We heard from partner agencies that the qualification list should be as simple as possible, and one way to do that is to cluster questions so people can answer with more than one response (such as "which languages are you proficient enough that you could translate?" and then the list is a whole bunch of languages). That's much easier for everyone than having each language as its own question.
Thanks for your suggestion! We had originally planned to include a checkbox option with qualifications, but we quickly realized a limitation in how a checkbox option would work, and ended up having to remove it before the final release of Qualifications. Here's why:
For each qualification, our system asks, "Does this person meet this qualification?" If the answer is "Yes," (where the person is approved for the qualification), then they will be able to access and/or respond to a need that requires that qualification. If the answer is "No," they won't be able to access the need.
So let's imagine that you have a qualification question of, "Which of the following languages do you speak?" Let's say I speak both French and Spanish, so I mark the "French" and "Spanish" boxes, and you approve me for the "Which languages ..." qualification. And then imagine that you post a need that requires a fluent speaker of Arabic. Because I am "qualified" for the "Which languages ..." qualification, I would then be able to respond to the need! Now, I'm not sure why I would want to respond to a Arabic-speaking need if I don't speak Arabic, but it's feasible that a volunteer might miss a detail or even purposely respond to something they're not fully qualified for.
Now you could mark me as "Not Qualified" for the "Which languages ..." qualification, but then I won't be able to see any French- or Spanish-language needs that are posted.
With the way the program is coded now, we recommend that you create a separate question for each language. This will take a little more time up front, but it will allow you to have more accurate records of who is qualified for what, and to attach more accurate qualifications to individual needs.
All of that being said, I do see how it would be more convenient to be able to use a checkbox option for qualifications. I can bring this up at our next enhancements meeting and present your use case. This will not be an easy change to make, but I think my team will be able to see the merit in it and seriously consider if for a future upgrade or rebuild.
Hi Nina and team,
This thread may be outdated, but my question seems relevant to this so I thought I'd add it here rather than start a ticket. We can open a ticket if that's easier.
We're trying to build opportunities for people to help us translate. We have the opportunities private for only people in a specific User Group so only they see them. The challenge is that we are looking for one of three combinations at each opportunity: Cantonese speaker, Spanish speaker, both are needed (this is the majority of the opportunities).
In addition to getting the right people into the opportunities, we would like to know (when both languages are needed) how many of each language ability we have. Ideally, we could limit it so that 3 of each language is needed and a reservation is full once 3 people of one language sign up.
I wonder what the best way to go about this.
In my head, the options are:
All of these seem like a lot of work, is there something else I'm not thinking of? The first two options also don't seem to allow us to see how many people of each language are signed up to volunteer. But the third option seems like it would end up making the calendar look really crowded and it could be hard to find the right opportunity.
Maybe this isn't possible yet, but I figured I would run it by the experts.
I can see that you started a ticket with Michelle and dig deeper into what you needed here, given your use case, which is awesome!
It's great that you were able to go with a solution that uses a combination of user groups, private opportunities, and qualifications to meet your needs given here.
Thanks for posting! If you have more questions about this set up, don't hesitate to reach out to firstname.lastname@example.org again in the future.
She / Her