Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 7 Current »

\uD83D\uDC65 Participants

  • Lead: Lizanne DeStefano

  • All meeting attendees

\uD83E\uDD45 Topics

  • Identify evaluators for each proposal

    • Track 1 - Dave Hart

      • proposal has table in proposal that have goals

    • Track 2 - Shelley Knuth

      • evaluation plans not defined yet

    • Track 3 - Winona Snapp-Childs

      • evaluation activities are included in proposal

    • Track 4 - Tom Furlani

      • evaluation activities are included in proposal

    • ACO - Lizanne DeStefano

      • contracting with an external evaluator (Lisa Kaczmarczyk)

  • Obtain their evaluation plans

  • Develop a matrix that compares metrics, instruments, data collection and reporting timelines

  • It is assumed that each track has an evaluation component, the defined or undefined evaluation needs will be discussed in the first 90 days.

  • XSEDE Evaluation data, tools, methods, etc. available to all tracks for reference and/or to assist with ACCESS evaluation

  • Coordinated User Survey

    • All tracks have a need or would like to get pull information from user surveys.

    • There should be a user survey that is at a program-level (meta data collection) to make sure the collaboration between the tracks are working for the community. The separation of services (service tracks) should be transparent. We need to make sure that we do not induce confusion in the research community by asking focused questions focused on tracks vs services.

    • The EC must approve any combined evaluation plan, including coordinated user surveys

✅ Action items (Owner)

  • Tracks to provide Evaluation Plan to ACO Evaluation team for coordination to create the Evaluation Matrix (Track PIs)
  • Discuss access to all proposals for evaluation information. (John T)

⤴ Decisions

  • No labels