Grants talk:Project/Wikipedia and the Aotearoa New Zealand History Curriculum

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

Reminder: Change status to proposed to submit[edit]

IMPORTANT: Please note that you must change your proposal status from "draft" to "proposed" by the submission deadline in order for your proposal to be reviewed in the current round. When your proposal has been successfully submitted, it will show up in the "Open proposals" list (it may take several minutes for the list to update after you submit it). Applications that are not completely filled out and correctly submitted by the deadline will not be reviewed. To submit your proposal, you must complete all fields of the application and then:

1. Click on "edit source"
2. Change "|status=DRAFT" to "|status=PROPOSED"
3. Click the "Publish changes" button.

Thank you,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eligibility provisionally confirmed, Round 2 2021 - Research and Software proposal[edit]

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

We've provisionally confirmed your proposal is eligible for review in Round 2 2021 for Research and Software projects, contingent upon:

  • confirmation that the project will not depend on staff from the Wikimedia Foundation for code review, integration or other technical support during or after the project, unless those staff are part of the Project Team.
  • compliance with our COVID-19 guidelines.

Schedule delay

Please note that due to unexpected delays in the review process, committee scoring will take place from April 17 through May 2, instead of April 9-24, as originally planned.

  • Please watch your talkpage, which will be the primary method of communication about your proposal. We appreciate your timely response to questions and comments posted there.
  • Please refrain from making changes to your proposal during the scoring period, so that all committee members score the same version of your proposal.
  • After the scoring period ends, you are welcome to make further changes to your proposal in response to committee comments.

COVID-19 planning for travel and/or offline events

Proposals that include travel and/or offline events must ensure that all of the following are true:

  • You must review and can comply with the guidelines linked above.
  • If necessary because of COVID-19 safety risks, you must be able to complete the core components of your proposed work plan _without_ offline events or travel.
  • You must be able to postpone any planned offline events or travel until the Wikimedia Foundation’s guidelines allow for them, without significant harm to the goals of your project.
  • You must include a COVID-19 planning section in your activities plan. In this section, you should provide a brief summary of how your project plan will meet COVID-19 guidelines, and how it would impact your project if travel and offline events prove unfeasible throughout the entire life of your project.

Community engagement

We encourage you to make sure that stakeholders, volunteers, and/or communities impacted by your proposed project are aware of your proposal and invite them to give feedback on your talkpage. This is a great way to make sure that you are meeting the needs of the people you plan to work with and it can help you improve your project.

  • If you are applying for funds in a region where there is a Wikimedia Affiliate working, we encourage you to let them know about your project, too.
  • If you are a Wikimedia Affiliate applying for a Project Grant: A special reminder that our guidelines and criteria require you to announce your Project Grant requests on your official user group page on Meta and a local language forum that is recognized by your group, to allow adequate space for objections and support to be voiced).

We look forward to engaging with you in this Round!

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

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 05:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Wikipedia and the Aotearoa New Zealand History Curriculum[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?
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
(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?
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • Project in education (finally).
  • I am not sure that the project fits with Wikimedia's strategic priorities. It is just a survey of public opinion about Wikipedia limited to teachers in one country.
  • Not sure, seems to be solving more a strategic goal of the institution rather than Wikimedia movement
  • The project fits Wikimedia’s strategic priorities. The research is sustainable and the outcome can be used or adopted elsewhere, moreover, this would lead to increased contributions to various projects.
  • This is a project in several phases and each one of them has its own specificities and should lead to a risk assessment of its own. Good leadership and project management skills are particularly relevant for this proposal, and I believe the team has a good track record. If the project is well documented, this could provide a learning process for the movement.
  • The project has a limited potential impact in my opinion.
  • I really like the idea of using Wikipedia skills in education: like evaluating primary and secondary resources, classifying them, etc. But though the assumption is good, I don't understand why need a research, not just a edit-a-thon or something to directly test the assumption and gather feedback. The cost would be similar but we would get the result much faster
  • The project takes innovative approach to solving key problems. The potential impact of the project is greater than risk. The project has an evaluation plan that measures the outcomes of the project
  • The budget is realistic and participants probably have necessary skills.
  • too high cost for the researcher's time with a quite low number of respondents to be interviewed
  • The project can be completed at a duration of 12 months. The budget is realistic enough to undertake the projects. The participant has the necessary skills and also the involvement of experienced wikimedians in the movement to support and also services of a researcher.
  • The community engagement is limited.
  • The project seeks to target Aotearoa New Zealand community, focusing on the school. It has community support. 3. There is diversity related to the skills set in the team and also the community.
  • The project is more focused to GLAM and I don't know how relevant the results will be for education in general, but it operates in an important field.
  • Focused research, with a specific question to be addressed and within the scope of broader Wikimedia activities.
  • I am skeptical about this project. It is just a survey of public opinion limited to a subpopulation in one country. I think that there exist more efficient ways to survey the public opinion about Wikipedia.
  • yes but at lower cost: not clear how many hours required and what the hourly rate is. Seems to be pricey for just 30 interviews.
  • I support the project fully, so the participant should be given a full grant for the projects because it meets Wikimedia's strategic priorities.
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.
Marti (WMF) (talk) 05:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scheduling interview[edit]

