Grants talk:Project/UG CI/Les Classes Wikipedia (Wikipedia Classroom)

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Eligibility confirmed, round 2 2017[edit]

IEG review.png
This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for round 2 2017 review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during the community comments period, through 17 October 2017.

The committee's formal review for round 2 2017 begins on 18 October 2017, and grants will be announced 1 December. See the schedule for more details.

Questions? Contact us.

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 01:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)


Aggregated feedback from the committee for Les Classes Wikipedia (Wikipedia Classroom) [edit]

Scoring rubric Score
(A) Impact potential
  • Does it have the potential to increase gender diversity in Wikimedia projects, either in terms of content, contributors, or both?
  • Does it have the potential for online impact?
  • Can it be sustained, scaled, or adapted elsewhere after the grant ends?
8.0
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
7.8
(C) Ability to execute
  • Can the scope be accomplished in the proposed timeframe?
  • Is the budget realistic/efficient ?
  • Do the participants have the necessary skills/experience?
7.2
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
8.0
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • This project is very well in Wikimedia's strategic priorities and has a potential for small but significant improvement for Côte d'Ivoire culture and knowledge.
  • I am happy to see project from Côte d'Ivoire. Congratulations!
  • Good project: increases diversity of editors and closes content gaps. High impact potential, can be adapted to other topics and/or in other countries
  • This project iterates on a proven solution. Posed risks are low given the consistence of the proposed mechanisms and outcomes. Targets are very well set.
  • project implementers have the necessary skills and there are clear measures of success
  • Good, known and working approach, although this is the first time in Côte d'Ivoire. Measures of success are reasonable
  • Apparently this budget requires a considerable cost in infrastructure to support the whole project. Outcome may be somewhat low given the cost. I also observe that the budget has a considerable amount of funds oriented to "snacks", "coordination" and several "ceremonies." Is this is all really needed for the success of this project?
  • the proposal does not contain much information and detailed descriptions are omitted.I give strong support for a more detailed proposal next time because it is very important for understanding the proposal. The budget is well written and presented. However, my concern is total amount of 6 095,43 (USD) for the set goals. 6095/100 articles = 60,95 per article. The budget lists the equipment: Is it necessary to buy new equipment? Can the partner (universities) provide a projector during the workshop?
  • The project is feasible and participants have necessary skills. The budget is a bit high but reasonable.
  • Community engagement is poor, facebook and twitter announces are not enough. More Wikimedia channels should be considered. Diversity should be at least analyzed to fully consider all the possibilities of this project.
  • there is some community support
  • Good support from the local user group, the project is targeting diversity.
  • I incline to fund but a reduction in some areas.
  • I support the project if the budget is reduced, or explained in more detail the need for equipment (and what will be with the equipment, if we will support it, after the project is completed)
  • I would consider discussing reduction of budget, notably compensation (12 months while the project is feasible in 9 months) and equipment (check if rent is reasonable and how equipment will be used after the end of the project)

Clarification regarding committee's feedback[edit]

Thanks very much for your feedback. You will find bellow some answers, in bold italic, to the points highlighted in your comments.

  • Good, known and working approach, although this is the first time in Côte d'Ivoire. Measures of success are reasonable

Thank you for your support. Although it is good to mention that this will be the second edition of Wikipedia Classroom in Côte d’Ivoire. We experimented a pilot phase with three groups of students last year (see this infographics showcasing the results and lessons learnt).

  • Apparently this budget requires a considerable cost in infrastructure to support the whole project. Outcome may be somewhat low given the cost. I also observe that the budget has a considerable amount of funds oriented to "snacks", "coordination" and several "ceremonies." Is this is all really needed for the success of this project?

Snacks have the advantage of providing a pleasant work environment. The availability of food and beverage prevents learners from having to go outside and search for something to eat of drink. This also leads to a better optimization of the learning time by avoiding lenthy breaks. Coordination allowances aim at supporting the management and monitoring work. The length of the project strongly implies to do so otherwise this would have a chilling effect on the enthusiasm of volunteers.

  • the proposal does not contain much information and detailed descriptions are omitted.I give strong support for a more detailed proposal next time because it is very important for understanding the proposal. The budget is well written and presented. However, my concern is total amount of 6 095,43 (USD) for the set goals. 6095/100 articles = 60,95 per article. The budget lists the equipment: Is it necessary to buy new equipment? Can the partner (universities) provide a projector during the workshop?

This calculation is restrictive as it ignores all other results and potential outcomes of this project. Beyond an impact on articles, it is important to note that the User Group, and in a sense the movement, will grow as new trained contributors and active volunteers will join the User Group. The project will bring about an increased engagement of existing members of the UG, stronger connexion with the Education ecosystem and partners, etc. In short, the impact of this project is multi-faceted as it follows the Wikimedia 2030 strategy

  • Community engagement is poor, facebook and twitter announces are not enough. More Wikimedia channels should be considered. Diversity should be at least analyzed to fully consider all the possibilities of this project.

Thanks, we will obviously take advantage of Wikimedia channels along with those mentioned earlier.

  • I support the project if the budget is reduced, or explained in more detail the need for equipment (and what will be with the equipment, if we will support it, after the project is completed)
  • I would consider discussing reduction of budget, notably compensation (12 months while the project is feasible in 9 months) and equipment (check if rent is reasonable and how equipment will be used after the end of the project)

The results (results and lessons) of the pilot phase carried out in 2017 taugth us to be autonomous when it comes to equipment. Providing rooms for training beyond regular class time is already a considerable effort from our partners. Furthermore, since this equipment will belong to the User Group, it will be used for other local projects and activities.

Best regards,

African Hope (talk) 11:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

IEG IdeaLab review.png

This proposal has been recommended for due diligence review.

The Project Grants Committee has conducted a preliminary assessment of your proposal and recommended it for due diligence review. This means that a majority of the committee reviewers favorably assessed this proposal and have requested further investigation by Wikimedia Foundation staff.


Next steps:

  1. Aggregated committee comments from the committee are posted above. Note that these comments may vary, or even contradict each other, since they reflect the conclusions of multiple individual committee members who independently reviewed this proposal. We recommend that you review all the feedback and post any responses, clarifications or questions on this talk page.
  2. Following due diligence review, a final funding decision will be announced on Thursday, May 27, 2021.

Questions? Contact us at projectgrants (_AT_) wikimedia  · org.


.

Round 2 2017 decision[edit]

IEG IdeaLab review.png

Congratulations! Your proposal has been selected for a Project Grant.

The committee has recommended this proposal and WMF has approved funding for the full amount of your request, $6096

Comments regarding this decision:
We are glad to see your successful educational work in Côte d'Ivoire continue!

Next steps:

  1. You will be contacted to sign a grant agreement and setup a monthly check-in schedule.
  2. Review the information for grantees.
  3. Use the new buttons on your original proposal to create your project pages.
  4. Start work on your project!

Upcoming changes to Wikimedia Foundation Grants

Over the last year, the Wikimedia Foundation has been undergoing a community consultation process to launch a new grants strategy. Our proposed programs are posted on Meta here: Grants Strategy Relaunch 2020-2021. If you have suggestions about how we can improve our programs in the future, you can find information about how to give feedback here: Get involved. We are also currently seeking candidates to serve on regional grants committees and we'd appreciate it if you could help us spread the word to strong candidates--you can find out more here. We will launch our new programs in July 2021. If you are interested in submitting future proposals for funding, stay tuned to learn more about our future programs.