Difference: DuckyEthicsDraft (2 vs. 3)

Revision 32006-11-02 - DuckySherwood

Line: 1 to 1

META TOPICPARENT	name="DuckyHomework"

Ducky Ethics Approval Form Draft Notes

Added:

>
>

DEADLINES for minimal risk studies

- Nov 10, Dec 1, Dec 21

Purpose: collect data on how students actually program in an IDE (Eclipse) and explore the data. If we find differences between the logs of high-scoring and low-scoring code development sessions, that could potentially be used to teaching and/or development tools.

Line: 43 to 44

Question: who holds the id<->person mapping? Can it be destroyed after the data is submitted? Are we likely to want to do follow-up interviews?

Added:

>
>

Forms needed:

Application form
Advertisement to recruit students?
Subject consent form
Fee for service form?

13. Summary of research

Purpose and objective

Hypothesis

Justification

Method

Analysis

15. Subject description

Students in Computer Science XXX.

Inclusion criteria: student in a computer science course which uses the Java programming language and has individually executed and graded assignments. Subjects must have at least one semester of familiarity with the the Eclipse development tool (which is already recommended) and be willing to use it again exclusively for this course.

16. Excluded

People who are not in CSXXX are excluded. Students who use a development environment other than Eclipse (approx N% last time this class was taught) are excluded.

17. Approach to subjects

Announcement in class?

20. Method

@@@

22a. How much time?

Install logger
Task switch
Hand in context
Deal with crashes

23. What risks?

If the plug-in is not rock-solid stable, it could crash and cause the subject to lose work. (@@@ where do I put in that we want to make damn sure it doesn't crash)

Long-term, if we can correlate

24. Benefits?

We hope that by participating in the study, the users will benefit indirectly from

improved tools

View topic | History: r6 < r5 < r4 < r3 | More topic actions...