Grants:PEG/WM US-DC/Workshop Facilitator Training/Report
- Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?
- Is your project completed?
Activities and lessons learned
- 4 men and 8 women attended the workshop training.
- 12/12 attendees thought the workshop format was productive and would recommend the workshop to other Wikipedians
- Comments on what they liked about the training: "I picked up a lot of 'soft knowledge' that you need to interact personally with people to get...you can't just read about it", "I enjoyed being able to get input from other users and administrators, collaborating and getting different perspectives", "Writing my first article…[and] coming up with a concept for a grant proposal" "Learning specific strategies for making it easier for newcomers to get started...sharing my knowledge and experience to help fellow editors."
- Comments on what was most valuable: "A chance to interact with other systemic bias folks", "Honestly, I think participation in an event like this is very helpful to lend the participant an air of authority. When I make my pitch to academic institutions to lead Wikipedia workshops in the future, I can now claim that I'm qualified to teach because I've been through Workship Facilitator Training. I think that will make my pitch much stronger.", "The "how to" nuts and bolts of running a successful editathon from those who've done it previously, with tons of links for follow-up. Knowing that we'll have support for our editathon ideas.", "Meeting other Wikipedians, building a community of Wikipedia Workshop Facilitators, learning how to properly file grants and go through Wikipedia administrative policies"
- Comments on diversity, etc. for future training sessions "This group was nice because it was diverse.", "good mix of interests and geography. The size was about right.", "The diversity here was incredible, and I think we have a good mix geographically and agewise, but we lacked racial diversity (100% white - that's a metric). I think a more formal application process where you can obtain metrics from applicants would be ideal.", "I agree with the focus on people associated with institutions/organizations that can aid their work on editathons. Reaching out more beyond college campuses would be exciting - other forms of community organizations!"
- Grant proposals were workshopped by all of the attendees.
- 2 WikiProjects/task forces were founded by attendees! en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers and en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Incubator/Women in warfare and the military
- What worked well?
- The training was very much an opportunity for participants to share knowledge and network with one another while learning from our trainer's experience. According to participants' ranks, the most useful session was on teaching techniques for working with participants, which included hands-on practice. The second-most useful was on grant-writing, which included creating ideas, coming up with impact statements, and working on metrics.
- What didn't work?
- Because of how quickly this needed to be planned, flights cost more than usual and there was some logistical awkwardness caused by the several different venues used. People found resource workshop sessions too long and not useful, which is something we will modify in the future.
- What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?
- Productive suggestions for improvement for future iterations of this valuable program: better logistics (which will be easily solved by planning more than a month in advance), schedule given in advance, tighter flow, and nametags. They also had suggestions for creating small groups/breakout sessions, which is something we have done at GLAM camp and will definitely include in the next facilitator training. We will compress future iterations into just two days, instead of 2.5 days. They will also start slightly later in the day!
We created Edit-a-thon worklists based on the notes from our training.
Outcomes and impact
- Provide the original project goal here.
- The goal of the project is to train 10-15 facilitators in how to conduct effective, repeated editing workshops.
- Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.
- We achieved our goal by training 12 facilitators, including facilitators in the DC area. We will a longer-term impact assessment in August 2015 to see how effective our participants have been in organizing their own workshops. In the meantime we are staying in touch with them, including through email and a dedicated Facebook group we set up.
Progress towards targets and goals
|Project metrics||Target outcome||Achieved outcome||Explanation|
|10 trained facilitators||12 trained facilitators||We recruited nine participants from throughout the United States plus three DC-area participants.|
We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees. In addition to the measures of success for your specific program (in above section), please use the table below to let us know how your project contributed to the Global Metrics. We know that not all projects will have results for each type of metric, so feel free to put "0" where necessary.
- Next to each required metric, list the actual outcome achieved through this project.
- Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome. For example, if you were funded for an edit-a-thon which resulted in 0 new images, your explanation might be "This project focused solely on participation and articles written/improved, the goal was not to collect images."
For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.
|1. # of active editors involved||13||All of the individuals involved were active editors except for one.|
|2. # of new editors||0||This training focused on experienced Wikipedia editors looking to recruit other Wikipedians.|
|3. # of individuals involved||14||12 participating in the training, plus the trainer and a volunteer assisting with logistics|
|4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages||0||This event focused on training, rather than contributions of media.|
|5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects||0||This event did not focus on writing articles.|
|6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects||0||This event did not focus directly on contributing to Wikimedia projects|
- Learning question
- Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?
