Registration survey

[jdkent]

We will still want to track who comes to hacky hour for the uibrainhack so we get an idea of their python/programming knowledge experience and what they hope to gain. (and afterwords we can ask if we really prepared them for neuromatch)

[jdkent]

Here is the software carpentry pre-workshop survey, we should use this: https://carpentries.github.io/assessment-archives/pre-workshop/pre-workshop.html

[jdkent]

and here is last year's qualtrics survey: https://uiowa.ca1.qualtrics.com/jfe/preview/SV_3JlvEwdpnyEE8GV?Q_SurveyVersionID=current&Q_CHL=preview

[jdkent]

and you can log into uiowa qualtrics to make a survey: https://its.uiowa.edu/qualtrics

[GHarmata]

I think we should keep it simple and not use the software carpentry survey for tracking attendance. Just obtain email and purpose for being at hacky hour each time. Then we can follow up with a more detailed survey after all the sessions are over.

[mpipoly]

Ok, I have a 3 question Qualtrics survey set-up already. if it is not useful, no worries. let me know what you think 9dding u as collaborators now)

[jdkent]

I cannot find the neurohackademy question, but the Programming languages software carpentry question would be a good substitute,

And my opinion is to keep the wording so it's programming language agnostic, it will be nice to know if people coming have any programming experience whatsoever since the lessons we are covering are just as much (if not more) about programming fundamentals as they are about python.

[jdkent]

I've updated the registration survey (minor edits and added the carpentry question, I changed my mind about keeping the question programming language agnostic)

[jdkent]

I'm going to release this version of the survey so Jake Michaelson can share it with computational psychiatry, but please feel free to give feedback and we can modify it as necessary.

[mpipoly]

@jdkent That looks great. I was wondering if we could use the "program" question as leverage if we ever decided to request something but maybe departmental is good enough.

[jdkent]

My sense is that departments are often the entities with funding/infrastructure,with neuroscience/genetics being the two notable exceptions.

My thought was that most people see their department/program as the same entity and may not know how to respond/some people (that have contacted me) do not belong to any program, but are affiliated with a department.

But I do not hold a strong opinion if you want to add it back in.

[mpipoly]

Yes, so it would be (if applicable) but i agree it is likely that departments will be our funders so we should avoid for now. Any no department folks can indicate "carver college of medicine" or "graduate college."

[jdkent]

we will considered this solved for now.