Talk:Workgroup:WikiEducator Administrators

From WikiEducator
Jump to: navigation, search


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Keep policies; scrap guidelines?014:32, 5 December 2009
Amazing progress in a short timeframe -- Are we trying to do too much?1020:11, 6 September 2009
Suggestion to archive meeting discussion003:36, 6 August 2009
July 20, 2009 Meeting515:12, 24 July 2009

Keep policies; scrap guidelines?

Hi folks,

I have been rather out of the loop; but on revisiting just now I can see that very agreeable policies have been written. They are sufficiently brief and general to be useful without being restrictive. Many of the policies are written as guidelines; and the guidelines have not been written. Given that there was a good deal of consensus built in crafting the policies, I wonder if this job is done and we could live without guidelines to interpret fairly simple policies?



Dmccabe (talk)14:32, 5 December 2009

Amazing progress in a short timeframe -- Are we trying to do too much?

Hi Anil and contributors to the WikiEducator Administrator initiative.

Wow -- progress on this Workgroup has been amazing within a very short time frame. Kudos goes to Anils' leadership and tireless efforts in keeping this workgroup to the grindstone. This workgroup is working on:

  • Five policy proposals and
  • Three guideline proposals

I wondering if we are perhaps being overly ambitious in trying to get all this work done by the next Council meeting? Given the importance of this work, I'm wondering whether we are able to give the attention, reflection and discussion that all these proposal deserve.

I'd like to propose that we allow ourselves a little more time to discuss and polish this work. The WikiEducator Community Policy provides the option for a special resolution, i.e. "A resolution distributed to all Council members and signed by two thirds of the addressed members shall have the same force as if it were passed at a duly called meeting of the Council.".

Therefore it would be possible for us to give ourselves a little more time to work on these proposals, without the need of waiting for the next council meeting. I propose that we consider approval of these policies and guidelines by special resolution after the next council meeting.



Mackiwg (talk)12:41, 25 August 2009

Hi Wayne, I agree with you, we are going very fast & hence I am not able to keep pace with everything (along with a hectic new academic session in college). More time is certainly welcome. Anil has done a wonderful job, his eye for details inspires me. WE is taking a step forward. Thanks to all who are contributing actively. Warm regards --Gita Mathur 02:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Gita Mathur (talk)14:06, 25 August 2009

Dear all,

I view the present suggestion as a success of our WE Community life, we have really got harmonized.

I was also thinking that we may place this as a project proposal with work-in-progress documents, and the council may officially approve the project to take it up with wider attention and deeper focus with an expanded time frame. In the mean time council can also advise the community to consult the work in progress documents for related issues as an interim arrangement.

We started with a suggestion to develop guidelines for admin users and quite naturally we have identified that so many things should come prior to that and many should follow immediately after that. Though the time frame was over-ambitious, it had provided substantial initial momentum for the initiatives, that were imminent, to start at the right time.

Now we may amend the charter suitably.

Warm regards Anil Prasad 03:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Anil Prasad (talk)15:59, 25 August 2009

The WE community is really coming together rather well.

In the light of the scope we have to suggest a special resolution for this work we could consider:

  1. Recalibrating the time frame/ project plan proposed in the Charter
  2. Rather than attempting to work on all the policies and guidelines simultaneously, to allocate blocks of time for each policy and to phase the development.
  3. Prepare a brief report on activities to date
  4. Present the charter @ Council for their endorsement
  5. Table a council request for a special resolution and voting on these policies a little later in the year (rather than waiting for the next full Council meeting)

Great work -- lets keep the magic alive!


Mackiwg (talk)16:13, 25 August 2009

Dear Dr. Wayne,

I agree with your suggestion.

Warm regards
Anil Prasad 04:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Anil Prasad (talk)16:24, 25 August 2009

Hi Anil,

You had already suggested the way forward in your earlier post -- I just added the bullets ;-)


Mackiwg (talk)16:34, 25 August 2009

We need to think about a process for amending the charter. Do we want to approve the amended charter in the same way we approved the original? I'm thinking we probably should do so. We want to create a clear trail of how the work proceeded.

So, how about we copy the existing charter to a subpage (with a link on the active charter page), reset the project plan/outputs (I like the staged approach that Wayne suggests) and any other sections that need revision and then reapprove.

ASnieckus (talk)01:09, 26 August 2009

I completely agree with this suggestion. These are important decisions and there are lots of small details that need to be fit together. Anil, you have done a great job getting this going. Without having taken the steps to get this going and laid out as you have done, we wouldn't know that we need more time :)

ASnieckus (talk)00:53, 26 August 2009

Suggestion to archive meeting discussion

To clean up the front page, I suggest moving the discussions in the meeting section to an archive location. A subpage for the first meeting might be the most useful.

ASnieckus (talk)03:36, 6 August 2009

July 20, 2009 Meeting


Just checking in to the first meeting. I have used a similar team charter with my doctoral cohorts at the UOP so I know the charter works well. I am not sure what I am expected to do beyond this.

Warm wishes,

--Nellie Deutsch 14:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Nelliemuller (talk)02:27, 21 July 2009

I think I need to be more patient. Too many moving parts, and I'm not sure of the goal as yet. That's the nature of collaboration I suppose:).dmccabe 03:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Dmccabe (talk)15:03, 21 July 2009


Actually, I think you asked exactly the right question (from the main page): "what are we attempting to achieve?" Maybe the charter doesn't effectively specify *what* is to be created. As I said on the main page, it's a chicken and egg problem, but if you are not sure what the goal is, then maybe we need to be more clear. In my opinion, the charter should communicate a shared vision for process and outcomes.

Regards, --Alison Snieckus 19:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

ASnieckus (talk)07:00, 23 July 2009

Hey Alison,

I'm a short timer approaching vacation. I'll have to place some other priorities ahead of this at least until I return, so I was probably a little less patient than would be typical. I tend to be more goal than process oriented, so the early phase of the project is a poor match for my personality. Luckily Anil has a good handle on the process. I'll weigh in once more in a couple of weeks,


dmccabe 02:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Dmccabe (talk)14:41, 23 July 2009

Dear Declan,

The group has benefited a lot out of the thought process you have triggered. While wishing you a great vacation, the group will await your invaluable contributions to our main task that will commence soon at

Warm regards
Anil Prasad 08:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Anil Prasad (talk)20:29, 23 July 2009

Thanks Anil,

Thanks particularlly for your leadership in getting this rolling successfully. I'll get back into this on returning.



Dmccabe (talk)15:12, 24 July 2009