User:Jwild/Learnings template
if you have general navigation box, input it here
Learnings edit
This page is created to share lessons from the Brazil Program, in an effort to improve effectiveness of program. Other programs should use these learnings to benefit from the lessons learned, and yet they should note that some lessons are relevant only to this particular time and location.
School Selection edit
Aspect | Method/Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Administration Leadership | We did not work closely with any directors at universities |
The professors we worked with said that working with administrations of universities would help give us more publicity if we wanted to recruit more |
|
Location of school |
We targeted schools in Two areas (Rio & Sao Paulo) due to:
We had one school that held classes in Marilla – about a 3 hour drive out of Sao Paulo |
|
Concentrate the focus of the courses in areas with ambassador options |
Rank of school | We loosely targeted schools that were well-ranked | *While the rank of the school does not appear to be associated with the schools success, the quality of the students in the course is important | *Continue to look at the “rank” or prestige of the school as one indicator of the quality of the students. Note that this should not be the top requirement |
Instrastructure | We didn’t think about this beforehand, but it is a requirement to have computer labs and times available fro the students |
Not all campuses have consistent access to computer labs, and not all DEPARTMENTS have access to computer labs. |
We should ensure the professor and campus ambassadors know beforehand that they need access to computer labs and work with their schools to get them |
Professor Selection edit
Aspect | Method/Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Professor characteristics | We targeted faculty who were passionate about open access |
We found the top professor characteristics were:
|
Work with professors who self-identify as wanting to be involved with the project, not just who look good on paper. One way to do this is through an open-call. |
Availability | Given the goal above of recruiting top professors who were passionate about access, we observed that in fact, many of our professors were too busy, and we saw some with very tight schedules or teaching |
When professors do not have the time to engage in the project fully, they have a hard time prioritizing the project in their class time, and do not fully leverage the campus ambassadors available to them. |
Try to get a feel for how much time a professor will have during the semester; we should avoid over-investing time in recruiting professors who do not proactively respond with interest. |
Planning | We did not have a tight training to really communicate with professors what was expected of them |
The professors were never walked through the expectations of them during this semester. Moreover, they did not have the chance to really sit down and dig into the details of their coursework and how Wikipedia could augment that on the literal level. |
Work with professors on the development of the project before the semester. This is essential in good project planning. Having the professors think about how the project should look before applying to the program could be an excellent way of going about this. |
Course Selection edit
Aspect | Method/Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Course design |
We had one course with multiple professors and the rest had just one faculty member |
The course with multiple professors had a harder time justifying time spent on Wikipedia. |
Ask about the structure of the course before the semester to understand the dynamics that may be involved |
Course planning |
We had a brief training before the semester to help plan out the semester, but this was not done. We experienced a lot of changes in the courses during the semester |
Professors are often very uncertain about the disciplines and how many classes they are going to teach before the semester starts, having limited information to plan in advance |
|
Computer Skills |
We did not preference courses based on the anticipated tech-savviness of the students. |
We did not experience any issues with students being unable to operate online |
None |
Year/level of students |
We did not target classes based on their level. We have had undergraduate, graduate, and PhD level courses |
TBD |
TBD |
Campus Ambassadors edit
Aspect | Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Wikipedians vs. non-Wikipedians |
We targeted 50% of our volunteers to be Wikipidians. We actually ended up with a higher percentage of x% |
Having Wikipedians was critical to the success of the project – they are able to answer questions and are committed to the success of the broader project Having Non-Wikipedians also provided a breath of fresh commitment and innovative ideas. |
We should continue to strive for at least a 50% of ambassadors being Wikipedians, and we should definitely be open to new editors becoming campus ambassadors |
Recruitment |
We did some online recruitment for editors and Wikimedians, but did not do much targeting outside of that. |
We were able to attract the minimum number of ambassadors necessary, but there wasn’t a lot of extra interest. For the non-Wikipedians, they came on their own accord and wanted to learn a LOT! |
Continue formal, on-Wikipedia recruitment efforts, but also try to do more expansive effort to plug people in who previously were not a part of the known community, for example through a banner on Wikipedia or through professors and/or university programs. (See Recrutamento de embaizadores) |
Campus Ambassador training |
We had combined training with professors, which did not offer much specializing for the CAs |
The CAs knew mostly about Wikipedia, but they were not prepared to know how to interact with their professors. They needed more support in understanding their roles and responsibilities, and also knowing when they should ask for help (e.g., when there was no computer lab available or the school was on strike) |
|
Online Ambassador training |
We had some half-hearted IRC attempts at talking to the Online Ambassadors, but no formal training and certainly not collective communication |
The OAs were unclear about their purpose, WMF was unclear about how to leverage them, and the professors were unclear what their purpose was |
|
Communication edit
Aspect | Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
With Ambassadors |
We essentially only communicated with ambassadors via the Embaizadores talk page |
We were able to get in contact with the CAs pretty well via this way, but not everyone. It did not become a space to share ideas or recommendations, and it was not very useful in designing how to target next steps or execute plans |
|
With Students |
Some ambassadors had mailing lists of students, some had Moodle, and some had solely the professors. |
It was difficult to get the students to do things like fill out surveys. This could be due to the difficulty of getting into contact, or it could be from the lack of emphasis by the professors. |
Establish with the professors from the onset what the best way to collaborate with the students is |
With professors |
We would call and email professors |
Some professors were slow in responding to emails, so ability to pick up the phone and call is very important. |
|
With Brazil education team and SF team |
We had regular check-ins and bi-weekly full team meanings |
In-class Sessions edit
Resources edit
Aspect | Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Campus Ambassador to student ratio |
TBD |
TBD |
TBD |
Motivation edit
Aspect | Observations | Learnings | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Motivating CAs |
|
To motivate and encourage CAs we can create hierarchy. For example CA level –I & II. To become CA level – II, the applicant should have at least:
|
|
Motivating students |
|
We can motivate these students by:
|
|
Motivating faculty |
|
|
|