I think this far too low level of detail to the point of being invasive - we are not taking a census. I think we should stick to the high level headings - White; Mixed / Multiple Ethnic groups; Asian / Asian British; Black / African / Caribbean / Black British; Other Ethnic group; Do not wish to declare. Tracking ethnicity is fine but not to this level of detail:

White: English / Welsh / Scottish / Northern Irish / British
White: Irish
White: Gypsy or Irish Traveller
White: Any other White background
Mixed / Multiple Ethnic groups: White and Black Caribbean
Mixed / Multiple Ethnic groups: White and Black African
Mixed / Multiple Ethnic groups: White and Asian
Mixed / Multiple Ethnic groups: Any other Mixed / Multiple ethnic background,
Asian / Asian British: Indian
Asian / Asian British: Pakistani
Asian / Asian British: Bangladeshi
Asian / Asian British: Chinese
Asian / Asian British: Any other Asian background
Black / African / Caribbean / Black British: African
Black / African / Caribbean / Black British: Caribbean
Black / African / Caribbean / Black British: Any other Black / African / Caribbean background
Other Ethnic group: Arab
Other Ethnic group: Any other ethnic group
Do not wish to declare

include all segments (opportunities and events) and let them know they can sign up manually at - https://www.software.ac.uk/newsletter if they want to choose what kind of news they would like to receive from us.

Move standard answers from JACS to HECoS

https://www.hesa.ac.uk/support/documentation/hecos/cah-list

Note still need to keep - a formal 'I do not do research' item

Our recommended practice is here: https://github.com/softwaresaved/common-form-questions/blob/master/questions/personal-information-questions.md

questions/personal-information-questions.md

Personal Information (PIQ)

Introduction

These questions are about relevant personal.

Show more
https://github.com/softwaresaved/common-form-questions|softwaresaved/common-form-questionssoftwaresaved/common-form-questions | Added by GitHub

shoaibsufi 3 minutes ago
Hi, CFQ is due an update around this question - the question was reformulated in the Fellows 2021 form

shoaibsufi 3 minutes ago
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1NEbyxamAuDhMsQtjJJndzSCpJHhi-tLjbDXVV3e20vo/edit

npch 2 minutes ago
However best practice from elsewhere suggests that the term “Other” is problematic, and the response “In another way” along with a text box is what is recommended by the Market Research Society.

shoaibsufi 2 minutes ago
Screenshot 2021-02-10 at 17.38.04.png
Screenshot 2021-02-10 at 17.38.04.png

👍
1

npch 1 minute ago
What Shoaib has posted is good (and shows the text required because Google Forms doesn’t have a non-“Other” option.

More info at the ticket - https://github.com/softwaresaved/InstituteIssues/issues/3

Profile Photo should potentially be moved to become one of the core-questions in the set around identity e.g. first name, surname etc.

It would still be optional in most cases, recommended for use in Fellowship applications.

It would be nice to have a flow chart as to how one would construct a questionnaire, neil suggested putting in some examples after the flowchart.

At present, the documents containing the common questions, and the documents containing the guidelines, formats etc are in the same folder and similarly named.

It would make sense to split these into two directories: questions (for the actual questions) and docs (for the guidance materials). A README.md in the root can be used as the index.

I would really like a reference of maturity in computational understanding and ask people how far along they are and how far along do they think their domain is (on average) - that would be useful in pitching things right and also seeing where intervention would help

(I don't have or know of such a reference to ask people by)

Look at latest CW18 ones

Not clear to me what we are saying about these questions - are these a MUST? a SHOULD? i.e. we MUST use all of these questions? SHOULD we be using all of these questions for an event? Some of them are clearly a MAY, e.g. the telephone number may be used for some instances but if we want to have a degree of uniformity we should perhaps use the REFC2199 nomenclature.

@shoaibsufi The question

With regards to research software which statement best describes your situation?

isn't include in this repository. Should I replace it with

With regards to research software, I am mainly a

on Fellows 2019 application form?

The question

What software do you use most often in your work?

from Fellows application form is not present here.

For Fellows, we use

Please include country/area code. For example, 44XXXXXXXXXX.

We are adding

Collaboration with other Fellows/Applicants

If your plan is a succession of existing Fellows activities or aligns with another application to this round of Fellowship, can you add the persons name and a short description of how your work aligns. You should ideally discuss this with the other person or people before putting in an application. The Institute is very interested in supporting work that build upon previous work in a strategic area and helps nurture and grow communities of practice. This section is optional and all applications are assessed on their own merit and we are looking to support novel work and new areas also.

@shoaibsufi Do you want a pull request with this question?

You mention the files that have content in the README.md. It would be good if these could be hyperlinked on the page:

application-questions.md -> [application-questions.md](application-questions.md)

would do it. I think it would be useful. I can do this if you want.

