Electronic Voting Systems (EVS) life cycle (v1.0)

This document has been produced to offer the current status of the EVS life-cycle and to identify areas that require further clarification.

A broad overview of the current (Pre-ITEAM) lifecycle is shown below along with a tentative timeline.

Issues that need to be considered by ITEAM and included in the above EVS life cycle

i) Should we have a standard EVS handset?

Currently we are using three different handsets, these are

  • RF LCD
  • XR
  • NXT

This decision needs to be factored into item 1 of the above flow chart.

ii) Is there a need for a standard model for charging / loaning handsets to students?

Variations include:

  • Full costing passed over to students
  • Refundable deposit
  • Loan with no transfer of money from students

This decision needs to be factored into item 4 of the above flow chart.

iii) A process is needed for Schools that need more handsets during the academic year.

Note:

Schools will need to use the ‘identified’ EVS supplier.

This is a new process and will need embedding after item 5 of the above flow chart

iv) A process is needed for lost-and-found handsets.

Suggestion:

Might the EVS issuing database in Studynet be developed with additional code to allow the Main Reception staff to scan the bar code of the recovered handset? This scanning would identify the owner of the found handset and (potentially) automatically send an email to the student telling them their handset has been recovered. The email could describe the collection point too.

This is a new process and will need to be embedding after item 4 of the above flow chart

v) A process is needed for students that have (permanently) lost their handset.

Possible options include:

  • Schools order a few extra handsets and hence can re-issue a new handset to the student.
  • The student takes responsibility for ordering a new handset direct from the supplier
  • UHSU shops hold a small stock ofhandsets.

In all cases there is a need for students to register their new handset on Studynet.

Do we have a view that all students need to pay for the new handset?

This is a new process and will need embedding after item 4 of the above flow chart

vi) A process is needed for students with faulty handsets.

Possible options include:

  • Schools order a few extra handsets and replace the faulty handset. The school then engages with the returns process (with the supplier).
  • The student takes responsibility for the returns process and engages direct with the supplier.

In both cases there is a need for students to register their new handset on Studynet.

This is a new process and will need embedding after item 4 of the above flow chart.

vii) A process is needed to collect the handsets at the end of the study duration.

There is a need to engage in good sustainability practices i.e. recycle the batteries, plastics and electronics, as well as think about the possible re-use of the handsets. If the returned handset is in good working order might it be reused by another student? If the handset is working but ‘scruffy’ might it be used for other areas of the University?Training, LTI etc.

This is a new process and will need embedding after item 5 of the above flow chart.

viii) Are we satisfied that Schools should issue the handsets to students or should the handsets be issued by central teams – at induction?

A review of item 4 of the above flow chart might be helpful.

ix) A process is needed for collecting students marks and transferring the marks through the UH system?

This is a new process and will need embedding after item 5 of the above flow chart.

Please contact Mark Russell () if you have any suggestions or comments regarding this guidance note.

The ITEAM project (A JISC funded project – JISC 5/11)