Dear Jetaynz,

Your project has been selected by the Project Grants Committee to advance to the next stage of review. Consequently, I would like to meet with you for up to one hour to discuss your Project Grant proposal. I am reaching out to you here to kindly ask you to check your email and get back to me at your earliest convenience regarding your availability to meet.

Warm regards,

Mercedes Caso (platícame) 18:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Response to feedback[edit]

Kia ora, hello. Thanks to the Wikimedia Foundation for considering our grant application, and a big thanks to the members of the committee for their feedback and to Mercedes Caso for the time she gave us working through the committee's feedback.

Before addressing the feedback from the committee we think it's worth emphasising what a seachange the introduction of the compulsory Aotearoa New Zealand history curriculum is, and the potential we think it opens up both for Auckland Museum, the wider GLAM sector and the Wikipedia movement.[1] Until now the teaching of New Zealand's national history has been an optional subject in schools and kura kaupapa schools. From next year it becomes compulsory across all levels of the pre-tertiary education system. In Auckland, the city we are based in, this covers over 278,000 students, more than one third of New Zealand's 816,000 high school/secondary school age population.

What makes this a particularly exciting opportunity is the nature of the New Zealand secondary education system. While there is guidance around the themes and topics that should be covered, the New Zealand curriculum is not prescriptive in lesson planning or day to day teaching— it allows flexibility in the particular areas that can be taught by teachers and the teaching methods they can use. This opens up the potential for the use of innovative teaching methods, such as using Wikipedia in the classroom.

However the new curriculum is also focused on providing localised history for students. We are conscious of feedback from teachers in workshops that we have participated in around the new curriculum that they lack resources to teach at this micro level, and we see the initial impact of Wikipedia in providing local resources, in particular enhanced suburb articles as a starting point. Ideally a local teacher could go to their local suburb article and be presented with a list of resources that would make their lesson planning easier.

In terms of applied learning we are particularly excited with the excellent new resource Reading Wikipedia in the Classroom which we became aware of after we had submitted after our grant proposal. We plan to connect with the Wikimedia education team as well as the staff that put this resource together. This will enable us to hit the ground running when it comes to working with local teachers, rather then needing to start from scratch and put suitable training material together.

Another important part of this project is the literature review examining the use of Wikipedia in the secondary school classroom. An initial scan of the literature suggests that most studies of Wikimedia Projects and education focuses on the tertiary/university sector. We aim to synthesise research that has been undertaken on non-tertiary education and our project hopes to build on these learnings. The results that come out of this project will be put written up as a case study and we anticipate it will be both scalable and also applicable to other areas of the education curriculum, in particular natural science and social science teaching, and potentially in other countries which have a similar flexibility in their high school/secondary school curriculum.

To address some of the specific feedback:

Why a survey of public opinion?[edit]

We had originally intended to apply for this project as a Community Organizing project to work directly with teachers and schools. However after some discussion within the project team we realised we needed to first establish relationships with teachers and schools. Part of our rationale was that we should assess teachers needs around the new curriculum and in the process find willing participants to take part in a pilot project. By laying the groundwork undertaking this market research and establishing relationships with interested teachers and schools we feel that later pilot projects have a much better chance of success.

