Short of classrooms, the current system gives preference to events

[wandrson]

The right classes means no one is waiting for training. We have that issue. Every week someone posts that they are looking for a class.

It is unreasonable of anyone to expect to have access to classes with no waiting period. For those who went to college, they undoubtedly remember that some required classes were only offered during selected semesters. The same applies here. I know I personally waited over 14 months before I was able to take a welding course, more for the PlasmaCam. In both cases those were tools that helped make my decision to join. Was that a problem? Yes, but the problem wasn’t my having to wait.

Again, a significant part of the problem is with the members, registering for classes they ‘might’ be able to make and then failing to show up is a significant problem in the sense that it can prevent others from registering for a class they want. This is why so many are able to ‘sit in’ when folks don’t show–creating extra work for the instructor to get them on the AD lists.

Again, this is a growth problem. And while we have become addicted to the revenue growth, until we have a way to expand capacity it is probably time to restrict growth.

If this is approved temporary, my challenge to @wandrson is setup ALL you classes at 5 days and see if your attendance suffers.

The idea is to improve flexibility, not decrease it. Right now someone can create an event or non-honorarium class that appears to receive less scrutiny, and can be on the calendar and ‘active’ in two days. This gives non-educational material an advantage.

As to your challenge, It isn’t something I would use for ALL of my classes, but the first time I offer a class is usually because folks have asked me for it… In those cases, I doubt I would have any concern about filling the class. The first time I offer a class, it has rarely not filled–quickly…

[jast]

That is tight for people to see a class, register and attend.

First I would like to say I agree with your point here.
But.
I’ll point out something you already know, and likely are taking to account, but maybe are losing sight of: this is a MINIMUM. An instructor is welcome to submit classes which will sit for 3 weeks to get folks registered. This change would mean a course can get onto the calendar AND TAUGHT within a week, instead of needing nearly 2 weeks for that to happen, allowing a more nimble response to changing demand. This, preferably coupled to the previously mentioned (maybe in another thread) “pre-standing” and/or “pre-approved” courses, could be good thing…

[Webdevel]

Than you. You stated this much better than my feeble attempt.

[wandrson]

Here is an example of part of the problem

Prime time class room space being scheduled FOUR MONTHS into the future for events. DPRG has a contract and hence special case for DMS, but the ‘film crew’ and the ‘anime club’ do not, and frankly the former is consuming an unreasonable quantity of our prime time class resources EVERY month.

[Photomancer]

If you only need the Purple Room for 30 minutes schedule it as as “Part 1” for just 30 minutes, then schedule the remainder for whatever separately as “Part 2” , don’t use the multi-part class at the bottom. I did this with some classes in the past and it reserved the room for the entire 3.5 hours.

Part 1 _Widget Making: classroom portion _ 7-8PM in Purple Room, Submit as a class.
Part 2 Widget Making: at Machine 8-9 in the What Shop, Submit as a class

Be sure to state two part class and that student must sign for for both. make this an instructor approval so after they have signed up you can add them to the second roster - other wise you’ll get people that "just want the practical:, sign up and block someone from taking the first part. I make the first for Honorarium and the second not. Reason, they are really one class and so only one honorarium should be sought asked for.
They may have tweaked the system since I first used it to overcome this. If so, someone correct this (I haven’t “experimented” to see if this this holds) There may be other ways to finesse the system.

[Bill]

If you only need the Purple Room for 30 minutes schedule it as as “Part 1” for just 30 minutes

The system does not allow scheduling just 30 minutes;one hour is apparently the minimum.

[Photomancer]

Every week someone posts that they are looking for a class.

The class was a couple days before they joined and is offered monthly, there isn’t enough volunteer instructors for more often. Unfortunate yes.

Some complaints as a volunteer instructor.

How often have we seen open classes posted and the comment “I can’t make on Wednesdays”. That may be a true statement, but it is when the volunteer instructor can make it. I try to schedule my classes on days that I’ll already be at the Space, otherwise, in my case that adds 1 hour of drive time and cost to a 3~3.5 hour class plus the 30 minute prep: total up to 5 hours invested. If there were more volunteer instructors there would be more days.

