Hey all,

You already know this, but I ran some example numbers, and I figured you'd
appreciate them.

We're too big to use Outreachy to significantly impact our diversity
numbers.  Just to take one dimension of one segment of our committer
pipeline, and some simplified numbers as an example: if we have 8000
committers across all of our projects, and 5% are women, we'd need to add
444 women committers to raise the percentage of women committers to 10%.
(8000*(.1 -.05)/(1 - .1))

If all of the Outreachy interns were women, and 90% of the Outreachy
interns were to become project committers, we'd need to employ 494
Outreachy interns.

Outreachy interns cost the org 6.5 thousand dollars, work for 6 weeks, and
require roughly 5 hours of mentoring per week.  *So raising participation
of women to 10% would cost more than 3.2 million dollars, and nearly 15
thousand mentor hours, if done solely via Outreachy.*

Of course several of my assumptions are downright silly.  So, it would
likely cost much more.  But even that amount is currently well beyond our
reach.  And the participation of minorities in our projects is probably
worse than the participation of women, so continuing this calculation along
those dimensions is just going to get depressing.

Direct impact on our diversity statistics can't be our goal in
participating in Outreachy.

Instead, one of the hopes that have been expressed with respect to hosting
an Outreachy intern is that we'll be able to follow their progress and
learn from the problems they encounter (following the "Switch" model (1)),
so that we can figure out what's keeping people out of our communities and
tackle those underlying problems.

Naomi's recent e-mail on this is super exciting.  I am really looking
forward to watching the work she's describing.

Best Regards,
Myrle

1.)
https://www.amazon.com/Switch-change-things-when-hard-ebook/dp/B005TKD512/

Reply via email to