- As a result of this training, two new WikiProjects emerged on the English Wikipedia, plus grant proposals for the Wikimedia Foundation PEG program.
Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects?
- The Workshop Facilitator Training helped to increase participation by training experienced Wikipedia editors in best practices for hosting workshops. The participants, having spent a weekend with each other, were very satisfied with the event, including with the connections they were able to make. Over time we hope to see these participants organize their own events that will recruit new editors to the Wikimedia projects.
Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects?
- The facilitators were trained to organize events around specific subjects, attracting newcomers on the basis of their interests. These newcomers will have a safe space to learn how to edit Wikipedia and contribute new content to Wikipedia.
Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?
- We do not believe this will work to increase the readership of Wikipedia, if only because Wikipedia is already so widely read throughout the United States and we did not necessarily focus on introducing it to a new audience.
Reporting and documentation of expenditures
This section describes the grant's use of funds
- Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grants at wikimedia dot org, according to the guidelines here? Answer "Yes" or "No".
- Will do.
- Please list all project expenses in a table here, with descriptions and dates. Review the instructions here.
|Item||Total cost (budgeted)||Total cost (actual)||Difference||Notes|
|Accommodations||$4,440.00||$5,224.74||+17.7%||Nightly room rate was raised to $159/night plus tax. There was also one participant who stayed an extra night, as it was cheaper to fly out the following Monday morning instead of Sunday night (even factoring in the cost of the extra room-night.)|
|Airfare||$4,500.00||$6,359.30||+41.3%||Much of the flight-booking took place less than three weeks before the training, including one flight that had to be booked the night before due to a miscommunication.|
|Ground Transportation||—||$194.89||—||Ground transportation (e.g. getting to and from the airport) not anticipated by our original budget. Those who submitted for reimbursement for ground transportation were reimbursed with non-WMF funds.|
|Day 1 (Catering)||$375.00||$350.74||-6.5%||Jason's Deli catered breakfast and lunch during the training.|
|Day 2 (Room)||$150.00||$150.00||+0.0%||Room fee at a local public library.|
|Day 2 (Catering)||$375.00||$350.74||-6.5%||Jason's Deli catered breakfast and lunch during the training.|
|Day 3 (Catering)||$375.00||$317.08||-15.4%||We did not have a dedicated room for the half-day. We had breakfast at the hotel restaurant (which was a bit pricey), but lunch was delivered sandwiches (which was a lot cheaper).|
|Day 1||$500.00||$99.66||-80.1%||Dinner at Ratzie's Pizza, which was very cost effective.|
|Day 2||$500.00||$438.67||-12.3%||Dinner at La Azteca restaurant, which was roughly in line with expected cost.|
|Group Dinners Total||$1,000.00||$538.33||-41.2%|
|Hotel Room||$444.00||$505.62||+13.9%||Nightly room rate was increased to $159/night.|
|Airfare||$250.00||$507.20||+102.9%||Due to constraints on the part of the trainer, and to ensure that the trainer did not leave before others, we were limited in our travel options.|
|Ground Transportation||—||$118.06||—||Taxi fare for getting to and from the airport was reimbursed with non-WMF funds. Taxi use was required, as the flight itinerary for each leg precluded the use of public transportation.|
- Total project budget (from your approved grant submission)
- Total amount requested from WMF (from your approved grant submission, this total will be the same as the total project budget if PEG is your only funding source)
- Total amount spent on this project
- Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project
- Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.
- Wikimedia DC tapped into its general financial resources to cover a cost overrun of $2,707.70.
- Are there any grant funds remaining?
- Answer YES or NO.
- Please list the total amount (specify currency) remaining here. (This is the amount you did not use, or the amount you still have after completing your grant.)
- If funds are remaining they must be returned to WMF, reallocated to mission-aligned activities, or applied to another approved grant.
- Please state here if you intend to return unused funds to WMF, submit a request for reallocation, or submit a new grant request, and then follow the instructions on your approved grant submission.
- There are no unused funds.