HL7 Education Offering Dashboard

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page captures some of the desired statistics in order to create a dashboard related to the provision of HL7 education, be it education provided by HL7 International, its affiliates as well as partner organizations. The aim of the dashboard is to monitor the quantity as well as the quality of educational services, as well as trendanalaysis (e.g. when it comes to the need for education related to productlines).

Desired Statistics

On Sept.15 2014 (WGM in Chicago) it was decided that the Comittee would start by identifying the kind of statistics that would be useful as a component of a dahsboard. The rationale for the desired statistic, as well as the source of the information (if known) should be identified as well.

  1. Volume of educational offerings
    1. Amount of educational face2face offerings sold by HL7 International on an annual basis (1) at WGMs, (2) at educational summits and (3) in-company/on-site offerings
      • Note: expressed in "participant training-days (4 quarters)", not in the number of tutorials (for these differ in length). Free tutorials and certification tests should be excluded.
      • Rationale:
      • Source of the data: (1,2) HL7 HQ, Mary Ann, 'master tutorial spreadsheet' (3) unknown
    2. Amount of educational face2face offerings sold by any of the HL7 Affiliates an annual basis
      • Note: expressed in "participant training-days"
      • Rationale: determine the geographical distribution of educational requirements
      • Source of the data:
    3. Amount of 'electronic' educational offerings sold by HL7 International on an annual basis (1) e-learning, (2) webinar
      • Rationale:
      • Source of the data:
  2. Revenue associated with educational offerings
    1. Revenue associated with face2face educational offerings sold by HL7 International on an annual basis (1) at WGMs, (2) at educational summits and (3) in-company/on-site offerings
      • Note profit for (2) and (3) could be used as well, net profit for (1) can't really be determined however.
      • Rationale: the board has identified the delivery of education as a new source of revenue. As such we'd have to know which activities are the most profitable.
      • Source of the data: Board Treasurer, HQ
    2. Revenue associated with 'electronic' educational offerings sold by HL7 International on an annual basis (1) e-learning, (2) webinar
      • Rationale:
      • Source of the data:
  3. Quality of our offerings
    1. Perceived quality of HL7 international offerings, annualized, (1) at WGMs, (2) at educational summits and (3) in-company/on-site offerings (4) e-learning courses, (5) webinars
      • Note: average grade assigned by attendees of all educational offerings during a particular year. The grade is about much more than just the quality of the deliverables, for grades are also about such things as the quality of the training room and the food. But still, it's the best/nearest long term statistic that coukd be used as an indication of 'attendee satisfaction'
      • Rationale: given the recent drive to increase the quality of our tutorials - has the average grade risen over the past few years? Are we achieving our objectives?
      • Source of the data: Mary Ann
    2. Perceived quality of HL7 international offerings, (1) at WGMs, (2) at educational summits and (3) in-company/on-site offerings (4) e-learning courses, (5) webinars
      • Note: grades assigned by attendees of a particular tutorial or educational offering
      • Rationale: given the recent drive to increase the quality of our tutorials - have the grades for a particular tutorial/offering risen over the past few years?
      • Source of the data: Mary Ann

E=learning courses

Source: Diego Kaminker

Year 	Students
2006 	110 	
2007 	200 	
2008 	240 	
2009 	380 	
2010 	410 	
2011 	800 	
2012 	850 	
2013 	730 	
2014 	600 	 Projected
  • Diego: There is a quantity leap (not a quantum leap) from 2011 because Fercam developed the autocorrection method for the assignments in the course thus allowing us to have an unlimited number of students with the same # of tutors (around 14). So we got rid of a wait list of around 500 students in 2010.