesn't meet some of the criteria
 3 = average
 5 = meets or exceeds all of the criteria

Score each workshop out of 5 total (the spreadsheet was made before our last meeting)...ignore the cells for the individual criterial.

Timetable for workshop submissions review process

A private mailing list ("the list") was setup March 7, 2007 for use by the workshop committee.

  1. March 7 to 11
    • on the list, discussions about the review process
    • all committee members review the documents and get familiar with the workshop submissions
  2. March 12
    • IRC meeting to finalize review criteria and the 'scoring' system
    • committee members start 'scoring' the workshops listed in the "FOSS4G2007 Workshop Submissions-Half Day" spreadsheet
  3. March 15, midnight PDT
    • deadline for committee members to provide their 'score' for each of the half-day workshops
  4. March 16
    • committee chair creates a summary spreadsheet of the half-day workshop submissions showing each committee member's score for each workshop, and a cumulative 'total score', with the worksheet sorted by 'total score', and make that spreadsheet available to the committee members via Google Docs
    • committee members start 'scoring' the workshops in the "FOSS4G2007 Workshop Submissions-90-Minute" spreadsheet
    • start discussions, if needed, to adjust the ranked list of half-day workshops
  5. March 18, midnight PDT
    • deadline for committee members to provide their 'score' for each of the 90-minute workshops
  6. March 19
    • committee chair creates a summary spreadsheet of the 90-minute workshop submissions showing each committee member's score for each workshop, and a cumulative 'total score', with the worksheet sorted by 'total score', and make that spreadsheet available to the committee members via Google Docs
    • start discussions, if needed, to adjust the ranked list of 90-minute workshops
  7. March 20, noon PDT
    • final deadline for any 'tweaking' of the ranked lists of the half-day and 90-minute workshop submissions
    • committee chair prepares the final versions of the relevant documents/spreadsheets, which will be forwarded to the conference organizing committee so they have time to review before their meeting on March 22nd


FOSS4G Workshop Committee Members

Next Committee Meeting

  1. Select chair for this meeting
  2. Set date/time for next meeting


Previous Committee Meetings

2007/03/12

  1. Select chair for this meeting
  2. Set date/time for next meeting
  3. Criteria selection
    1. Discuss the criteria to be used for the workshop submissions review process
    2. Vote on the suggested criteria, to establish the criteria list for use by the workshop committee
  4. Criteria importance
    1. Discuss whether all criteria should have equal 'weight', or whether some need a 'multiplier' to add/subtract their effect
    2. Vote on any suggestions for 'criteria weightings'
  5. Scoring
    1. How to 'score' a workshop submission based on the selected criteria
  6. Format of recommendations
    1. list of workshop submissions that are not recommended
    2. issue of limitations on the number of workshops
    3. ranked list of workshop submissions
  7. Timetable
    1. Half-day workshops
    2. 90-minute workshops

2007/03/06

  1. Select chair for this meeting
  2. Set date/time for next meeting
  3. Process for reviewing the workshop submissions
    1. How to do the review process
      1. private vs public
      2. who will be involved in the review
      3. collaboration methods (e.g. IRC, mailing list)
      4. A possible approach for the Workshop Committee to use when reviewing the workshop submissions
    2. Plans for dealing with 'late submissions'
      1. will submissions not already received be considered for the review?
      2. workshop submissions for key topics that aren't covered ("filling in the holes")
    3. Dates
      1. deadline for finishing review process is March 20th (due to organizing committee meeting March 22nd)
      2. if clarification of a workshop submission's details is needed, how long to wait for a response - March 11th?
      3. timetable for review process
        1. March 6 - March 11:
          1. committee members review submissions
          2. discussion amongst committee members about submissions
          3. committee members assign 'scores'
        2. March 12: 'scores' are tabulated
        3. March 13:
          1. committee meets to review/adjust 'ranked lists'
          2. 'ranked lists' of the workshop submissions are made available to the public (e.g. locked wiki page)
        4. March 14 - March 19: public can use mailing lists and IRC to comment on 'ranked lists'
        5. March 20:
          1. committee meets to review/adjust 'ranked lists'
          2. committee forwards final 'ranked lists' to the conference organizing committee
    4. Results of review process
      1. separate recommendations for half-day vs 90-minute workshops?
      2. what does the review produce:
        • two lists - recommended & not recommended?
        • an explanation for each submission that wasn't recommended?
        • one list, with a 'ranking' or 'score' for each submission?
  4. Workshop review criteria
    1. Decisions
      1. workshop committee to make recommendations
      2. final decisions made by conference organizing committee
    2. Objective criteria
      1. does the submission clearly not fall within the conference mandate
      2. can submission's technical requirements be met by the conference facilities?
      3. has the same workshop been presented at prior FOSS4G conferences? (this could be a plus or a minus)
    3. Subjective criteria
      1. expected level of interest in the workshop topic
      2. expertise of the workshop presenter in the workshop subject matter
      3. ability of the workshop presenter to present a 'good' workshop
      4. is there 'too much' overlap between multiple submissions
      5. geographical representation
      6. any relevant input from workshop evaluations collect by FOSS4G2006
      7. the "free" debate

