Talk:Strategy monitoring plan 2014-15

Just spotted "G1.2 The quality of educational Open Content continues to improve" should include something re: article quality incrementing, think this must've been lost in a rewording. Sjgknight (talk) 11:51, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Good/Featured article or Did You Know are a possible although not ideal approaches. Daria Cybulska (WMUK) (talk) 10:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

skilled & capable

"G2a.3 WMUK volunteers are skilled and capable. Volunteer Activity Units [4] in training sessions and editathons" - do we want to distinguish (measure both?) between units of people delivering training and receiving? Sjgknight (talk) 11:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I suppose it depends whether the aim is more on increasing the skill of volunteers (in which case I think we should capture how much training volunteers receive) or assessing the skill (in which case we could focus on the feedback received by e.g. volunteer trainers after they deliver an event). It does need distinguishing. Daria Cybulska (WMUK) (talk) 10:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

We of course care about both, so I guess one answer is jut to measure both. No. of sessions run by trained volunteers is captured elsewhere Sjgknight (talk) 11:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

'access to Wikimedia projects is increasingly available'

Enabling new readers to access the projects is a relatively new type of activity for Wikimedia UK. Perhaps we could set a target as running several pilot projects to assess how this area could be approached in the future. Daria Cybulska (WMUK) (talk) 10:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, broadly that's what the output measure indicates (as it's about estimating our increased reach). The projects we see relating to this outcome are things like: accessibility increase; translation work; digital literacy work (which enables people to engage with content); Kiwix deployment and similar projects. QRPedia scans help with bits of that (and of course, are in part about directing people to content in any easy access fashion in places they would ordinarily have not been directed to Wikimedia sites), but clearly we will need to think about other measures as our work continues. Sjgknight (talk) 11:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

'supporting Technical Communities' and 'increased awareness of the benefits of Open Content'

Some of the external communities we work with aren't strictly technical (e.g. Open Rights Group) and it's still an important area of our open knowledge work. I suppose a clarification is needed where in G4.1 we are focusing on technology development, and there is another area where we link with other groups to further open knowledge aims. Daria Cybulska (WMUK) (talk) 10:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)