I had a recent exchange with a web hoster suggestion box that gave me pause to think... the suggestion box, prior to letting me make my suggestion, listed links to X suggestions previously requested that it thought resembled mine and asked me to confirm that I had reviewed the X suggestions and believed that my request had not been made before.....
I think it would be almost trivial to write a script that would intercept a forum posting, parse it (perhaps based on a moodle dictionary) and pop up such a list. Downsides might be whether posters should be treated in such a manner (How do you change the max upload file limit?) and whether and to what extent some users should be provided a way to bypass this (maybe a moodle treasure hunt, which upon successful completion changes your moodle forum avatar as in phpbb.... LOL)
Such a system, combined with some distillation process (I think sticky posts in the forum is the long standing resolution of that discussion?) and writing of subject lines of some summary postings to make postings more amenable to simple searches might well significantly reduce the number of forum postings while increasing their substantive content.
We do have a distillation process - the docs wiki.
The general idea is to avoid most people ever having to even come to these forums at all (and I'm pretty sure we are already seeing a lot less forum posts because of the docs).
People can click the Docs link at the bottom of the page in their own Moodle where they were having trouble, and they get collected, formatted wisdom in their own language.
I am really have trouble seeing how it's better to have 20 sticky posts at the top of every forum here (with badly written subject lines, offtopic replies and all the rest?). (I am not against the dticky posts feature, I just think it's not as good for the purpose we are talking about).
Some sort of automated FAQ engine is still a possibility, but it would not be a trivial bit of work ... I'd probably rather see effort go into ways to encourage people to contribute to the docs.
The general idea is to avoid most people ever having to even come to these forums at all (and I'm pretty sure we are already seeing a lot less forum posts because of the docs).
People can click the Docs link at the bottom of the page in their own Moodle where they were having trouble, and they get collected, formatted wisdom in their own language.
I am really have trouble seeing how it's better to have 20 sticky posts at the top of every forum here (with badly written subject lines, offtopic replies and all the rest?). (I am not against the dticky posts feature, I just think it's not as good for the purpose we are talking about).
Some sort of automated FAQ engine is still a possibility, but it would not be a trivial bit of work ... I'd probably rather see effort go into ways to encourage people to contribute to the docs.
The general idea is to avoid most people ever having to even come to these forums at all (and I'm pretty sure we are already seeing a lot less forum posts because of the docs).
Interesting goal!
I agree there are a lot less forum posts (definitely in quality and probably in quantity) compared to a few years ago, but I doubt it has anything to do with the docs
It's really pretty simple. In general, people will contribute to what they see as being valuable and they won't contribute to something that is not seen as valuable. Hence, the significant contribution to the forums and the significant lack of contribution to the wiki--true even of your own PHM's.
Steve
Hi Steve and Martin,
My wife (with the recent Masters Degree in Education) always asks where is the data? My lesser and very much older degree in Anthropology, smiles from a removed cultural perspective.
"A lot less" is something I agree with (and Steve, I thought it was all about me answering New user questions
) . But I would like to hear alternative theories why it does not have "anything to do with the docs." This is important stuff to me, as in educational.
When I first came to Moodle (Jan-May 2006), I got completely lost in Forums because there was too much scattered details for a new user. Forgot how but I stumbled into MoodleDocs. Demo.moodle.org was also a help for testing out ideas found in MoodleDocs. I just read Using Moodle and figure that is another great thing which can reduced the Forum chatter.
I have several wild ideas (not based on data at all). It seems to me several theories individually or together might account for the decrease in forum posts.
1. More helpful Moodlers and the language on the home page of moodle.org refer new users to Moodle Docs, both generally and specifically. Anyone brave enough to do a forum wide search will end up with some link to MoodleDocs.
2. MoodleDocs, Forum History/Searches, the electronic book(s) like Using Moodle, more Moodle partners, and improved help screens has decreased the actual forum posts in moodle.org
3. Moodle as a product is more user friendly as time goes on and Forums are not as necessary for a larger percentage of users. For example, help and information buttons in Moodle are very different than in 1.5.
4. The support provided to new users by site administrators has improved (critical mass), so questions are "nipped in the bud" and never make it to Forums in a larger percentage of sites as Moodle matures.
