Training Course for Would Be, New and Existing Editors
Access Privileges
Editors are the ones who should have a good understanding on the what, why and how of WiserEarth (WE), in other words, WE's vision, mission, history, platform, tools, content and community. To help them with this, we will need to create a short 'training course' that users will need to complete before they can apply to be an editor. Existing editors may also need to complete this course to fill in the gaps in their understanding of WE.
As a requirement to apply to be an editor is to have been a community member for at least three months, this course can be completed during that period. We will provide a mechanism to track completion of the course.
Here's a preliminary outline of such training course which will benefit from your feedback and suggestions. Feel free to leave a comment or edit this document directly if you have some ideas. What needs adding / deleting / merging / restructuring?
Understanding WiserEarth
The pages on the general section will help you understand what WiserEarth is all about. The governance section list documents that governs how to use WiserEarth, how content is edited and used, and how community members interact with each other. We welcome your questions or feedback on the comment section of each page.
General
|
Governance
|
Using and Contributing to WiserEarth
Growing your personal network
- Complete personal profile with real photo and explain who you are, what you do, and what you are passionate about.
- Get to know some community members you might be interested in (including all editors and admins)
- Leave a comment on another community member's profile page
- Send a message to another community member
- Link your WE message inbox to your email
- Invite community members to join your network
- Invite people you know to join WiserEarth (and your network)
- Find and connect with people and organizations in your area
- Find and connect with people with similar Areas of Focus
- Browse, join and participate in groups, discussions and editing
- Gain greater visibility and credibility for your organization, initiative and expertise (step 5 of organization tutorial)
- Feedback pages >>
Enriching and drawing from WiserEarth knowledge commons
- Explanation of WiserEarth entities (organization, people, group, resource, solution, job, event, wikipage, discussion)
- Use search feature | Use advanced search feature | Feedback >>
- Use proximity map | Feedback >>
- See Areas of Focus (AoF) taxonomy | Click on info icon | See several AoF portals | Read AoF FAQ | Feedback >>
- Google page translation | Feedback >>
- Organization directory (view FAQ) | Add an organization (view tutorial) | Edit an organization profile | Feedback >>
- Discover potential funding opportunities and potential organizations to fund (use advanced search for 'foundation')
- Wikipage FAQ | Wikipage creation and editing (view tutorial) | Feedback >>
- Resources directory (view FAQ) | Add and edit a resource page (view tutorial) | Feedback >>
- Job board (view FAQ) | Add and edit a job page (view tutorial) | Feedback >>
- Events directory (view FAQ) | Add and edit a solution page (view tutorial) | Feedback >>
- Solutions directory (view FAQ) | Add and edit a solution page (view tutorial) | Feedback >>
- Upload Files and Photos in a training wikipage | Experiment with folders | Feedback >>
- Sharing and mapping your knowledge and connections
- About WE's Network feature (view FAQ) | Add connections between records | Feedback >>
- Create list of entities to add
- Participate in growing the directory and userbase (based on organizations directory)
- View all comments page | Post a random comment in a dummy page | Flag posted comment for review | Feedback >>
- Use recent activity page (view tutorial) | Edit newly added content | Feedback >>
- Read Page Status description | Feedback >>
- About Show History feature (view FAQ) | Use show history feature on a training wikipage to compare and revert (view tutorial) | Feedback >>
- View watchlist alerts | Edit watchlist preferences | Edit watchlist items | Feedback >>
- Rate content | Ratings Tutorial
Collaborating and building alliances in groups
- About WE groups | Groups FAQ | Group Tutorial
- Try finding existing groups to join before creating your own
- Modify group layout in a sandbox group (view tutorial)
- Add three records to your group(s) | Add three records to your network (specify connection type via 'Edit your connection' link) | Feedback >>
- Feedback >>
Creating a better WiserEarth together
- Give feedback or suggestion
- View What's New on WiserEarth page | Add it to watchlist
- Take the user survey >>
- Social bookmarking WE pages (do so on About Us page) | Feedback >>
- View Spread the Word page | Do at least one of the options there
- Donate to WiserEarth
- Consider being a WiserEarth Editor
Getting help
Go to Help Desk >>
Verifying Course Completion
- Activity reports page (certain number of contributions)
- Certain number of edits, additions, comments
- Network section in personal profile (create at least two for every entity type? connect to at least two other for each entity type?)
- Short Quiz on SurveyMonkey or public wikipage
Editor Training
Becoming an editor
- View WiserEarth Editor job page
- Choose editor role(s) to commit to
- Apply to be an editor at....
- Get enough endorsements from current editors
General (all editors)
- Editorial Policy
- Check and edit new content addition | Monitor Recent Activity page | Feedback >>
- View all comments page | View flagged comments | Suppress a comment in a dummy wikipage | Feedback >>
- Edit an AoF portal of interest | Add AoF portals of interest to watchlist | Add all 379 AoF portals to watchlist? | Add three content related to each editor's stewarded AoF | Feedback >>
- Change page status of a dummy record page | Feedback >>
- Participate in co-editing WiserEarth organization database >> (at least one organization record per week)
Specific (per editor role)
Directory Editor
AoF Editor
Moderator
Networker
Support
Outreach
Regional Coordinator
Journalist
Mediator
Developer
Language Support
Comments (1 - 10 of 10)
|
Flag comment for removal sternklar 11 months ago
Thanks, Bowo, that did answer my question. Sounds like some of both, then? Now that we have the editor roles named, 11 in all, I was thinking of creating a group for each of the roles.
