Volunteer Software Development Team - New Cadet Portal


#420

It’s in the side menu. So it’s always visible.


#421

Is there scope for the oc to have a forms function i.e. sets up a question and cadet can respond to it?

Example?

OC: Who is outstanding PTS badges and if so what badge?
Cdt/Scout: Me im missing platinum badges for shooting, music, leadership, gliding, flying


#422

So everyone missing everything which is basically the way it is now!


#423

I thought id keep it realistic


#424

Would also be awesome if there was a function where i tell a new cadet they need a new piece of uniform , when we dont have it in stores they can go on the portal and request it with new sizes (which automatically updates the uniform section on sms with their latest sozes…am i asking too much here?l

That then sends the request to an email account which the person who looks after stores can access too and collates the requests and sends order off


#425

That would be optimistic but awesome!


#426

Or atleast to a sqn oc/delegated member of staff to collate and send to local stores


#427

@AlexCorbin and @daws1159 - great ideas and all definitely possible.

Let’s get v1 out of the door and then @james_elliott can start prioritising our worklist for future features.


#428

Seen the recent work on notifications, which looks great ( https://twitter.com/CadetPortal/status/1099375048119537665?s=19 )

Just wondering if there’s planned work on the copy for those? Particularly with respect to “rejection”.
I wonder if less “negative” language could be used - bearing in mind if a cadet has been “rejected” it likely just means the activity is oversubscribed? (Rejected feels very strong wording to me).
Copywriting isn’t a particular strong point of mine (I’m famed at work for an error message that read “Error. Panic!”), but even “not accepted” might be softer?


#429

Declined might sound better but rejected is a good word to get teenagers used to, as is the word fail.


#430

@Squirrel and @Teflon - I’m in the process of looking at those now - language may well be softened slightly (at least when presented to cadets)


#431

Declined - event over subscribed.
Or
Declined - other reason


#432

Probably won’t make the distinction between those two - it would be another choice the CFAV needs to make and I’d argue it has little value.

Will probably land on SMS still saying rejected (cos it’s short and to the point) but in CadetPortal it will be something softer such as “Not Selected”


#433

There needs to be, given the reaction I’ve had and get from parents as to why their little lamb can’t do / doesn’t get selected to do this or that, at least if it’s full, it’s easy to understand.


#434

I’m getting a feeling that this is fast becoming everything to all people and I’m concerned that it will start OK and people will be excited, but then as people leave on and information held alters/poorly managed as per S/point as lots of people start inputting and difficult to use, it will lose its value, just like s/point.
I would have thought get the basic bit up and running as per the original idea, make sure that works and then put the other bits in that have been suggested, but let that come from the cadets not the staff at what ever level.


#435

Advocate an MVP approach on this one. Having been an OC until recently I know of those supportive parents. But also know that

  1. They are few and far between
  2. Regardless what the computer system says, they are still likely to be picking up the phone

For now we’ll likely implement as is (OC VSDT thought/prioritisation dependant); if there is an issue with it during beta, or after rollout, then we can inspect and adapt.


#436

Agree. What we want to achieve for v1 has been very much locked in by OC VSDT and the team, and we’re working hard towards getting that out the door and into beta.

That’s not to say there aren’t great ideas out here, and from other avenues, and we’ll be prioritising those once we have met the MVP.


#437

Well if there’s only one option then you can spin your own narritive…


#438

Hi All,

I have been reading the above with interest :slight_smile: I think what we need to bear in mind is that the initial release, as I keep saying, is the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) and further functionality will be added over time in future iterations and that includes both Cadet Portal and SMS.

To set the scope of MVP, we created an MVP constitution which is available at:

https://rafac.sharepoint.com/sites/cadetportal/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2Fcadetportal%2FShared%20Documents%2FMinimum%20Viable%20Product%20-%20Initial%20Release%2FCadet%20Portal%20Minimum%20Viable%20Product%20-%205%20Dec%2017.pdf&parent=%2Fsites%2Fcadetportal%2FShared%20Documents%2FMinimum%20Viable%20Product%20-%20Initial%20Release

In the MVP Constitution, we said we would provide/do:

  • A responsive design which adapts to different screens and browers - developed
  • Develop MVP as a standard web application but with future Azure app aspiration - developed
  • Deliver client and server-side processing - developed
  • Automatically generate Cadet Portal accounts when the SMS record is created - currently under development by the Bader Team as this is SMS functionality
  • Provide a decent URL to host the site - which has been achieved by securing https://cadets.bader.mod.uk - developed
  • Enable cadet login via the gateway - this has been done on the pre-prod infrastructure and is working as it should be - developed
  • Sign Bader SyOps - this will be achieved by O365 functionality which is part of the wider infrastructure
  • View personal details - we have actually over-delivered on this as we have secured a stance from Command Executive Board (CEB) where cadets can edit certain data but not others and we have nearly finished the development of the editing part in addition to simply viewing the data - developed
  • Update parent/guardian details - we have agreement about how this can happen but we haven’t yet implemented this. We need to look at how this can be authorised/approved and the parent informed. This will probably be pushed to Iteration 2 for various reasons.
  • View events list and view event related information - we said that we would not allow cadet sign up for this but we have actually done that and more - so I would say that we have massively over-delivered on events including all of the SMS work which is nearly complete and all of this functionality will be available in MVP - - developed
  • View qualifications, classifications, awards and promotions - all of that is there - developed
  • Absence requests - - developed
  • Logout - developed
  • Bootstrap popovers for help - again, we have over-delivered on this throughout the tool - - developed
  • Bader branding - developed
  • Self-service for passwords - this is all part of the wider Bader infrastructure and will be available to cadets as they will have MS Active Directory accounts
  • Password reset on first login - this is a key security requirement and will be implemented
  • Links to key SharePoint documents - we have delivered on this following the SPOL migration and cadets can have access to a range of documentation through the tool - developed

Things we have done in addition to what we said we would do in MVP:

  • Sqn Downloads including SMS functionality
  • Training programme including SMS functionality
  • Drill and ceremonial page including initial 818 video content
  • Welfare and Support page

So, in terms of doing what we have said we would do, I would argue we have pretty much over-delivered in every area.

We have a strong development platform through MS Azure DevOps to capture all of the user stories, ideas and suggestions for Iteration 2 which we have been maintaining. Once we get to Beta and then the wider release, we will start looking at that list and then create a prioritised development list for the next release, which will take into account your feedback.

Ultimately, Cadet Portal will display what SMS has in it - so if the data is pap on SMS, it will be pap on Cadet Portal. To adopt a common phrase, Garbage In, Garbage Out. If the Squadrons do their part to maintain cadet data as they are required to do by existing policy, then the cadets experience in Cadet Portal will be good. If they don’t, the cadets and their parents/guardians/carers etc will start to complain which will hopefully prompt some action.

Something that I also feel that we are delivering on is a commitment to internal and external communications on this project which is demonstrated through our social media presence, my engagement with you on here (which, for info, I am not required to do and I continue to do so because I feel your input has positive benefits - that view is not always held in other parts), our new SPOL site, YouTube presence, briefings at conferences, open access demos on Skype etc etc.

So, please continue to contribute to the discussion in a constructive way and if you have any questions, please ask.

Best wishes,

James

PS Yes, we aim to have Cadet Portal deployed across the Corps in 2019 :wink:


#439

James

I know you said this is for ATC only as CCF use Westminster but would it be available for CCF units who use SMS? I use it as Westminster is useless for RAF Section record keeping, especially the various qualifications (obviously copy what I can over to Westminster for annual inspections). The portal would make my life so much easier as OC/Adj/TO rolled into one.