The number (30) of participants we originally intended to survey is small but New Zealand is a relatively small country with a population of only 4.5 million people— our target group of secondary school teachers is only a few hundred individuals, within 378 secondary schools across New Zealand. We're also conscious that teachers are busy and won't necessarily take time out to take part in our survey. For the purposes of complying with the grant (if successful) we aimed for a low number. Keeping this concern in mind we will make the survey available to teachers across the country and the target sample group has been adjusted up to 40, which will cover 10% of schools nationally. Our Visitor & Market Research team has informed us that valid conclusions can be drawn from this sample size.

We have also made time in our project plan for smaller workshops/focus groups with interested teachers. These will be Auckland based, as that is where the Museum is located as we are not nationally funded (our funding is from the Auckland Council). We believe we will glean the highest value information in these workshops and establish relationships for on-going partnerships in which we can test the utility of WMF resources and begin planning for pilot projects next year when the curriculum rolls out. This will by necessity involve only a handful of interested teachers, but can scale up depending on demand over time. If there is interest from other parts of the country we will happily share our methodology, advice and time with other organisations or GLAM institutions to undertake similar work.

Institutional Strategic Goals[edit]

This project is indeed being undertaken as part of Auckland Museum's strategic goals— as a publicly funded institutions this is a requirement of our day to day work. However we believe we are uniquely placed to undertake and deliver this project. Auckland Museum is one of the country's leading museums, has a long history of working with Wikimedia Foundation projects and this work is supported at a high level by our executive leadership team. We have recently commissioned a Wikimedia project strategy document written by local Wikimedians, and we are in the process of implementing these recommendations as part of our long term Wiki Workplan. Already this year this has involved employing a Wikimedian in Residence (funded by Wikicite), holding an edit-a-thon for the local community and we have an upcoming workshops with the local GLAM community, encouraging their involvement in Wikimedia projects. We are also hosting the 2nd Aotearoa New Zealand Wikicon in mid July, organised by the Wikimedia User Group of Aotearoa New Zealand.

Auckland Museum's education programme aims to engage 100,000 students onsite and deliver a range of online education programmes, products and services. The new history curriculum is a major focus of the Museum's work, and both our Wikipedia work and education programme intersect as can be seen from the project team which involves staff from across the Museum.

The Museum is committed to the open access of its collection, and our values align with the Wikimedia Foundation's goals to make open knowledge free and accessible. We also believe the longer term potential of this project aligns with the Wikimedia 2030 strategy aiming to be innovative in the dissemination of free knowledge and increasing the sustainability of movement by legitimising the use of Wikipedia in a secondary education setting and unlocking a new generation of Wikipedia editors.

Why not an edit-a-thon or community event?[edit]

As mentioned earlier, in our initial planning for this grant we quickly realised that it wasn't possible for us to go directly into schools, as we needed to establish relationships with schools and teachers first. Furthermore, working directly with high school/secondary school students (aged 13-18) raises a number of ethical issues, the most obvious of which is that working directly with minors is problematic. The advice that we received from our research advisor was that taking a market research approach would be the most straightforward in terms of ethical approval, and allows us to undertake this project in a timely fashion.

We intend on holding some edit-a-thons with local the local Wiki community in the future with the aim of enhancing local suburban articles, as part of the pilot of providing local history resources for teachers.

Pay rate for researcher[edit]

This was addressed in the comments in the endorsements. As mentioned there a rate of NZD$35 (USD$25) p/hour for 12 weeks work (at 37.5 hours per week) was put forward. After further research we are keeping this pay rate as initially proposed. Though it is on the higher end of the hourly rate for research analysis in New Zealand and the researcher will be working with experts from across the museum, they will be required to undertake a literature review, design, analyse and write up the survey and also undertake workshops/focus groups with teachers, so we believe this is fair remuneration for the skillset that is required. In terms of timeframe it is our preference for the research to be completed by the end of this calendar year/early 2022 as the history curriculum rolls out at the start of next year, so a full time rate at a shorter time period works better for us. For the period the researcher is employed by the Museum they will be treated as full time staff, and have office space, consumables and other benefits as available to staff which will be paid for by the Museum.

