There was one off-list question about the proposal below, regarding how to survey alignment of policy goals to clauses in the mission statement. I think the easiest way would be to list the several potential policy goals and ask people to rate each on a 1-5 scale as to whether they would:

(1) empower people around the world to collect and develop free educational content,

(2) engage people around the world to collect and develop free educational content, and

(3) disseminate the free educational content effectively and globally.

I think the sample size should be about 100 community members selected at random from projects' recent changes by editors with email addresses registered. Thoughts?

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 7:53 AM

I've had the opportunity to address some of the substantive objections to including general issues affecting the editor base in advocacy goals off-list, and I would like to propose something different as an alternative.

I propose that we establish quantative measures of potential advocacy actions which score the extent to which they would advance the mission. In practice, this would mean using aggregate rubric scores for each clause of the mission, asking a randomly selected subset of the community how much success in a specific advocacy goal would advance that clause, and then using the median (not mean, to prevent outlier effects) scores to rank the different potential advocacy actions.

Here is some background information on organizations which have done similar things:

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Crotts/publication/270959033_Aligni...

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2013-1488