The following questions could be updated to be bias-free e.g. following APA style:

• Gender: could be rephrased as "Gender identity" and include the following options:
  • Female/Woman
  • Male/Man
  • Nonbinary (which includes genderqueer, gender-nonconforming, gender-neutral, agender, gender-fluid)
  • Prefer to self-describe: ________
  • Prefer not to say
• Ethnicity
  • Allow people to select multiple options to be inclusive of people with more than one ethnic background

In https://github.com/softwaresaved/common-form-questions/blob/master/docs/format/format.md

Replace:

Dropdown - a drop down list of options from which one can be chosen
Multiple Choice - a set of buttons displayed at the same time from which one can be chosen
Checkboxes - one or more options can be chosen

With:

Forced Choice (1..n) - represents a choice of options from which the number in brackets can be chosen

e.g.:

Forced Choice (1) - means you can choose only one of the options
Forced Choice (2) - mean you can choose up to two of the options
Forced Choice (n) - means you can choose any option that applies

And then update the question and examples.

This is due to the fact that CFQ should focus on the model of the questions and not on the presentations - whether things are dropdown or multiple choice - should be left to the form designed and not the model design.

Would it be worth splitting core-questions into different documents e.g. core-identity, core-demographics, core-engagement-with-institute?

This might make it easier to work with and find questions. As an alternative, putting clearer dividers in the core-questions.md between the classes of questions would make it easier to scan.

We need guidelines of when to use one or the other.

Dropdown menu screenshot

Multiple choice

For fellows, we use

If you are a PhD student, please just enter PhD Candidate and your year or status, e.g. PhD Candidate - year 2 or PhD Candidate - waiting for viva

When we've copied answer lists from a source - for example, for the responses to gender and ethnicity - we should provide a link to that source. This way, it's easy to check up on the source and see whether the possible answers have changed over time.

Obviously this doesn't apply to all questions, just the ones where we've copied the answers from another source.

Is the Fellows form, we use

The organisation/company that directly pays your salary.

Might need to add a a training-questions.md file

1. Check if our core questions are better - if not modify
2. Check if the training questions should be added to training-questions.md (make sure you follow the format)

Sources of data:

SWC pre-workshop survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=V6gQbbOKn3NoPKfYKHjAKu_2BBCdtXXsTS2pf1BIdARccEtJQqlu1KFB2j2TcF0MCn

SWC post-workshop survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=uN5QPa4MbF1_2BB1plbLWnL1ZUc7Nttqici0Nc0e3G4RahMwwGW5NUp4U5PKQDYmky

DC pre-workshop survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=zdE7x498WxTrpyiD6WEQJaspyjn2T7djLpBg2pc36ylXiMCwflbQtv6puqE01NB4

DC post-workshop survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=Mrj4bb21g1tgjNuilRh0cOT5mrUI7P2KQPzKG6FqkomqgWhHqR_2BsNWTJLHGif1VF

Carpentries long term survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=LksuekfCD3hzLW6lPkx9qhkRF5nDt8uGWpN7lq2Mx0Dqw1Zriv3qYFpu3XtR46ei

SSI/Soton little survey templates: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B6P79ipNuR8EcGlQN3N5LTdhR2c

Suggesting input format is one of the recommendations for best practice in
online form design.

See:

https://www.intechopen.com/books/user-interfaces/simple-but-crucial-user-interfaces-in-the-world-wide-web-introducing-20-guidelines-for-usable-web-fo

• http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2556288.2557265

Perhaps integrate different Answer-choices for the same question, e.g. dependent on context e.g. ethnicity might be different for different countries or if you want to use different standards

From Olivier Philippe during discussions on integrating Policy surveys with the CFQ

For the demographics-personal-and-engagement.questions.md file you say

Question:
Email Address

Reason:
Needed to keep in touch with people, can be used to verify institution and needed to add them to other resources (e.g. newsletter list)

You cannot add them to other resources unless you ask for explicit consent to be added and explicit consent has to be collected for each resource they are to be added to otherwise you are violating GDPR.

This might just might be me but the questions seem to get lost in the text of a page. Might it be easier to make these easier to identify by putting in bold and/or putting them in a different colour? You can't do this directly in markdown but you can embed bits of html:

<span style="color:blue">Question text</span>

Does not have to be blue but I think it would make it easier to navigate through the questions on a page.

See #29 for reasoning.

So Text and Paragraph Text should just be Text with a note that the form designer should decide whether a longer text answer is likely and present this to the user. Again trying to make the CFQ about the model and not the presentation.

34 UoA's vs 165 JACS principle codes

Need to find out if we can do a cross walk for older data

and also find out why they decide on a particular set of UoA - in other words what gets to be a UoA

Also REF2021 - 34 UoA's and REF 2014 was 36 - but is that as stable as JACS which itself has versions

HESA (JACS) has been engaging with research (and not just teaching) so there is more compatibility between JACS and UoA (HEFCE)