Grants:Project/Rapid/Athikhun Suwannakhan/IFAA19 Workshop/Report
- Report accepted
- To read the approved grant submission describing the plan for this project, please visit Grants:Project/Rapid/Athikhun Suwannakhan/IFAA19 Workshop.
- You may still comment on this report on its discussion page, or visit the discussion page to read the discussion about this report.
- You are welcome to Email rapidgrants at wikimedia dot org at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.
Did you meet your goals? Are you happy with how the project went?
- Increase awareness of Wikimedia projects
- Recruit new editors
- Encourage experts contribution and participation in Wikimedia projects
- Increase the amount and quality of technical and highly specialised content in Wikimedia projects
- Make the audience realise the importance and impact of Wikimedia projects in higher education, medical education and global healthcare
- Ameliorate the negative perception of Wikipedia in academic community
- Expand network of potential partners
Please report on your original project targets.
This project is considered the very first steps to ameliorate the negative perception of Wikimedia projects in the academia. The questionnaire and the methodology employed in this study will be used to evaluate the quality of Wikipedia articles in other fields of study. In addition to the methodology to evaluate text contributions, we are developing a different set of questionnaire to evaluate media and multimedia platforms, which not only focuses on the accuracy and the quality of the materials in general, but will also address specifically the pedagogical, didactic, and technical quality.
|Target outcome||Achieved outcome||Explanation|
|100 attendees||30 attendees||Target NOT reached The conference had multiple parallel sessions. Therefore number of attendees were much less than expected.|
|5 partners||6 partners||Target reached Six potential collaborations with other researchers to explore the quality, accuracy, readability of Wikipedia articles across subjects in medicine.|
|50 new editors||n/a||Not applicable We could not identify new editors following the workshop. Since all of the attendees did not have a laptop or tablet with them, we could not ask them to register for a username. Therefore it is not possible to track their contributions after the event.|
Number of participants were smaller than we originally expected, which could have resulted from the congress having multiple parallel sessions. User:Athikhun is currently working on a standardized questionnaire which can be used to evaluate medical content on Wikipedia. The questionnaire will comprise of two forms, one for text evaluation and the other for media evaluation.
Projects do not always go according to plan. Sharing what you learned can help you and others plan similar projects in the future. Help the movement learn from your experience by answering the following questions:
- What worked well?
Our presentation and workshop helped increase the awareness of Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. It also highlighted the impact of Wikipedia and the roles that it has in higher education, especially in medical education. Live demonstration performed by Dr. Jacob de Wolff really demonstrated how easy it is to edit a Wikipedia article. Our methodology used to evaluate Wikipedia articles in the field of human anatomy is applicable to evaluate the articles in other fields of study, which are of interest for many researchers. We are looking forward to doing similar studies in the field of neuroscience and cell biology.
- What did not work so well?
Our original intention was to do interactive tutorial whereby participants follow the student training on wikiedu.org. However, most of them did not have laptop or tablet with them, making it possible to do interactive tutorial. What we did instead was live demonstration of Wikipedia editing, and answering questions the audience had.
- What would you do differently next time?
Since most of the audience are academics, they do not have technical background of Wikimedia projects. A different approach will be deployed to better engage the audience, especially with the technical side of Wikipedia.
Documentation of expenditures has been received by WMF.
Grant funds spent
Please describe how much grant money you spent for approved expenses, and tell us what you spent it on.
|Registration fee for User:Athikhun.suw (with student discount)||8,247.56|
|Registration fee for User:Jfdwolff||16,986.48|
|UK visa application fee||4,106.56|
All receipts will be sent to Rapid Grants officer separately for review.
Do you have any remaining grant funds? No
Anything else you want to share about your project?