5. The actual new user group is shrinking as a percentage. What is the real user number? Has any Qc'd the numbers this fall?
6. It is all magic and we had each best throw an I Ching to really figure out the chicken guts of the real meaning.
If Moodle.org is a site an we have courses, can cross tabulate some numbers?
Ok that was my brain working overtime. Just some wild ideas.
Best to all, Great thread . Chris
s
My wife (with the recent Masters Degree in Education) always asks where is the data? My lesser and very much older degree in Anthropology, smiles from a removed cultural perspective.
"A lot less" is something I agree with (and Steve, I thought it was all about me answering New user questions
) . But I would like to hear alternative theories why it does not have "anything to do with the docs." This is important stuff to me, as in educational.When I first came to Moodle (Jan-May 2006), I got completely lost in Forums because there was too much scattered details for a new user. Forgot how but I stumbled into MoodleDocs. Demo.moodle.org was also a help for testing out ideas found in MoodleDocs. I just read Using Moodle and figure that is another great thing which can reduced the Forum chatter.
I have several wild ideas (not based on data at all). It seems to me several theories individually or together might account for the decrease in forum posts.
1. More helpful Moodlers and the language on the home page of moodle.org refer new users to Moodle Docs, both generally and specifically. Anyone brave enough to do a forum wide search will end up with some link to MoodleDocs.
2. MoodleDocs, Forum History/Searches, the electronic book(s) like Using Moodle, more Moodle partners, and improved help screens has decreased the actual forum posts in moodle.org
3. Moodle as a product is more user friendly as time goes on and Forums are not as necessary for a larger percentage of users. For example, help and information buttons in Moodle are very different than in 1.5.
4. The support provided to new users by site administrators has improved (critical mass), so questions are "nipped in the bud" and never make it to Forums in a larger percentage of sites as Moodle matures.
5. The actual new user group is shrinking as a percentage. What is the real user number? Has any Qc'd the numbers this fall?
6. It is all magic and we had each best throw an I Ching to really figure out the chicken guts of the real meaning.
If Moodle.org is a site an we have courses, can cross tabulate some numbers?
Ok that was my brain working overtime. Just some wild ideas.
Best to all, Great thread . Chris
s
I agree Chris, data is definitely what should be used. I see absolutely no basis for Steve's claims above.
(As an aside PHM membership is now generated directly from posting and rating data: http://moodle.org/user/index.php?id=5&group=1)
There are some stats here that you've probably seen: http://moodle.org/stats One of the interesting numbers there is the new users in the last 24 hours (currently 868 but it fluctuates between 500 and 1500). There are always a lot of new users.
We don't actually know what posting rates are. That's something I can generate from the history - give me some time. And if someone else wants to write a nice forum analysis script I'll be happy to run it here.
One thing we do know about the docs is that server loads on the docs server has gone up and the number of pages has dramatically increased over time. The history for the English docs can be useful: http://docs.moodle.org/en/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=500&days=30 as can the Wiki statistics page: http://docs.moodle.org/en/Special:Statistics (and remember these are just for English).
(As an aside PHM membership is now generated directly from posting and rating data: http://moodle.org/user/index.php?id=5&group=1)
There are some stats here that you've probably seen: http://moodle.org/stats One of the interesting numbers there is the new users in the last 24 hours (currently 868 but it fluctuates between 500 and 1500). There are always a lot of new users.
We don't actually know what posting rates are. That's something I can generate from the history - give me some time. And if someone else wants to write a nice forum analysis script I'll be happy to run it here.
One thing we do know about the docs is that server loads on the docs server has gone up and the number of pages has dramatically increased over time. The history for the English docs can be useful: http://docs.moodle.org/en/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=500&days=30 as can the Wiki statistics page: http://docs.moodle.org/en/Special:Statistics (and remember these are just for English).
So, you see no basis for:
In general, people will contribute to what they see as being valuable and they won't contribute to something that is not seen as valuable. Hence, the significant contribution to the forums and the significant lack of contribution to the wiki--true even of your own PHM's.
