Education Committee/Education Committee meeting January 2013

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please note this is a draft. Please do feel free to make edits and contributions.

The meeting will take place at 6pm on Wednesday 30 January.

Agenda[edit | edit source]

  1. Introductions
  2. Form of the committee – how do we want to work? Do we have enough people / the right people involved? See Education Committee Charter and General Committee Charter.
  3. Virtual Learning Environment – to include current progress, report by Stevie and Charles, next steps (including potential development tasks to be delegated to our contract developers), recommendations, timescales
  4. Train the Trainer - agreement for trainers (Daria, if deemed appropriate for this meeting)
  5. Schools conference – what it is, when it is proposed to take place, current planning, delegation of tasks
  6. Digital Disruption update (Stevie)
  7. Education Organiser – anyone applying should recuse themselves from this section
  8. Any other business

Notes[edit | edit source]

Please do add notes here regarding any of the topics above. Anything useful here is a bonus. (I have put form of the committee after introductions, as how we handle subsequent issues will be affected by this, Leutha (talk))
2) Drawn from Education Committee Charter

  1. Election of chair and secretary
  2. Budget responsibilities (see 2013 Activity Plan:
Train the Trainers Programme (currently Doug and Martin hold responsibility): £19,420
Virtual Learning Environment (currently Doug and Martin hold responsibility): £2,000
Schools conference (currently Doug holds responsibility) : £12,000
Do Doug and Martin want to share responsibility for these budgets? Is the committee ready to take on such responsibilities, or should we play more of an advisory role? How would CoIs be handled if they arose? Should we take on one element first and see how we get on handling that. Leutha (talk)

3) VLE

VLE Progress Report
  • The discussion around the VLE should include thoughts on user testing prior to going public with the software (SB)
  • See comments from Dave Braunschweig (Wikiversity & Harper College) here.
ADDIE diagram
Please check out Instructional Design, a resource developed by the community to help understand course design issues. Towards the bottom of the page there is a link to User Testing of E-Learning Courses which uses ADDIE as a framework. From reading that, it would seem we are not ready for User Testing yet. So, returning to the proposals I made in the e-mail I circulated I suggest:
  1. We canvass the opinion of people who have already completed the Training the Trainers (TtT) programme as regards what Charles has done. This would probably be better done in the context of asking them how they would like to see their role as WMUK Volunteer trainers develop
  2. We ask the Mancester cohort to review the material as well.
  3. We prepare for a get together - either face-to-face or virtually - inviting all the people who have completed TtT for a discussion of how the programme can be taken forward - of which the VLE will be one element.
  4. Develop a framework of recordable outcomes as against costs, so that proposals for spending the limited budget can be considered in an effective way.

4) Training the Trainers Agreement:

Amendment to agreement proposed by Leutha (talk) (for discussion, see here: Replace para 3 to read:
3) "The Participant agrees to contribute towards Wikimedia UK activities designed to realise the objectives of the charity, and to apply the knowledge and skills they have gained in a way which is in harmony with ethos of the Wikimedia movement."
Comment: What is the point of calling the training "accredited training" if it is purely for recognition with WMUK? Leutha (talk)
Thanks for setting out these suggestions, Leutha. In response to your comments, it's still accredited training even if only accredited by Wikimedia UK, for Wikimedia UK's purposes. It's essential that our training programme is credible, i.e. seen as professional quality, but at the same time owned by and relevant to Wikimedia UK. At the same time, we're only training people to do Wikimedia stuff, not recommending them for other kinds of work. Happy to discuss this further. MartinPoulter (talk) 17:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)