2007/03/02

  • IRC Log
  • Action Items arising from meeting:
    • action: dave to phone Paul re making workshop selection process public, and deadline for finishing workshop submission review process
  • Agenda:
  1. Select chair for this meeting
  2. Committee membership
    1. invite David Percy to the committee
    2. status of Olivier?
  3. Set date/time for next meeting
  4. Review goals for number of workshops
    1. For "Workshops Day" (Monday September 24)
    2. Concurrent with presentations (Tuesday PM, Wednesday AM/PM, Thursday AM)
  5. Workshop Submissions - process summary
    1. have there been any comments on, or issues with, the submission process?
    2. are we aware of any submissions that are 'in the works', but which haven't been received?
    3. clarify "workshop" vs "lab" (e.g. half-day vs 90-minutes? Monday vs Tuesday-Thursday?)
    4. should 'workshops' that have no requirements for computers be considered "presentations"?
    5. Current status (as of 1:00PM Friday, 30 minutes before this meeting: total of 45 submissions)
      1. Number of submissions for half-day workshops = 28 (Beginner=9, Intermediate=2, Advanced=5, Developer=12)
      2. Number of submissions for 90-minute workshops = 17 (Beginner=7, Advanced=3, Developer=7)
      3. Number of half-day submissions that indicated they could be shortened to 90 minutes = 2
      4. Number of 90-minute submissions that indicated no need for computers = 5
      5. Technical Requirements:
        1. Provided Windows XP workstations = 21
        2. Multiple options, or ambiguous = 8
        3. Participants bring their own Laptop = 5
        4. Provided Linux VMWare machine = 5
        5. Instructor-provided LiveCD = 4
        6. None = 2
  6. Workshop selection process
    1. How to do the selection process - who, collaboration methods, etc.
    2. Plans re "filling in the holes" - how to get workshop submissions for key topics that aren't covered so far
    3. Dates
      1. Confirm current submission deadline(March 2), or select new deadline
      2. deadline for finishing review process
  7. Workshop selection criteria
    1. Decisions
      1. workshop committee to make recommendations
      2. final decisions made by conference organizing committee
    2. Objective criteria
      1. can submission's technical requirements be met by the conference facilities?
    3. Subjective criteria
      1. expected level of interest in the workshop topic
      2. expertise of the workshop presenter in the workshop subject matter
      3. ability of the workshop presenter to present a 'good' workshop

2007/02/23

  • IRC Log
  • Action Items arising from meeting:
    • action: dave - send out reminder later today about next week's meeting
    • DONE: Dave to email Frank a reminder announcement for the workshop submission deadline
    • action: dave to start wiki page re guidelines for workshops
  • Agenda:
  1. Select chair for this meeting
  2. Set date/time for next meeting
  3. review Action Items from 2007/02/09 meeting:
    1. ACTION: Aaron: talk to David Percy before next meeting
    2. OBSOLETE: Dave: need to find out from Olivier re use of INDICO
    3. ACTION: Jason to follow up with Jody
    4. ACTION: Dave to start developing the list of local print shops
    5. DONE: Dave to make agenda for next meeting
  4. review committee membership
    1. Jeff McKenna resigned from the committee due to work commitments, but will hopefully be able to help 'later on'
    2. Olivier Ertz hasn't been on IRC for about 3 weeks - anyone know his status?
    3. do we need more committee members?
    4. nominate and confirm new committee chair
  5. video of conference - confirm that this has been ruled out?
  6. Workshops
    1. Status of workshop submissions
    2. workshop materials
      1. who pays, and for what
      2. guidelines for workshop presenters:
        1. make a guideline based on the "top 5/10 rated workshops" from the prior conference( s )?
        2. guidelines for what? Format of workshop handouts? Size/length of handouts? Type of presentation?
        3. when accepting workshops, provide the presenters with the guidelines
        4. where/when to indicate to workshop presenters (or for workshop proposals?) to check with project steering committees?
  7. New Business
    1. estimated maximum bandwidth demand for a single workshop
    2. review of workshop evaluations from FOSS4G2007

