On 6 Mar 2014, at 16:37, Michael Peel <michael.peel(a)manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
On 6 Mar 2014, at 16:30, Richard Nevell <richard.nevell(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
As a chapter we have run the Wikimedian in
Residence (WIR) programme since May 2012, when Andrew Gray started his residency at the
British Library.
You've missed out a couple of years of history there - British Museum, Derby,
ARKive...
As promised to Richard offlist, I've just gone through the survey and filled it in.
There were a number of questions that were rather odd in their phrasing or allowed answers
though. For example:
Question 2: these were all very general questions (e.g. asking about the lengths of WiRs
and their benefits to the community) that could only be answered 'Not at all',
'Moderately' and 'Completely'. I went for 'moderately' for all of
these as there wasn't really anything to completely disagree or agree with here - e.g.
length of residencies, it's not clear whether saying 'Completely' would
indicate support of 3-month or 1-year residencies.
Questions 5 and 6: these are nearly impossible to answer as a 'select 3' question.
Having a ranked answer here would be much more effective.
I was also expecting to see more questions on topics like 'what are the most important
aspects and outcomes of a successful WiR project?', 'how would you like to be
involved in future WiR projects?' and 'how can WiR projects better engage
volunteers?'.
My main suggestion would be: please share drafts of surveys like this on-wiki and ask for
feedback on them before starting to ask for answers to them! WMUK's membership survey
is a really good example of how such surveys can be collaboratively designed and carried
out.
Thanks,
Mike