Community engagement[edit]

A number of local Wikipedians have endorsed this project and if successful we will look at ways that we can engage with them on this project, as advisors and also contributors to the work that we will do, particularly around enhancing local articles as part of the pilot project working with teachers to provide resources. We have a Wikipedian in Residence on the project team who is a long time Wikipedia editor and is active within the local community. As mentioned earlier, the Museum also has a Wiki Workplan guiding our work with Wikimedia Foundation projects, and an important element of this is actively engaging with the local community. We are hosting the 2nd Aotearoa New Zealand Wikicon in mid July this year where we can closely discuss with local editors how to work on this project together. We also envision hosting regular monthly or bi-monthly meet-ups going forward, some of which will focus on how we can enhance Wikipedia articles to assist teachers.

There is also a longer term outcome that we would like to see occur. As mentioned in the proposal, if we can work with local teachers and schools to normalise the use of Wikipedia in the secondary school classroom we hope to grow a new, diverse generation of Wikipedia editors here in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Risk assessment[edit]

There are a number of potential risks around this project, most of which relate to the participation of the intended survey group.

  • Lack of buy in from local teachers/not enough survey participants - This is a medium level risk. We believe that circulating the initial survey through various professional networks (as listed on the proposal page), we should be able to cover off enough of the target group. If there are issues there are members of the project team which have personal contacts within the teaching profession that we can call upon.
  • Over subscription from teachers - This is a low level risk. If we find that there are more teachers interested in this project than we are able to host for workshops and focus groups we could stagger participants over time, as the curriculum will take 2-3 years to bed-in within schools.
  • Negative perception towards the use of Wikipedia - This is a high level risk. We have anecdotal evidence that teachers regard using Wikipedia as a resource in the classroom with some suspicion. If our survey findings indicate this is true then we can use their concerns as the basis for a positive education campaign, addressing their feedback with respect but also attempt to show them the ways that Wikipedia can be positively integrated into a classroom setting— particularly drawing on the excellent new Wikimedia Foundation resource Reading Wikipedia in the Classroom.

Changes to original proposal[edit]

  • increased minimum participation rate to 40 - survey made available to teachers across New Zealand
  • more detail on workshops/focus groups - Auckland based
  • more detail on pay rate (USD/NZD and hours required to work)

Ngā mihi maioha, thank you

Jetaynz (talk) 13:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Round 2 2021 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, $11,400

Comments regarding this decision:
The committee is pleased to fund this research project to learn more about the attitudes towards the use of Wikipedia of history teachers. We appreciate the integration of existing knowledge in the research area, the incorporation of support and guidance from the Education team at the Wikimedia Foundation, and plans to build upon learnings from the Wikipedia in the Classroom program.

NOTE: Funding of any offline activities (e.g. travel and in-person events) is contingent upon compliance with the Wikimedia Foundation's COVID-19 guidelines. We require that you complete the Risk Assessment Tool:

  • 14 days before any travel and/or gathering event
  • 24 hours before any travel and/or gathering event

Offline events may only proceed if the tool results continue to be green or yellow.

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.
Marti (WMF) (talk) 04:47, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Updated timeline for Project[edit]

Dear @Jetaynz, it was very lovely connecting with you on a call last week (14 Oct 2021). Thanks for sharing that you'll require more time for project implementation due to the changing COVID-19 situation in New Zealand. I've updated the timeline of your project accordingly, taking place Nov 2021-Mar 2022 (previously June - Oct 2021). Please feel free to adjust the dates when you have greater visibility on your end. Looking forward to connecting again in a few months. Stay safe and well. Keep in touch. JChen (WMF) (talk) 08:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you @JChen (WMF) was lovely to talk to you too. Our Research Assistant should be onboard with us in the next week or so and we will be able to finalise our timeframes shortly after that. Look forward to speaking again soon. Jetaynz (talk) 04:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]