What part of that do you see no basis for? As a famous person once said, that is a self-evident truth...but the advantage here is, you can actually see it if you open you eyes and look.
(As an aside PHM membership is now generated directly from posting and rating data: http://moodle.org/user/index.php?id=5&group=1)
The rating bias that has already started in this very short thread should show anyone the flaw in that system....but, I will say it's an an improvement...let's see how it works
Steve
The combination of those two sentences with "Hence" says that "in general" "people" see "the wiki" as being not valuable. (Right? Tell me if you have some alternate meaning for those words)
and also:
> there are a lot less forum posts (definitely in quality and probably in quantity)
Unless you have analyzed some actual data from across Moodle.org these are not anything like "self-evident truths", they are the opinions of one person. That's why I was agreeing with Chris about the importance of looking at real data.
What I was talking about above in my first post was people READING and searching the docs to find answers, not contributing to them. It seems logical that most of the people who gain satisfaction from them we never hear from, because their question is answered and they move on (think how you use Wikipedia or Youtube).
I think the stats and constant references to Moodle docs through these forums do show a lot of people do use the docs (even via Google, for example), but perhaps an analysis of this (including Moodler interviews and surveys) would make a nice study for some Masters student.
I believe our aim should be to help Moodle users find answers easily in the docs and thus not be forced to wade through fragmented, repeated, outdated and often irrelevant information in the forums.
I'll get back to my work now.
and also:
> there are a lot less forum posts (definitely in quality and probably in quantity)
Unless you have analyzed some actual data from across Moodle.org these are not anything like "self-evident truths", they are the opinions of one person. That's why I was agreeing with Chris about the importance of looking at real data.
What I was talking about above in my first post was people READING and searching the docs to find answers, not contributing to them. It seems logical that most of the people who gain satisfaction from them we never hear from, because their question is answered and they move on (think how you use Wikipedia or Youtube).
I think the stats and constant references to Moodle docs through these forums do show a lot of people do use the docs (even via Google, for example), but perhaps an analysis of this (including Moodler interviews and surveys) would make a nice study for some Masters student.
I believe our aim should be to help Moodle users find answers easily in the docs and thus not be forced to wade through fragmented, repeated, outdated and often irrelevant information in the forums.
I'll get back to my work now.
I'll take your "annoyed tone" I'm detecting as an indication that you have it all figured out
By the way, I've never used ratings before, but since we are in the "data age" now I think I'm going to test out your new PHM system. Once I collect some data, I'll let you know if your system works
Steve
Thanks for the rating Helen...real valuable input to the discussion
Steve
Just for the benefit of those who don't login and can't see ratings, I'm proud to already have two in this thread. Come on....what's with the two stars Martin...I was shooting for straight 1's
Oh dear....
I guess the first item to be addressed is that as I have not achieved any stars I have obviously been determined by the forum of public participation to have not been particularly helpful. My apologies to anyone who may have perceived you were helped by me.....
Or am I being oversensitive in that just because users can rate postings does not mean that they do or will.... (yes, that is a bit of foreshadowing)
As to the substance of my initial post.... it appears that some took off on tangents (fora can be quite wonderful places for open discussion!) I was addressing the fact (my premise) that we have seen quite a few almost identical posts over the past few months on items covered in the docs and in the forums (over and over and over again). Moreover, while a few posters have decried the fragmented nature of the fora (suggesting they had tried to search for an answer) most did not.
I suggested that it might be helpful to have a way to direct those posting about common issues to existing resources. The immediate response was apparently to point to the docs as a distillation agent. While I don't think anyone would argue that the docs could never serve in such a capacity, the extensive recent discussion (How To vs FAQ - apparently not very helpful either....) suggests there is a continuum of opinion on such issues.
I don't believe that it is particularly helpful to note what people "can" do where the discussion is not ability or capacity but what behavior. The point of my posting was clearly to address not what people can do, but what they are doing, and what perhaps can be done to redirect them. I would suggest that the logical responses to the argument are to reject the premise (btw, how DO you change the 2 MB limit....) or agree with the premise and concur with the suggestion, offer an alternative or do nothing. While encouraging folks to contribute to the docs might be helpful (though I think the acerbic nature of some forum commentary might chill some) the underlying question is how to get more people to lOOk (I miss my Xeyes) first.
