[IGFmaglist] Workshops and a couple of feedback points I received

Subi Chaturvedi subichaturvedi at gmail.com
Thu Apr 2 07:21:09 EDT 2015

Marilyn, I agree on the mentorship role not being conflict, I think we
should lend all assistance individually and collectively but on the latter
I differ.

I would refrain/abstain from evaluating a workshop where I have been either
invited to speak or moderate. That's a personal choice.

Similarly if one is serving on a board or in a leadership role in an
organisation or is co-proposing a workshop the same might be advised.

Looking forward to hearing more from other colleagues as well.



On 2 Apr 2015 16:42, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Subi.
> Also, a few other questions.
> As we all supported mentoring role, can we also clarify when that means
that a MAG member cannot participate in evaluation?
> Those of us who informally, or more formally mentored submitters --
helping them through our rather more structured approach -- were not
necessarily endorsing a workshop, but were responding to request for help.
Secondly, just because a MAG member is invited as a speaker should not be
interpreted that they are biased toward the workshop, so how do we
determine the neutrality and allow participation in ratings and rankings.
> M
> ________________________________
> From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 14:54:29 +0530
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Workshops and a couple of feedback points I
> To: marilynscade at hotmail.com
> CC: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> Thanks Marilyn for initiating the thread. Following on from the call
yesterday. I wish to start by thanking Susan, Fiona and all the members of
the group for their excellent contributions on guidelines.
>  I got questions on how can workshop proposers ensure, gender and
geographical diversity of speakers, especially from first time workshop
> This is a question to the secretariat and to Susan and other colleagues
on the MAG.
>  I do not have clarity on how those workshops were scored which said yes
to help needed from the MAG / Secretariat on recommendations of
speakers/panelists. Last year while evaluating workshop proposals there
were no standard guidelines MAG members used individual discretion for this
> How were they evaluated? Was this held against them. Were they scored
> Was help provided to them?
> Or were they rated in the general pool and incase they didn't meet the
scores were they dropped off without necessary assistance being provided?
We did look as workshop proposals on a case by case basis at the end, but I
do not recall specific discussion on this issue.
> 2. IS the link with registration of panelists/speakers operational and
are workshop proposers familiar with it? is that an available resource for
workshop proposers especially first time and developing country proposers
who may not be familiar with the existing pool.
> 3. There were questions too on the exact objective of the background
paper and the optimal length and it's importance / contribution towards
acceptance of a workshop. First time proposers may not have absolute
clarity on this as well.
> Prior to evaluating workshop proposals , I reiterate my support for a
webinar be held early and a robust discussion be had so that the odds
aren't stacked up against new proposers and developing country proposers
whose first language may not be english and titled heavily in favour of
veterans. As a teacher I vouch for the fact that evaluation is a tricky and
a deeply contested subject.
> I also hope that we will continue to work towards excellence in quality
but will also strive towards enabling new and first time proposers to not
just participate and learn but also lead and share.
> The mentorship role of the MAG may also continue both pre-workshop
submission, during as well as post evaluation.
> 4. Where we mention on the website
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/
> "A list of all proposals for the IGF 2015 overarching theme and
sub-themes (those made during the December meeting and those submitted
during the online public consultations) is available."
> Can it also be added that the workshop proposers may reach out to the
secretariat at (email) , in case they are facing any difficulties or have a
> Thanks
> Subi
> On 1 April 2015 at 14:50, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> This is only following up on comments made by folks who were asking
questions about their proposals.
>> Two noted they tried to upload background papers justifying asking to
have a panel. One noted that they thought
>> that panels were a valid approach and questioned the resistance and
apparent opposition of the MAG to allow
>> the use of panels, especially when proposers are focused on speakers
from developing countries.
>> The second question I received was about allowing a change from one
format to another, if it developed that
>> a different format was better for the topic, as long as that happened
quickly, and with all needed process.
>> Sorry, one more - one person told me that they uploaded their background
paper but do not know how to verify it was
>> received.
>> Marilyn Cade
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20150402/9e953563/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list