Then we could post the links in the editors group, and each editor would have a regular place to go and post resources and have targeted discussions about the projects for their specific editor role. Does that seem reasonable or would that be too unwieldy? I think it could help keep things focused, and the general editors group could stay focused on topics of concern to all editors, and be the hub that links to the 11 new groups.
Then the WE staff who have an interest or an existing role in those specific responsibilities (like outreach or language support) could check in with the various groups and comment from that side. Thoughts, anyone?
|
|
@Angus: I realize how overwhelming this (rev #6) can be, but WE really has many tools that require trial usage to really understand how they work. I regrouped my original draft into rev #6 as a reflection of how an editor must first of all be a good user. So, the first part of this training course actually is for the general user who wants to explore WiserEarth step by step, little by little, day by day. I'm thinking of users with minimum computer and internet knowledge here (people who never heard of Wikipedia or Facebook).
Having said that, yes, we'll need to break this down into byte-sized chunks and select which is a must to help with being a good editor. To break this down, I'm thinking of dividing it into 10~30 sessions. Each session can be designed to be completed in half an hour. We may want to mark which is 'mandatory' or 'recommended' for users who are thinking of becoming an editor. Not to forget, users need to be a WE member for at least three months, so completing all of this during that period may not be too overwhelming.
And of course, if people are savvy enough with a site like WE (those who dig Wikipedia and Facebook), they can all together bypass this training course and venture on their own getting to know WE. But then again, having a complete list of things to read/view/understand/do will probably be useful for them too.
I suspect, that as we improve our user interface and streamline processes for new members further, there will be even less need for an elaborate training course like this. But again, this list can probably be of use for that end too.
On surveymonkey quiz: haven't put my mind around this one yet, but we probably would want it to take at most 10 minutes to complete. Probably would want to have several versions, each corresponding to one editor role (plus a general one).
How does this sound? I wonder what others think? (always could use a fresh perspective)
@Patric Thanks for your elaborate suggestion. I'm no student of game theory, but hopefully I understood what you were trying to say. I'm guessing that the gist of your suggestion is the following part:
[people] want to know what to DO! The primary learning attention could focus on 3 second, 3 minute to 30 minute rule as a foundational strategy to explore, learn and grow. As (WE editors) principle designers of this learning experience what is key is to move attention to actions within 30 seconds and learning processes to 30 segments that produce immediate tangible results to a current individual or organizational concern.
I think the first '3 seconds' and '30 seconds' impact would mainly be achieved through WE's homepage. This is something we're working on at the moment, making first time experience visiting WE simpler and more engaging. Stay tuned for news on this end.
The next '30 segments' impact, would be this training course, which needs more polish and fleshing out. When you observe what's been put together, you'll notice that each step is quite concrete and produce immediate tangible result. If you find any that don't, or have ideas of what needs adding to the list, please give your feedback.
As for the real 'game' part of involvement in WE, this is actually something on my mind too lately. We need to make WE more 'fun'. Facebook is a lot of fun for many if not most (beside the fact that they have all sorts of 'games' to play with!). Even LinkedIn can be a lot of fun too (at least from what I heard). What is missing in WE that keeps the whole experience not 'fun' enough? Got ideas?
@Deborah: WEversity a.k.a WiserUniversity is on hold like other 'experimental' working groups for the editors group. Reason is simply lack of resources :) Let's revisit this idea as we progress with work for each editor role. In the mean time, I suggest we refine the content of this training course from within the main editors group.
Fyi, we're also thinking of creating a WE intro video with a professional animation studio, which should be quite engaging. But this won't be ready for at least three months. This probably would go on the homepage or the About Us page, which should help address a part of Patric's concerns. I myself am looking forward to seeing this.
On monthly online class... got ideas on how we can go about doing this? We have the 'chatterbox' module for groups. We can imagine creating a group filled with just the training materials in wikipages, a chatterbox, and a discussions module. That should provide a basic real-time environment for an online class. You probably have heard elsewhere that we're thinking of integrating DimDim multimedia web conferencing suite in the future. When that's done, we'll have a full-fledged online class environment. Got ideas?
@Heather: I've answered part of your question on my response to Angus. Which is the fact that an editor must first of all be a good user, and the first section of this training course is meant just for that. As for training materials for each editor role, we've got quite a few for each which I hope to flesh out soon. They should help get things moving. |
|
I am hopping in here because I am beginning to grasp a larger picture of the WE dynamic and stage of development. I will look for corrections if I have this out of sync.
I agree that the editor tutorial is mandatory material to have available - but that step is slow while the editorial roles are being solidified and some of the processes are being made explicit or being outlined in terms of best practices.