Having spent a little time in the docs, I have to suggest that at times they are less then helpful. There is no guarantee, of course, that they are correct, that they have been vetted, that they are recent. Of course, 2 of the 3 apply as well to the forum, but the forum does offer recency and an open discussion, which some might view as more helpful (at least as a place to ask for help, as opposed to a place to search for answers.) I would also posit (without any data) that most new users would be very hesitant to alter anything in the wiki. I don't know if wiki participation is related to degree of perceived helpfulness, degree of perceived inconvenience or degree of believed inadequacy to the task.
Speaking of data, one could look at the logs to see in how many cases were the docs accessed or a forum search done before a forum posting and similar info. I think it makes sense to perhaps provide a doc somewhere with the nature of data logged and archived by the various servers and perhaps have a way to query that data.....
In any event, I am busy working on a wiki doc addressing appropriate composition of fora subject lines and why congenial but non-substantive forum posts are inappropriate
. I know one and all will contribute.
I guess the first item to be addressed is that as I have not achieved any stars I have obviously been determined by the forum of public participation to have not been particularly helpful. My apologies to anyone who may have perceived you were helped by me.....
Or am I being oversensitive in that just because users can rate postings does not mean that they do or will.... (yes, that is a bit of foreshadowing)As to the substance of my initial post.... it appears that some took off on tangents (fora can be quite wonderful places for open discussion!) I was addressing the fact (my premise) that we have seen quite a few almost identical posts over the past few months on items covered in the docs and in the forums (over and over and over again). Moreover, while a few posters have decried the fragmented nature of the fora (suggesting they had tried to search for an answer) most did not.
I suggested that it might be helpful to have a way to direct those posting about common issues to existing resources. The immediate response was apparently to point to the docs as a distillation agent. While I don't think anyone would argue that the docs could never serve in such a capacity, the extensive recent discussion (How To vs FAQ - apparently not very helpful either....) suggests there is a continuum of opinion on such issues.
I don't believe that it is particularly helpful to note what people "can" do where the discussion is not ability or capacity but what behavior. The point of my posting was clearly to address not what people can do, but what they are doing, and what perhaps can be done to redirect them. I would suggest that the logical responses to the argument are to reject the premise (btw, how DO you change the 2 MB limit....) or agree with the premise and concur with the suggestion, offer an alternative or do nothing. While encouraging folks to contribute to the docs might be helpful (though I think the acerbic nature of some forum commentary might chill some) the underlying question is how to get more people to lOOk (I miss my Xeyes) first.
Having spent a little time in the docs, I have to suggest that at times they are less then helpful. There is no guarantee, of course, that they are correct, that they have been vetted, that they are recent. Of course, 2 of the 3 apply as well to the forum, but the forum does offer recency and an open discussion, which some might view as more helpful (at least as a place to ask for help, as opposed to a place to search for answers.) I would also posit (without any data) that most new users would be very hesitant to alter anything in the wiki. I don't know if wiki participation is related to degree of perceived helpfulness, degree of perceived inconvenience or degree of believed inadequacy to the task.
Speaking of data, one could look at the logs to see in how many cases were the docs accessed or a forum search done before a forum posting and similar info. I think it makes sense to perhaps provide a doc somewhere with the nature of data logged and archived by the various servers and perhaps have a way to query that data.....
In any event, I am busy working on a wiki doc addressing appropriate composition of fora subject lines and why congenial but non-substantive forum posts are inappropriate
. I know one and all will contribute.Having spent a little time in the docs, I have to suggest that at times they are less then helpful. There is no guarantee, of course, that they are correct, that they have been vetted, that they are recent. Of course, 2 of the 3 apply as well to the forum, but the forum does offer recency and an open discussion, which some might view as more helpful (at least as a place to ask for help, as opposed to a place to search for answers.)
Exactly....one may even compare docs to a lecture environment and forums to a constructivist environment. Sure, there is room for both, but given the choice, most avoid the "lecture hall" .
I'm glad I got to rate your post before my rating ability was revoked. Seems Martin, Helen, and maybe a few other disciples didn't like the point I was making, or maybe the elite really do believe they are the only ones with the right to abuse ratings and rate as they see fit.