2007/02/09

  • IRC Log
  • Action Items arising from meeting:
    • ACTION: Aaron: talk to David Percy before next meeting
    • ACTION: Dave: need to find out from Olivier re use of INDICO
    • ACTION: Jason to follow up with Jody
    • ACTION: Dave to start developing the list of local print shops
    • ACTION: Dave to make agenda for next meeting
  • Agenda:
  1. Select chair for this meeting
  2. Set date/time for next meeting
  3. Old Business
    1. review Action Items from 2007/02/02 meeting:
      1. DONE: Jason: send meeting reminders 1 day and 1 hour before meetings
      2. ACTION: Aaron: talk to David Percy before next meeting
      3. DONE: Jason: send out message to re-review the call and requirements by noon tomorrow PST
      4. ACTION: Dave: need to find out from Olivier re use of INDICO
      5. DONE: Dave: email Lorenzo re attending next week's meeting to discuss use of LiveCD
      6. DONE: Dave: review action items from earlier in the meeting
      7. DONE: Dave: prepare agenda for next week's meeting
    2. Status of help from Jody
    3. need a way to track the submissions like last year's INDICO system
    4. possibility of some sort of "facility" at the conference where workshop presenters can arrive and get help (financially and technically) getting copies, CD's, etc
    5. video of conference - is there an 'external resource' that could be used to manage this?
    6. Ominiverdi LiveCD: mailing list email from Lorenzo
  4. New Business
    1. nominate and confirm new committee chair
    2. review committee membership
    3. Status of workshop call, announcements, and feedback so far
    4. Policies & Procedures for workshop materials:
      1. who pays for workshop materials
      2. financial support by conference for workshop materials preparation
      3. guidelines for workshop materials (format, length, etc)
    5. Guidelines for types of workshop:
      from #osgeo, 2007/02/06
      12:54:38 jgarnett:  aside: #geoserver meeting trying to come up with workshop topics   12:54:59 jgarnett:  how "advanced" should workshops go?
    6. Specs for rental computers
    7. Other New Business

2007/02/02

  • IRC Log
  • Action Items arising from meeting:
    • ACTION: Jason: send meeting reminders 1 day and 1 hour before meetings
    • ACTION: Aaron: talk to David Percy before next meeting
    • ACTION: Jason: send out message to re-review the call and requirements by noon tomorrow PST
    • ACTION: -----: need to find out from Olivier re use of INDICO
    • ACTION: Dave: email Lorenzo re attending next week's meeting to discuss use of LiveCD
    • ACTION: Dave: review action items from earlier in the meeting
    • ACTION: Dave: prepare agenda for next week's meeting
  • Agenda:
  1. Select Meeting chair
  2. Set date/time for next meeting
  3. Old Business (based on Log from 2007/01/26 meeting)
    1. Jason: did you get in contact with Jody (jgarnett)?
    2. who will send out meeting reminders, and when
    3. Aaron: did you get in contact with David Percy?
    4. do we have a "set of questions/needs for the full committee to answer"?
    5. theme rooms, and creating tracks after workshop submissions received
    6. in 2006, workshops were 3.5 hours, including 30 minute break
    7. What about podcast/video of the workshops and presentations
    8. workshop details needed before call for abstracts (room sizes, number of machines, etc.)
    9. need a way to track the submissions like last year's INDICO system
    10. Olivier: did you contact the 2006 local committee re setting up an instance of INDICO for use for 2007 (for workshop submission tracking)?
    11. possibilities re adding more workshop time at the start/end of the conference?
  4. New Business
    1. for any "to do" items that come up in meetings, use "ACTION: name" on IRC to flag who is to take care of that item
    2. review Call For Workshops Content:
      1. Hyperbole
      2. Submission Requirements
    3. Ominiverdi LiveCD: mailing list email from Lorenzo
    4. date when call for workshops will be ready for announcement
    5. rooms for workshops - establish minimum allocations Workshop Rooms
    6. computer resources - current availability, and desired target Computers

2007/01/26

  • IRC Log
  • Agenda: There was no set agenda


Workshops Notes

Workshop Duration and Scheduling

http://www.foss4g2007.org/program_overview.html

Hardware

  • 40 computers in the rental budget
  • another 20 slated as loaners from Nanaimo
  • other options? (bring-your-own etc.)

Room Availability

?

Software Installation

  • LiveCD for Linux
  • MS4W installer for Windows
  • other?
  • attendees come with laptops and software installed?

Other

  • local person to deal with venue's tech staff?


Questions for Organising Committee

  • Number and dimension of rooms, tables (how many PCs /people can we fit in a room)

Feedback from Past Conferences (things to note)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.osgeo.org/w/index.php?title=FOSS4G2007_Workshops&oldid=12715"