2nd place · Claude Hackathon
Voxify
Students submit proposals and see what the university did with them.
- place in the Governance Track
- 2nd
- from an empty repository to a working demo
- 1 weekend
- features built on Claude: themes and reports, missing voices, an impact simulator
- 3
The problem
Students give feedback and rarely hear what happened to it. Without a visible answer, people stop suggesting things.
What we built
Students reach a short form through a QR code, agree to a plain-English consent note and submit a proposal. Organisers get a dashboard where Claude groups responses into themes and drafts two reports side by side: a summary for students and a briefing for the council.
A missing-voices check flags groups that are under-represented, a timeline shows how sentiment changes, and outcome pages tell students what was decided.
Key decisions
Close the loop
- Problem
- Feedback disappears once it’s submitted.
- Decision
- Every proposal can lead to a visible decision, and students can follow it on an outcome page.
Notice who isn’t speaking
- Problem
- A loud minority can look like consensus.
- Decision
- The dashboard breaks participation down by group, flags groups that are under-represented, and has Claude write a short note on what their absence could mean for a decision.
Trade-offs before decisions
- Problem
- Organisers rarely see who a change would affect until after it’s made.
- Decision
- A simulator lets an organiser describe a proposed action, and Claude projects its likely impact and trade-offs.
Limits and next steps
This was a hackathon demo, not an official TCD service. It stores data in JSON files, and AI summaries need checking by an organiser.
Try the proposal and response flow with students and organisers, and check whether summaries fairly represent different views.