Grants talk:IEG/Full Circle Gap Protocol: Addressing the Unknown Unknowns/Midpoint

Midpoint Report Accepted

Dear Shameran81,

Thank you for submitting this thorough midpoint report. It was a pleasure to read about your learning to date. I'm accepting this midpoint report with the following comments:

• Congratulations on progressing through several of your measures of success, including recruitment of five experts, hosting a brainstorming session, recruiting a university course, and training and working with students.
• You originally planned to analyze in depth "between 5 - 25 pages" in your brainstorming session. I'm wondering how many pages your team of experts (including your "bonus" expert) have analyzed all told?
• Thank you for writing up summaries of your course presentations. I wonder if you have more detailed notes on your talks you might link to? Or links/references to readings/information you assigned that could be used in other contexts?
• Great idea to work with Wiki Ed prior to the brainstorming session to develop lists of pages related to feminism and technology that are both highly trafficked and underdeveloped. Wondering if this is a list you might also be able to share?
• I would love to know more about the bestiary of gaps you created during the meta discussion in your brainstorming session! Sounds like a fascinating discussion. Anything further you can share about this?
• I particularly enjoyed the "Bonus Close Reading" section. I love that your pool of "experts" unexpectedly expanded beyond the academic context. This sounds like it was a a wonderful session.
• The learning pattern link in the "What is working well" section is broken. Do you mind correcting that?
• Your Learning Pattern on Engaging non-Wikipedian academic experts to identify content gaps is an invaluable output of this project. The "close reading" is a great concept with so much potential for supporting both volunteer organizers and editors. Each of the variations for implementing this concept offers unique rewards--thank you so much for being so thorough in describing your findings with each on this front. For ease of reference, I wonder if it might be worth adding subheadings for each of the variations you describe (along the lines of "Live presentation to launch an editathon," "Private small group discussion," "Private individual interview"). Perhaps you might also add to the learning pattern the two additional variations (Google form and written narrative) you initially suggested when you proposed the close reading to your expert group.

Congratulations again on your accomplishments so far. I'm looking forward to reading more in your Final Report!

Warm regards, --Marti (WMF) (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)