Do you think [boatsie] that having an editor role tutorial now is possible given the works still under deliberation? Am I missing something? What pages refer to the WE Univeristy idea - i have not seen them yet, and I would like to!
I think that the re-org on AOF and some structural changes that are in talks/works for the portals will, when complete, allow for greater pace for defining the roles of the editors and thus the content for the turorials.
best, heather |
|
is there a way that the tutorial for WE editors could be the very first course in WE University? (which seems to have stalled...) ... given the highly contextualized formatting of other tutorials completed (eg, adding your organization), seems like the skill set exists within the community. If we incorporated other media (short videos, demos, interactives, possibly had an actual synchronistic 1x a month online live class which could be moderated by an editor who has already passed the tutorial as part of their accreditation .... we could also archive classes
|
|
Bowo, Thanks for throwing it all up on the wall to explore. My initial response and suggestion as a committed editor desiring to "learn effective action to current organizational concerns" is to create a communicative process of learning versus training in a linear technological sense that incorporates game design theory.
Point of the Wiserearth WE Game? The punch line, grabs your attention!
Constitutive Rules? the platform, governance, (like the chess game what is needed to play the game, board, players, pieces, time)
Action Rules? how to play in the game, possibilities, requirements, (how do you move and play in the game)
Rules of Strategy? the history of successful and meaningful strategies of learning and implementation the playing of the game. A growing repository of community wisdom in playing in the game, like completing feedback loops in learning that continual grows new effective actions and strategies over spans of time and concerns.
Initial concern: In my assessment what is most difficult in this moment in any marketing effort is to seduce another's attention to a new process of training that is unproven in its effectiveness to solving an immediate concern. People are in chaos, desire a locus of control to solve a concern not a new ideological undertaking. Global virtuous citizens want to change the world not participate in administrative governance or policy. And they want to know what to DO! The primary learning attention could focus on 3 second, 3 minute to 30 minute rule as a foundational strategy to explore, learn and grow. As (WE editors) principle designers of this learning experience what is key is to move attention to actions within 30 seconds and learning processes to 30 segments that produce immediate tangible results to a current individual or organizational concern. What successful results are occurring and how is it happening? If WE can generate a creative game that works for connecting and integrating unitary concerns - people will play. If not, no one has time to waste on a maybe?
As time allows i will begin to explore the materials enclosed. I pray this helpful and supportive as a beginner in learning. Thanks Patric
|
|
@ Bowo: This is overwhelming. We need to quickly break this down into bite sized chunks and prioritize what people need to know to be effective editors and then design a short surveymonkey 'test'.
|
|
|
Good question Kerry!
The quick answer is that these editor roles are both 'new' and 'supplementing' positions.
Why 'new'? For example, Regional Coordinator and Mediator are to my knowledge, not part of current staffers' 'official' work. Although Camilla (staff) for example, is teaming up with Bernard (volunteer editor) to organize a group for France-based WiserEarthlings (especially those in Paris). Mediator on the other hand, is something not even necessary for the most part (with very few exception) up to this point, but something that will likely be needed as our userbase grows, and more lively discussions and interactions among different people occurs.
Why 'supplementing'? For example, editing AoF portals and outreach is part of every staffers work, though not on a regular basis. To do these more effectively, we'll need more people doing things in a more elaborate manner. Another example is a combination of 'networker' and 'support', which is something Peggy, Angus, Honore and myself have done (and are doing). We help out network coordinators set up, manage and grow groups. By listening to their specific needs, we try to customize those groups to fit their needs. This is definitely one of those things that can improve further and serve many more network coordinators if we have more networker/support people.
I think all staff are eager to pass on things that worked and can help editors serve the greater WE community better. And editors (and all community members) are quite free, as always, to propose ideas and thoughts. Let's do this together first thing in 2009: co-creating an action plan for each editor role, and along the way, come up with appropriate training materials for each .
Hope this answers your question Kerry. Feel free to follow up with more questions or thoughts. |
|
|
I'm looking at the specific editor roles, and it seems like the AoF editor role, the Directory editor and the Moderator are already somewhat covered in the general editor requirements. However, the other editors' roles seem less defined.
So my question is, before we start listing off training requirements for these individual roles, I'm wondering how big of a part the editors play in what staff are already doing... For example, will Developer editors be working with staff developers and gain training that way? Will Journalist editors be working with a publicity section of WE staff? If so, then it is probably up to staff to define where the editors will be filling in, and what precisely is needed.
If it's more flexible and editors are going to be doing the same work as staffers, or expanding upon that work, then I would feel more qualified to comment on what it might require to train the editors in the various fields :) Does that make sense? So I suppose the gist is... are the editors creating positions that WE did not have yet, or are they supplementing positions that already exist? |
|
|
Patric,
Thanks for your interest. For the moment, this page will be a central place for more information regarding community training. We will be updating this page and prepare the needed sub-pages. You can add this page to your watchlist to monitor edits and comments. As always, feel free to drop in questions and suggestions along the way.
Thanks, Bowo |
|
|
Bowo, I am interested in this course instruction and becoming competent in the WE platform. Is there more information and coaching in this regard available? Thnaks patric |