The one that really pissed me off, was a Bridgeport class, someone signed up, attended the lecture, in the 10 the minute break between classroom and at machine, the person saw a laser class open and went to attend that. Oh we waited an 5 minutes hoping they’d show up. Didn’t finish that class and blocked someone else from taking it - there was someone waiting and asked but I said class is full. As far as I’m concerned, I’ll never let them complete the class unless no one is ever waiting to take it at that time. And they will have to sit through the entire class.

Of course there are the ones that sign up and don’t cancel.

[Diplomat]

I think “never” having a waiting period is an admirable goal. Real world, we have too many moving pieces.

The 5 day challenge is about putting your money where your mouth is. I think 2 days of calendar visibility is too short. If it is so good, take the challenge and in 60 days you will personally be able to say if it is too short. Otherwise, it occurs to me as something you are advocating for and do not honestly believe in.

My objection is around visibility on the calendar. 2 days is not much time. I do understand for some classes it will speed training.

Here is the next question, can we push the review time down to 2 days?

I would like class data tracked for 60 days. I will help with that. Run a comparison to the 60 days before to the 60 day trial. (@John_Marlow and @StanSimmons)

Finally, I will eat crow if it works, with a bit of salt and pepper, please. (I would not mind, honestly.)

[wandrson]

I think “never” having a waiting period is an admirable goal. Real world, we have too many moving pieces.

The 5 day challenge is about putting your money where your mouth is. I think 2 days of calendar visibility is too short. If it is so good, take the challenge and in 60 days you will personally be able to say if it is too short. Otherwise, it occurs to me as something you are advocating for and do not honestly believe in.

My objection is around visibility on the calendar. 2 days is not much time. I do understand for some classes it will speed training.

Here is the next question, can we push the review time down to 2 days?

I would like class data tracked for 60 days. I will help with that. Run a comparison to the 60 days before to the 60 day trial. (@John_Marlow and @StanSimmons)

Finally, I will eat crow if it works, with a bit of salt and pepper, please. (I would not mind, honestly.)

1. I disagree, I think there should be a minimum waiting period for new members before they can take required classes. It would serve to underline that the space is for members not customers-limit attraction to the I have a project I want to finish joiners. And it would give them time to experience what other reasons they might find to be members.
2. I am more then willing to take your challenge, just understand that the calendar isn’t the only way to notify for classes.
3. The calendar isn’t the only way for members to find out about classes, and for the teachers that choose the shorter time periods, they probably have an existing demand they are trying to fill.
4. How to push the audit time down? Easy, just change the code in the calendar application. If at least a few auditors check the calendar system daily, that is sufficient to catch everything. Further, we could have the application flag new teachers and those with problems in the past for extended review if that is a real concern. Personally, I think we let the market (students) decide if the class/teacher is worthwhile by simply letting the rules apply (three signed up and showed up).
5. What kind of comparison are you thinking about?
6. Crow not necessary, in fact I will buy you BBQ the Sunday after you publically admit to the mistake?

[Diplomat]

Data analysis.

Compare attendence in classes before and after change in the system.

Are classes with short lead times as well attended as classes with longer lead times?

Are more classes being offered? IE are we teaching more classes.

The assumption for the shorter lead times argument has proof in a little bit of data analysis.

Meanwhile, you talking up your classes skews the challenge just a bit. I absolutely know if every instructor talked up each class they would be better attended. It is the nature of advertising. I would ask you do it for 30 days and not do it for the next 30. That too is interesting data to collect.

Sounds like a BBQ bet is on. Excellent!

[jast]

Sounds like a BBQ bet is on. Excellent!

where is the link sammich emoji?

[wandrson]

Data analysis.

1. Compare attendence in classes before and after change in the system.
2. Are classes with short lead times as well attended as classes with longer lead times?
3. Are more classes being offered? IE are we teaching more classes.

Some of the issues I see with such a short term analysis (60 days)

1. Since we created the new calendar system, we have since a near continuous evolution of class frequency, type, etc.
2. We are already near maximum on the number of classes we can offer, since the prime times are essentially always full or nearly so. Which is why I raised the issue
3. The rule change would need to coincide with software changes to the calendar system, so we would have a new round of bugs that would need to be worked out

Meanwhile, you talking up your classes skews the challenge just a bit. I absolutely know if every instructor talked up each class they would be better attended. It is the nature of advertising. I would ask you do it for 30 days and not do it for the next 30. That too is interesting data to collect.

No, it represents what I think is the most likely scenario to benefit from this change. Classes that are already in demand for which the teacher has just discovered a possibility with their schedule to teach.

