Wikipedia:Education Program/Structure proposals/The Interior proposal

Please list your name and/or Wikipedia username.

What idea(s) do you have for what the new structure for the U.S. and Canada Wikipedia Education Programs could look like?

Universities and colleges can represent a great resource for content improvement on Wikipedia. However, experience has shown that without the proper framework student work can also have a negative effect on volunteers. Student editors and instructors need guidance before they can meet the specific needs of Wikipedia.

As the program moves forward, what is needed is in-depth analysis of the program so far. Which approaches have worked, what aspects have caused problems? Before we can begin the next phase of education partnership, or even sketch out how it will be organized, we have to find ways to align the goals of instructors/students and of Wikipedia itself. Impact reduction is important; the community of volunteers will not accept a process that leaves them out of the equation. As the WMF moves out of its leadership role, its employees can assist with providing the metrics needed to make these decisions.

In this period of declining editorship, we must find ways to attract engaged Wikipedians to work with courses. We can look at WikiProjects that still have high levels of participation, and emulate their methods. We must also work to improve the reputation of education projects. Instructors must be given the information they need to design successful Wikipedia integration and provide incentives to share experiences, both bad and good.

How would you ensure this new structure involves all key stakeholders, including academics and the Wikipedia community?

Wikipedia works because of collaboration. Wikipedians need ways to easily communicate with courses, and vice versa. The new Education Noticeboard can be a positive factor. Instructors also need a mechanism to provide feedback on successful approaches. The idea of a formal Board made up of both education professionals and Wikipedians has good potential to facilitate more open collaboration between stakeholders.

What are potential pitfalls of this approach?

Data collection and analysis is labour-intensive and determining the quality of submission can be subjective.
Because volunteer participation cannot be guaranteed, there may not be the involvement necessary for success.
The problem of courses that work outside of the Education Project framework still needs to be addressed.

Any other comments about your proposal?

This proposal does not lay out a concrete framework for the future form of the program. This is because I believe the data collection and analysis phase really will determine the approach we take. By looking at the past, we can better design the future of education partnerships with Wikipedia.