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