2 Comments


  1. This is a great idea. One of the major challenges about making event surveys is making them scientifically valid. It is easy to make surveys that sound like fun (“What did you think of the talk? Mind Blown, Awesome, Decent, Didn’t Like It, Bleah”) but these are not useable in a statistical way. Proper surveys are dry and without personality for a reason and that reason is accuracy and an avoidance of bias. Having the surveys centralized means all WordCamps will be measured with the same stick so to speak and you don’t have to have a social scientist on your planning team to get accurate data. I’m all for it.

    Reply

    1. As much as we favor statistics from a top level (all the WordCamps scored this…), let’s not lose sight of the fact that these surveys should also be uniquely useful for the organizers as well. Surveys should allow the organizers to determine what specific elements of their unique WordCamp were successful, among other uses. So at the very least if there is a “central survey” then some questions need to be highly customizable to be useful for WordCamp organizers who need this data to plan better camps next year. Admittingly, some organizers might not bother with this method so a generic vanilla survey makes sense.

      I’m not saying this isn’t a bad idea, but if you aren’t a WordCamp organizer then you might be missing a few points.

      Reply

Leave a Reply