Looks like I may need to keep this account to post and comment, create another one to rate, and when that one is revoked, maybe create another one, then another one, etc., until they're all deleted and my ip is blocked...then maybe I'll need to use another ip, and on, and on, etc.
Wow...sometimes I think things would be a lot easier if I had just resisted reading Thoreau when I was younger
Steve
While I no longer practice, I have very deep religious convictions about the role played by those who hold our feet to the fire. I am more often than not that person, and I have paid the price. I take what the Rev. Niemoller had to offer very seriously, for they did come and take my family.
I am terribly disappointed at this turn of events (banning indeed....) I am reminded of a Supreme Court case I handled with respect to charges against another attorney for some very pointed remarks about another attorney. We argued the rule, which provided that truth trumped decorum. The court, in a very close decision, found otherwise; the rule was changed soon after.
I think you made some valuable points (all the way round, actually) and I am going to give some serious thought to what I need to do now. I don't much hold with suspension or expulsion; they benefit no one..........
I am terribly disappointed at this turn of events (banning indeed....) I am reminded of a Supreme Court case I handled with respect to charges against another attorney for some very pointed remarks about another attorney. We argued the rule, which provided that truth trumped decorum. The court, in a very close decision, found otherwise; the rule was changed soon after.
I think you made some valuable points (all the way round, actually) and I am going to give some serious thought to what I need to do now. I don't much hold with suspension or expulsion; they benefit no one..........
Hi Marc, there were a couple of things mixed into this, let me clarify.
1) Sticky posts vs docs ... that was the point I was responding to because of previous discussions. I realise it wasn't the main point of your starting post though, sorry. I agree that problems of currency in any documentation are real and need to be addressed, but would add that the same problems of outdated information would probably apply equally to sticky posts (and most people would be unable to help fix them).
2) Given that newbies might prefer to post regardless of how accessible or up-to-date docs are, finding some way to detect what resources they need and direct them there automatically ... I didn't mean to dismiss this idea completely, it's just a fair bit of precious programming time and extra load on the site. We could start by deriving keywords and searching the docs, right? Something like this:
http://docs.moodle.org/en/Special:Search?search=&fulltext=Search
(Regarding other appoaches, there is a re-write of Moodle.org under way that you could not have known about, which makes the documentation very up-front and visible on every page here).
1) Sticky posts vs docs ... that was the point I was responding to because of previous discussions. I realise it wasn't the main point of your starting post though, sorry. I agree that problems of currency in any documentation are real and need to be addressed, but would add that the same problems of outdated information would probably apply equally to sticky posts (and most people would be unable to help fix them).
2) Given that newbies might prefer to post regardless of how accessible or up-to-date docs are, finding some way to detect what resources they need and direct them there automatically ... I didn't mean to dismiss this idea completely, it's just a fair bit of precious programming time and extra load on the site. We could start by deriving keywords and searching the docs, right? Something like this:
http://docs.moodle.org/en/Special:Search?search=&fulltext=Search
(Regarding other appoaches, there is a re-write of Moodle.org under way that you could not have known about, which makes the documentation very up-front and visible on every page here).
1) Squeaky do gooders would make sure that moderators stayed on top of things, but 6 of one half dozen of another.... I am taking no specific position in this battle (frankly I may not take any position ever here) but tried to raise the problem of how to move knowledge from point A to point B. Present system seems problematic
2) I am a perl guy, not a php guy, but the concept is largely the same.... click on "post to forum" and instead of posting to forum an small script identifies the status of the poster and if warranted parses the post (lots of stuff abounds for this) and perhaps does a quik look up for key terms then does a search and rewrites the screen with recommended links followed by the proposed post, and maybe even do some hidden fields to determine if the user actually looks at the link offered.
Impact on the serves? Well at present one person asks about a 2 meg limits and there are a 1-2 dozen answers (the result of asynchronous nature of the forum- 30 minute wait for e-mail etc.) Yes, a search would place a load on the server, but it would also negate dozens of other responses.... AND potentially eliminate half accurate or inaccurate responses.