Sounds like a BBQ bet is on. Excellent!

Cool! Any excuse to eat BBQ

[jeffbob]

Thank you for the explanation. I will try and go online and see if I
can make it happen.

Jeff Whitcomb
2100 Bowling Green
Denton, TX 76201
800-969-9368
cell-903-203-9463
“The only good sense is one of humor, without it all the others are worthless.” JCW
[email protected]

[MrsMoose]

He said exactly what I was thinking! If a teacher wants to do a longer lead nothing is stopping them but there’s been several times when I’ve signed up for someone’s class and wished I could toss on a training of my own and just make a day of it but can’t because of the time needed…like someone said the popular classes don’t need wait time beacause they fill hours after posting. A week is also pretty predictable for me but two weeks out is a stretch where I have to worry the class I just offered will have serious conflicts with the real daytime gig. If the teacher cuts it too close they’ll learn to push it back further.

I’m not that worried about having outside groups teach events and advertise for the space since we just had a pretty strong consensus that membership is at critical mass organically as it stands. Advertising isn’t our issue

[MrsMoose]

As long as the data is viewed with a side filter of…the teacher was going to be here anyway so losing honorarium isn’t a big deal but getting it wouldn’t be bad either.

For example I’m coming up to run a long print. Not any skin off my nose to throw in a wide format class while I’m waiting for it and at best I cover my print and transportation. Or in the case of this weekend an order came in and I need to run up and work on it. At worst people who see it aren’t in que anymore and when someone complains at the frequency of said training we have more to point to for options of when it was held. Either way I go in with wide open eyes that a short notice class likely won’t make but with nothing to lose I don’t care. If i did care I put a longer lead like normal.

[kyrithia]

I think a general shorter time possible on calendar would balance out. No big system complexity other than changing the 10-day thingy to shorter and audit period to 2 instead of 3 days.

The high-demand class classes or those with waiting folks or sudden interest (i.e. a group of students interested in a close follow-up class or special focus)…those have enough to fill or make honorarium without a lot of visibility. It’d cycle high-demand training a little faster and help with bottlenecks, and let teachers be more responsive to special clumps of interest while enough of those interested can still predict their upcoming schedule.

And the regular classes that take longer to fill or new classes where interest is still being determined…those are to the benefit of the teacher to schedule further out so folks can see them. If the teacher is interested in honorarium, it makes sense.

A shorter possible lead time lets the volunteers teaching be more responsive to demand, and things needing visibility can be scheduled further out.

[artg_dms]

One of the problems I’m starting to see more of is the Elab being used as a classroom for “pseudo” related topics such as programming. While I’m not totally opposed to this, I would be a very unhappy camper if I hauled my project down to the Space and found I couldn’t a bench because some one decided to hold a class there because there wasn’t a classroom available and they didn’t want to wait for one.

If your class doesn’t require the workbenches and test gear, you need to have that class in a classroom and not in the ELab. I would like to see the calendar system require permission from the committee chair for classes requesting the use of a committee. area.

[Cairenn_Day]

Can we shorten the time for required classes with known instructor?

or can the committees with those high demand classes provide a list of
known teachers

Exmple some ones s bussiness trip gets canceled because o say
weather They might be willing to teach a class on shot noticr

[Bill]

One of the problems I’m starting to see more of is the Elab being used as a classroom for “pseudo” related topics such as programming. While I’m not totally opposed to this, I would be a very unhappy camper if I hauled my project down to the Space and found I couldn’t a bench because some one decided to hold a class there because there wasn’t a classroom available and they didn’t want to wait for one.

If your class doesn’t require the workbenches and test gear, you need to have that class in a classroom and not in the ELab. I would like to see the calendar system require permission from the committee chair for classes requesting the use of a committee. area.

The best way to accomplish this sort of filtering is for concerned committee chairs or their designates to volunteer to be honorarium auditors and calendar admins.

“If your class doesn’t require the workbenches and test gear, you need to have that class in a classroom and not in the ELab” may be too restrictive. It is not unlike prohibiting drawing classes in CA because they do not need any of the special tools in that room.

[Cairenn_Day]

I often hold jewelry classes in the committee aea, eve if they could
be taught elsewhere My thinking is that one it frees up a clasroom
and 2 it helps folks familiarize their selves with jewelry