On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>
wrote:

>
>
> I hope that at some point WLM organizers can be given the tools, enthusiasm
> and support to create their own evaluation on a larger scale. That way I
> hope that some of the flaws can be avoided thanks to a better understanding
> of the collaborations, structures and the projects in general.
>

The Evaluation portal on Meta [1] has all the resources we use, open to
organizers of any program. There is a guide to using the portal resources
[2]. We also host virtual meet ups regularly to develop capacity around
evaluation, that are recorded and available on our Youtube channel [3]
under CC license. The Learning and Evaluation team is open to have
conversations one on one as well! =)

We are always encouraging program leaders to engage in this conversation:
what metrics matter to this program, what is relevant to measure. Happily,
this is the conversation we had with some WLM organizers yesterday [4],
which is also taking place on WLM Report talk page [5].



> All in all it is good to have something 'to shoot at' but I would prefer
> that these reports are produces more in concert with the stakeholders
> involved and affected, rather than 'announced' and 'presented' to the wide
> community.


This isn't true. We always reach out to program leaders to engage in data
collection. Further, had you taken part of the event, or even watched it,
or read the blog we wrote [6], you would have seen nothing is presented or
announced, rather, open for discussion and conversation.



*María Cruz * \\  Community Coordinator, PE&D Team \\ Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc.
mc...@wikimedia.org  |  :  @marianarra_ <https://twitter.com/marianarra_>

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Evaluation
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Evaluation/Introduction
[3] https://www.youtube.com/user/WikiEvaluation/
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN3TN4wrFZs
[5]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:Evaluation/Evaluation_reports/2015/Wiki_Loves_Monuments

[6]
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/22/first-2015-wikimedia-programs-evaluations/




>
> Best,
> Lodewijk (effeietsanders)
> member of the international coordinating team 2011-2013
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Claudia, I share your concerns about reducing subtle things to a few
> > numbers.  Data can also be used in context-sensitive ways.  So I'm
> > wondering if there are any existing quantitative summaries that you find
> > useful? Or qualitative descriptions that draw from  more than one
> project?
> >
> > Figuring out what ideas are repeatable, scalable, or awesome but one-time
> > only, is complex. We probably need many different approaches, not one
> > central approach, to understand and compare.
> >
> > I'm glad to see data being shared, and again it might help to have many
> > different datasets, to limit conceptual bias in what sort of data is
> > relevant.
> >  On May 6, 2015 9:59 AM, "Claudia Garád" <claudia.ga...@wikimedia.at>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Sam,
> > >
> > > I am sure there are figures and stories that the various orgs collect
> and
> > > publish. But they are spread across different wikis and websites and/or
> > > languages. E.g. many of the FDC orgs are looking into ways to
> demonstrate
> > > these more qualitative aspects of our work (e.g. by storytelling) in
> > their
> > > reports.
> > > But these information does not get the same attention and publicity in
> > the
> > > wider community as the evaluation done by the WMF. Many WMAT volunteers
> > and
> > > I myself share the concerns expressed by Romaine that these
> > unidimensional
> > > numbers and lack of context foster misconceptions or even prejudices
> > > especially in the parts of the community that are not closely involved
> in
> > > the work of the respective groups and orgs.
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Claudia
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Am 06.05.2015 um 13:40 schrieb Sam Klein:
> > >
> > >> Hi Romaine,
> > >>
> > >> Are there other evals of WLM projects that capture the complexity you
> > >> want?
> > >>
> > >> Perhaps single-community evaluations done by the WLM organizers there?
> > >>
> > >> Sam
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Romaine Wiki <romaine.w...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>> In the past months the Wikimedia Foundation has been writing an
> > >>> evaluation
> > >>> about Wiki Loves Monuments. [1]
> > >>>
> > >>> At such it is fine that WMF is writing an evaluation, however they
> fail
> > >>> in
> > >>> actual understanding Wiki Loves Monuments, and that is shown in the
> > >>> evaluation report.
> > >>>
> > >>> As a result on the Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list a discussion
> grows
> > >>> about the various problems the evaluation has.
> > >>>
> > >>> As the Learning and Evaluation team at the Wikimedia Foundation
> already
> > >>> had
> > >>> released the first Programs Reports for Wiki Loves Monuments, we are
> > now
> > >>> put as fait accompli with this evaluation report.
> > >>>
> > >>> Therefore I am writing here so that the rest of the worldwide
> Wikimedia
> > >>> community is informed that this is not going right.
> > >>>
> > >>> Wiki Loves Monuments is not just a bunch of uploads done in
> September,
> > >>> the
> > >>> report is too simplified without actual understanding how the
> community
> > >>> is
> > >>> doing this project.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Romaine
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Evaluation/Evaluation_reports/2015/Wiki_Loves_Monuments
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > >>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to