Debriefings with expertsPosted: January 22, 2016
In the last two weeks, I’ve held debriefing sessions with the five “expert” participants in the Gap Finding project. Each interview has lasted approximately one hour. The interviews have been guided by a series of questions that I wrote beforehand. While not every interview was identical, the questions were more or less the same across each conversation. I recorded the interviews and I will use them to guide the recommendations I make in the final report for developing a gap finding protocol.
Why did you decide to participate in this project?
In your own words, what were the goals of the project?
What aspects of the project do you think worked to achieve the goals? What didn’t work?
What did you find useful about the Letters of Engagement?
How would you have participated in this project without the honorarium?
At which points in the project were you confused about your role? What would you recommend to avoid confusion?
Which aspects of the project would you have preferred to have more ownership over?
What did you, or do you, take from this project into your classroom as an instructor?
In what ways did this project synchronize with your understanding of public scholarship or feminist scholarship? In what ways did it fall short of your expectations?
What helped you achieve a sense of community with the other participants before the brainstorming session? During? After?
If you were to participate in a second rendition of a Wikipedia “gap finding” project focused on distributed editing and feminism-focused content what would you recommend be done differently? Why?
What would recommend future initiatives that seeking to improve coverage of feminism on Wikipedia consider based on your experience in this project?
Would you be interested in having Wiki Ed facilitate ‘matching-making’ between gap finding projects and gap filling projects, and if so, what form might this look like?
Any questions? Is there anything else I need to know?