[IGFmaglist] PROPOSAL FOR WORKING GROUP ON IMPROVING THE IGF CALL FOR PROPOSALS AND SELECTION PROCESS

Sun Jul 24 14:22:59 EDT 2016

+1 for charter and additions suggested

On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 11:41 AM, Miguel Ignacio Estrada miestrada at gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Rasha for your great proposal.
I fully agree with Flavio's suggestions, specially #6 as I believe technology
should be our best ally during the complete process.
On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Flávio Rech Wagner < flavio at inf.ufrgs.br > wrote:
Dear Rasha

Thank you very much for this draft charter proposal.

I would suggest two additional areas of improvement:

5) Establish a well defined and precise procedure for the final selection of
workshops in the face-to-face MAG meeting, considering the results of the
electronic review process but also taking into account that the final list of
accepted workshops must present desired diversity and balance (among stakeholder
groups, considering geographic diversity, giving priority to developing
countries and newcomers, etc.).

6) Revise and improve electronic resources used throughout the various phases of
the process (submission, review, proposals of mergers, clustering, final
selection).

Best regards

Flavio

Em 23/07/2016 22:34, Dr. Rasha Abdulla escreveu:
PROPOSAL FOR WORKING GROUP ON IMPROVING THE IGF CALL FOR PROPOSALS AND SELECTION
PROCESS

Dear Colleagues,

Below please find a draft charter proposal for the Working Group on Improving
the IGF Call for Proposals and Selection Process (WG-ICPS) for your kind
consideration.

Need for Updating the IGF Call for Proposals and Selection Process

Recognizing the work that has been done in previous years to enhance the
workshop proposal call and selection process, the deliberations of the MAG
second meeting in NYC established that there still is much room for improvement. The same conclusion was reiterated during the IGF Retreat in Glen Cove, the
report of which states:

“Some participants expressed the view that MAG members spend too much time in
workshop evaluation. It was suggested that the workshop selection process be
improved, streamlined, and more transparent. There can be more work done prior
to the selection discussion, and the selection processes started much earlier.
It was discussed that if the MAG can establish more concrete and concise criteria up
front, these can be reflected more clearly in all subsequent steps, e.g., call
for workshops, proposal templates, clustering, etc. This will enable an improved
Secretariat pre-screening process, including better evaluation of the proposals
at the time of submission, suggested actions such as possible mergers, and more
effective clustering.”

Areas of improvement include the following:

1) Establishing well defined criteria for Stage 1 elimination by the Secretariat,
so that workshops that make it into the MAG evaluation pool are all qualified
for further MAG review.

2) Establishing well defined criteria for Stage 2 evaluation by MAG members, so
that all workshops evaluated pass through the same checkmarks and are evaluated
according to the same criteria with the aim of reducing subjectivity in the
evaluation process.

3) Establishing a review system whereby each workshop is evaluated by a
representative number of multistakeholder MAG members rather than by the whole
MAG, effectively reducing the amount of work required from each MAG member while
maintaining or improving the review standards and process.

4) Improving the workshop proposal form and requirements to reflect the above and
to provide better guidance to proposers and encourage more diversity.

This working group is therefore proposed to work on the above and have a better
system in place for the 2017 IGF. Feedback from all MAG members is invited, and
we also recognize the need for feedback from IGF proposers and participants,
particularly regarding Item 4.

Proposed (Tentative) Action Items / Timeline

Below is a proposed schedule for consideration by MAG members:

Activity

Deadline / Dates

Duration

1.

Discussion of the WG charter and modifications

Online, July 24-30

2.

Approval of the WG charter by MAG members

During the next MAG virtual meeting

2.

Working Group activity

Post WG approval-next MAG face-to-face meeting

3.

Working Group to submit recommendations to the MAG members

During next MAG face-to-face meeting

4.

Discussion and approval of the WG recommendations by MAG members

During next MAG face-to-face meeting

The above is mostly tentative and open to feedback and modifications. All
recommendations of the WG are of course subject to the MAG’s final approval.

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
Twitter: @RashaAbdulla
< http://twitter.com/rashaabdulla >

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.orghttp://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

--
Nacho Estrada | @acmuzic
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20160724/5f0fb488/attachment.htm>