[Sugar-devel] The quest for data
sverma at sfsu.edu
Mon Jan 6 14:51:08 EST 2014
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Andreas Gros <andigros72 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Great utilization of CouchDB and its views feature! That's definitely
> something we can build on. But more importantly, to make this meaningful, we
> need more data.
I like this approach as well because the aggregation is offloaded to
CouchDB through views and reduce/rereduce so we can have a fairly
Google Charts (https://developers.google.com/chart/) or D3.js
> It's good to know what the activities are that are used most, so one can
> come up with a priority list for improvements, and/or focus developer
> CouchDB allows to pull data together from different instances, which should
> make aggregation and comparisons between projects possible. And for projects
> that are not online, the data could be transferred to a USB stick quite
> easily and then uploaded to any other DB instance.
True. CouchDB will allow for aggregation across classes, schools,
districts, etc. Depending on the willingness of participation of
different projects, we can certainly go cross-project. Even if these
views are not made public, they will be useful. For instance, I would
love to compare my Jamaica projects with my India projects with my
> Is there a task/todo list somewhere?
Not that I know of, but we can always start one on the sugarlabs wiki.
Anybody have suggestions?
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:15 AM, Martin Abente
>> <martin.abente.lahaye at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello Sameer,
>> > I totally agree we should join efforts for a visualization solution,
>> > but,
>> > personally, my main concern is still a basic one: what are the
>> > important
>> > questions we should be asking? And how can we answer these questions
>> > reliably? Even though most of us have experience in deployments and
>> > their
>> > needs, we are engineers, not educators, nor decision makers.
>> Agreed. It would be helpful to have a conversation on what the various
>> constituencies need (different from want) to see at their level. The
>> child, the parents/guardians, the teacher, the
>> principal/administrator, and educational bureaucracy. We should also
>> consider the needs of those of us who have to fundraise by showing
>> progress of ongoing effort.
>> > I am sure that most of our collection approaches cover pretty much the
>> > trivial stuff like: what are they using, when are they using it, how
>> > often
>> > they use it, and all kind of things that derive directly from journal
>> > metadata. Plus the extra insight that comes when considering different
>> > demographics
>> True. Basic frequency counts such as frequency of use of activities,
>> usage by time of day, day of week, scope of collaboration are a few
>> simple one. Comparison of one metric vs the other will need more
>> thinking. That's where we should talk to the constituents.
>> > But, If we could also work together on that (including the trivial
>> > questions), it will be a good step forward. Once we identify these
>> > questions
>> > and figure out how to answer them, it would be a lot easier to think
>> > about
>> > visualization techniques, etc.
>> If the visualization subsystem (underlying tech pieces) are common and
>> flexible, then we can start with a few basic templates, and make it
>> extensible, so we can all aggregate, collate, and correlate as needed.
>> I'll use an example that I'm familiar with. We looked at CouchDB for
>> two reasons: 1) It allows for sync over intermittent/on-off
>> connections to the Internet and 2) CouchDB has a "views" feature which
>> provides selective subsets of the data, and the "reduce" feature does
>> example Leotis had at the OLPC SF summit
>> > What you guys think?
>> A great start for a great year ahead!
>> > Saludos,
>> > tch.
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
More information about the Sugar-devel