Often, it helps to have an outsider perspective. We in the Pune community
met Torey to day and are of the opinion that the Foundation wants someone
from their side to provide an impartial outsider's view and also to explore
ways ahead in addition to finding out whats going on and what had happened.

Obviously, her assignment is just one of a number of initiatives that are
underway to improve/get feedback regarding the IEP fiasco.

Warm regards,

Ashwin Baindur
------------------------------------------------------


On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Anirudh Bhati <anirudh...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Barry Newstead 
> <bnewst...@wikimedia.org>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks for the engagement on the questions that should be tacked in this
>> evaluation.  See inline for a brief response to Theo's question about Tory
>> Read.
>>
>> Best,
>> Barry
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Theo10011 <de10...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I really didn't read the entire thread to have a lot of comments, I just
>>> have one point I noticed that I wanted to ask - Why is Tory Read conducting
>>> the "evaluative study"?
>>>
>>> As I recall, her only exposure to India and Wikipedia before this was
>>> the research project. And even that had nothing to do with the Education
>>> program directly. Is there a reason why she's leading the study?
>>>
>>> It seems like the same pattern of avoiding knowledgeable
>>> and experienced members of the community to focus on the "outside
>>> perspective". I thought the only lesson that the team did take away was,
>>> you can't do in India what the global education team and Frank did in the
>>> US. They don't scale and you need local solutions.
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure Ms. Read is a competent researcher and would do a good
>>> job but I don't see how Ms. Read's expertise or exposure to India and the
>>> Education program would make this process any different from the pattern
>>> that brought IEP here. Talking to the staff in SF, or spending a day in
>>> Delhi or Pune is not going to give a clear picture at all.
>>>
>>
>> Tory is indeed a competent researcher who built a solid understanding of
>> the community and how things work in Wikimedia during her engagement with
>> us in the India Chronicles.  I selected her for this assignment because she
>> has a good working knowledge of our general situation from her work on the
>> India Chronicles, she has the skills to interview a good cross-section of
>> those involved (WP editors, students, profs, Campus Ambassadors, online
>> ambassadors, staff, others), she can look at the issue with fresh eyes and
>> help synthesize learning and recommendations for changes, she will get this
>> done in a timely fashion while memories are still fresh (which is really
>> important).
>>
>> She is doing a combination of Skype, email and in-person interviews...and
>> is in Pune this week actually. I'm confident that her work will be valuable
>> to all of us and it will be shared in its entirety with the community.  It
>> won't be the only work on this. Both the India team and the Global
>> Education Program team are committed to doing more joint problem-solving on
>> future changes to the program with those interested in engaging with us.
>>
>>
> Hi Barry,
>
> My understanding is that conducting an evaluative study requires a deep
> comprehension of our projects and the volunteers.  At the same time, an
> exercise like this demands objectivity while analyzing empirical evidence.
>
> By building a repertoire of anecdotal evidence through a series of
> interviews mostly conducted over phone/VoIP, I do not see how this report
> will inform us beyond what discussions on this mailing list already have.
>
> Tory Read is an accomplished story-teller, but she is not a Wikipedian.
>  Can we simply not have WMF staff in New Delhi handle the interviews and
> requests for comment?  (They should also seek help from some of the
> established Wikipedia editors.)
>
> The reason why I am stressing on this is because I think that an
> established Wikipedia editor would be better-placed to objectively analyze
> what worked and what did not work, and how this program may be improved.
>  Such editors need not be Indian, they can be a group of Wikipedians who
> were directly or peripherally involved on Wikipedia when the IEP program
> was being executed.
>
> Best,
> anirudh
>
>
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to