[IGFmaglist] Proposal for Modification for the Workshop Review and Evaluation Process

avri doria avri at acm.org
Tue May 31 14:30:54 EDT 2016


+1


On 31-May-16 13:39, Peter Dengate Thrush wrote:
> Colleagues
> I am in generally in favour of MAG members doing less work on
> analysing Workshop proposals, but wonder if the benefits of that
> outweigh the advantages…
> Under the old system a MAG member had to spend a fulltime day or so
> reading every proposal and evaluating it.
>
> The advantages of that were that MAG members got an overall sense of
> what the community thought was relevant/important/topical, and saw
> what groups, and their individual members, were proposing them.
>
> I thought (as a 1st timer last year) that this was a very good insight
> into the community of applicants. I could see all of the material from
> which the IGF meeting was going to be composed.
>
> On a more concrete point, knowing the whole set made discussions about
> merging proposals, and picking the better proposal from a group of
> similar ones, better informed.
>  
> Service on the MAG is not particularly onerous - although I recognise
> my advantage in being a fast reader in English- I appreciate that its
> harder for some others. The selection work would also be less work if
> I had not left until close to the deadline, but began as soon as the
> information was available…
>
> I’m happy to try a new system - I just think we need to be clear about
> the cost:benefit ratio of any change.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Peter
>
>> On 1/06/2016, at 4:32 am, Chengetai Masango <cmasango at unog.ch
>> <mailto:cmasango at unog.ch>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Flavio,
>>  
>> From the Secretariat’s side I think it can be arranged that a MAG
>> member can evaluate an additional set of randomized workshops (rather
>> than the MAG member picking particular workshops they want to grade
>> which may lead to some sort of bias).
>>  
>> Best regards,
>>  
>> Chengetai
>>  
>>  
>> *From: *Igfmaglist <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org
>> <mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org>> on behalf of Flávio Rech
>> Wagner <flavio at inf.ufrgs.br <mailto:flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>>
>> *Reply-To: *<flavio at inf.ufrgs.br <mailto:flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>>
>> *Date: *Tuesday, May 31, 2016 at 3:08 PM
>> *To: *<igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>>
>> *Subject: *Re: [IGFmaglist] Proposal for Modification for the
>> Workshop Review and Evaluation Process
>>  
>>
>> Dear Lynn, Rasha and colleagues
>>
>> I have a suggestion of a small improvement to the process of
>> distributing the review workload among MAG members.
>>
>> As explained in Rasha's proposal, each workshop proposal is expected
>> to have 8 reviews and each MAG member is expected to evaluate around
>> 36-40 proposals.
>>
>> In the past, MAG members were requested to review as many proposals
>> as possible, within their time availability. And, in fact, many MAG
>> members were able review a large number of proposals, well above
>> 36-40 proposals.
>>
>> I would therefore open the possibility that any MAG member, if s/he
>> is willing to do so, is allowed to review not only the workshop
>> proposals formally allocated to her/him, but also as many other
>> proposals as possible.
>>
>> I must already apologize for not being able to follow the next
>> virtual meeting, as it will take place at 3 am in Brazilian time and
>> I need to lead an extremely important event starting at 9 am (again
>> Brazilian time), for which I must be entirely fit.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Flavio
>>
>>> Rasha, Flávio, Susan,
>>>  
>>> thank you for this proposal.
>>>  
>>> It is important that all MAG members review the proposal carefully as it is scheduled for review and approval on our Virtual MAG Meeting call this week (Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at  6 am UTC).     If you are not able to make the call, please send in comments so we are able to judge consensus.   
>>>  
>>> Time is tight given our WS review schedule and we need to make a decision.   Input from all MAG members is important as this will determine how the MAG reviews the WS proposal.
>>>  
>>> Regards,
>>> Lynn
>>>  
>>>  
>>>> On May 29, 2016, at 6:23 AM, Dr. Rasha Abdulla <rasha at aucegypt.edu> <mailto:rasha at aucegypt.edu> wrote:
>>>>  
>>>> Dear MAG members,
>>>>  
>>>> Following the Secretariat's green light, I have finalized the proposal for modifying the Workshop Review and Evaluation Process. This proposal tackles only the second stage of the review process, that of evaluation by MAG members. The first stage (the Secretariat screening), as well as the third stage (final decisions re borderline cases, mergers, etc) remain unchanged. 
>>>>  
>>>> I hope this proposal arrives at a middle ground for this year that takes care of most of the concerns raised. It also reduces the subjectivity in evaluation, and it considerably reduces the work load per MAG member. Many thanks to Flavio, who suggested the work distribution among MAG members, and to Susan for her comments on the whole process. I'm attaching the new proposal on the second stage of reviewing as well as the current document for the whole review process.
>>>>  
>>>> In the interest of time before our next virtual meeting, and since there was little interaction on the WG mailing list, I'm hereby offering the proposal to the full list of MAG members for consideration. I request that the Secretariat include this on Wednesday's meeting agenda if possible.
>>>>  
>>>> Best regards.
>>>> Rasha
>>>>  
>>>> Rasha A. Abdulla, Ph.D.
>>>> Associate Professor and Past Chair
>>>> Journalism and Mass Communication 
>>>> The American University in Cairo
>>>> www.rashaabdulla.com <http://www.rashaabdulla.com/>
>>>> Twitter: @RashaAbdulla
>>>> <http://twitter.com/rashaabdulla> <http://twitter.com/rashaabdulla>
>>>>  
>>>> <MAG Workshop Review and Evaluation Process for IGF 2016 revised.docx><Proposal for Second Stage of Evaluation Process.docx>_______________________________________________
>>>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>  
>>  
>> -- 
>> Prof. Flávio Rech Wagner                 Tel: +55-51-3308 9494
>> Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul  Fax: +55-51-3308 7308
>> Instituto de Informática                 E-mail: flavio at inf.ufrgs.br <mailto:flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>
>> Porto Alegre, Brasil                     URL: www.inf.ufrgs.br/~flavio <http://www.inf.ufrgs.br/%7Eflavio>
>> _______________________________________________ Igfmaglist mailing
>> list Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus





More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list