I am going to inquire of the web hoster to see what they wrote their app in and what kind of impact it has made on their servers and will post their response.
2) I am a perl guy, not a php guy, but the concept is largely the same.... click on "post to forum" and instead of posting to forum an small script identifies the status of the poster and if warranted parses the post (lots of stuff abounds for this) and perhaps does a quik look up for key terms then does a search and rewrites the screen with recommended links followed by the proposed post, and maybe even do some hidden fields to determine if the user actually looks at the link offered.
Impact on the serves? Well at present one person asks about a 2 meg limits and there are a 1-2 dozen answers (the result of asynchronous nature of the forum- 30 minute wait for e-mail etc.) Yes, a search would place a load on the server, but it would also negate dozens of other responses.... AND potentially eliminate half accurate or inaccurate responses.
I am going to inquire of the web hoster to see what they wrote their app in and what kind of impact it has made on their servers and will post their response.
hidden fields to determine if the user actually looks at the link offered
Now that *would* be interesting. We have access stats for resources, but not for forums (to my knowledge). That could be useful information.
atw
Now that *would* be interesting. We have access stats for resources, but not for forums (to my knowledge). That could be useful information.
atw
I just wanted to point out that if anyone has a TD Ameritrade account, you can see how help sections can (and probably should) work. I realize they don't have forums and it's different than the forums here on Moodle since they produced the content, but I believe this is a great example of what Marc is referring to in the OP. TD Ameritrade just rolled out what they call "Ask Ted" a couple of months ago. It's the best "online help" I've ever seen and is full of video clips/screen shots step by step instructions based on what you type into the help field. The suggestions have been spot on in every query I've used. Unfortunately, for security reasons I don't think you can access this feature unless you have an account and are logged in. I've contacted them about it and they've programmed it all "in-house" but it works exactly how you'd expect a help section to function and it's very easy for any user to find any answer to any question in less than 2 minutes. It's definitely worth taking a look at for ideas if you have access and would like to design a state of the art system.
Sincerely,
Todd Thornton
Is it feasible for you to post some screen shots here?
I'll try my best to describe this, but one thing to keep in mind is that you have audio throughout (assuming you want it) to help you along the way. The best thing is that a new window opens taking you exactly to the page with the information you requested. In my example, if you ask about new accounts, a new window opens to the page discussing the different types of new accounts you could open. Here's my best effort in trying to describe their system.
Once you are logged in, you click on "Ask Ted" to ask a question. There's an easy way to turn off/on the audio.
The "About Ted" opens a new window that gives you tips on how to ask a better question. The "contact us" is always visible to contact support directly.
If it doesn't understand, it prompts you to rewrite your question.
When it does recognize what you are asking, it gives you the most likely choices first and then alternate choices and then a button for more to be shown just in case. It also opens up a new window automatically that takes you directly to the place on the website where the information/page is found without you having to do anything.
Hopefully that will give you some ideas.
I have come across some php/ajax that does a live search based on an xml dictionary http://www.w3schools.com/php/php_ajax_livesearch.asp that is I think more along the lines Todd is thinking than the KISS type option I was initially suggesting. There are also similar resources for doing the same kind of thing in js.
but, my initial point is that if people are conditioned if you will to posting in forum first and asking later, then we should interpose such a system so that an initial attempt at forum posting will hopefully alleviate the need to post in some instances via direction to the appropriate resources.
but, my initial point is that if people are conditioned if you will to posting in forum first and asking later, then we should interpose such a system so that an initial attempt at forum posting will hopefully alleviate the need to post in some instances via direction to the appropriate resources.
Marc,
I agree with pretty much everything you've written. I don't know that a system like I mentioned could ever be implemented in Moodle or not, (I'm not a programmer, but I'm assuming its complex to build) but I'm all for any improvements in handling information and pointing people in the right direction before they feel the need to post. I know personally I'd prefer not to post, but just find the information that I need so I can move on to the next issue. (I don't care where it is- wiki, forum post, Youtube how to video, etc.)
The main point that I was trying to make is that when an organization/company thinks about what people need in online help and how they can make the experience seamless and intuitive for the user, the end result can be extremely impressive.
Todd