User talk:Dom497/Recruitment

Initial thoughts by Figureskatingfan
Thanks for creating this sandbox, Dom; I think this could be a good place to discuss/debate ways to improve "The Process", as well as improvements to the project in general. The more discussion we have, the better, of course.


 * I'm wondering if we should change the wording a bit. Personally, I've never really liked "Recruitment" or "recruiter" or "recruitee".  It's a little unclear to me the difference between "recruiter" and "recruitee"; perhaps it's a gender discourse issue, since they strike me as too military and inaccessible.  My experience is that this kind of arrangement is a "mentorship", so we'd use the words "mentor" and "mentee", which are more familiar words, even in business and certainly in education fields.  I've naturally used those terms in this program.  There may be more creative words to describe this kind of relationship, so if you can come up with any, I'd be willing to consider them.

Becoming a recruiter section
(I'll just recreate my copy-editing below):

You must meet all of the criteria listed below to become a recruiter. There is no training required and you don't need any "special" skills; if you understand the GA criteria and would like to pass it along to other editors, all you have to do is teach it.


 * Has a good understanding of the Good article criteria and what the Good article criteria are not
 * Has a familiarity with the review process.
 * Has read and understands "The Process" section below.
 * Has completed at least 15 reviews with no assistance.
 * Is a registered Wikipedia user.

If you meet these criteria, you can become a recruiter! All you have to do is add your name to the list of recruiters, provide a brief explanation why you would be a good recruiter and put your status as "Available" or "Not Available". Make sure to change your status to "Not Available" if you do not want to recruit anyone else for the time being.

Retiring

If you wish to resign as a recruiter, please remove your name from the list of recruiters. If you are taking a sabbatical from the Recruitment Centre, change your status to "Not Available". Please note that any recruiter that does not recruit at least one recruitee after a 9 month span will be removed from the list of recruiters.


 * Noticed that I've restructured a few things, and that I've cut out what I think are redundancies. Question: has any recruiter ever been taken off the list after nine months?  I wonder if we should shorten this time.  Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:45, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I've removed the line about recruiting more than one editor at a time, since it's stated in the next section and because I think it better belongs there. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

The Process section
The Process

I'm wondering if we should also change the name of this part, to make it standard to what other projects do. For example, both GAC and WP:PR calls its version "Instructions", and FAC calls it "Procedure". I suggest that since this is a GA sub-project, we call it "Instructions"

Step 1

If there are no users on the waiting list, wait for a recruitee to request that you recruit him or her. If you see users on the waiting list, contact the user at the top of the list and ask to be his or her mentor. During times of low demand, users have 48 hours to respond; during periods of high demand, they have 24 hours; and if there is only one user on the list, he or she has as much time to respond.

NOTE: You should only recruit a maximum of two recruitees at a time because working with more than two can be overwhelming; however, you can recruit more if you can keep the quality of your recruitments high.


 * Explanation: I'm really picky about using "them"/"they" as a pronoun. As much as I support gender inclusive (and people-first) language, I'd rather use "him"/"he" before using the third-person.  The solution is to use "him or her", despite its clunkiness. I'm also not so sure about the time limit here.  I mean, who decides the meaning of "high demand" and "low demand"?  Plus, I don't think it's fair that a user has to wait an indefinite amount of time, regardless of the demand.  How about: "Users have 48 hours to respond."  We can choose a different time limit if we so wish.

Step 2 After accepting a recruitee, create a sub-page using the box below. Insert the recruitee's name at the end of the pre-loaded page name and click "Create page". If the recruitee has been recruited more than once, add a 2, 3, 4, etc to the end of their name. Before click the Save page button, fill in the "status", "date started", and "recruiter" blanks in the pre-loaded text. Notify the recruitee that this page will be the place where everything related to this program should be put (discussions, questions, quizzes, opinions, etc).


 * Suggestion: Personally, I don't care for the title of the subpages; i.e., "Dom497 by Figureskatingfan". Cough cough if you know what I mean.  I wonder if a better title would be something like "GA Recruitment: Dom497", which I think focuses on the recruitee, which is what we should do anyway, I think.

Also, please add a link to the recruitee's sub-page under the "In Progress" section here and update your "Current Recruitees" column here.

NOTE: If at any time your recruitee decides that they want to end the recruitment early, or if the recruitment cannot be completed, proceed to Step 4b.

I think I'll stop here for now. More later. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Continuing on:

Step 3 Follow the instructions below. People learn at different speeds and levels, so there is no deadline. If you feel like you need to add something in for your recruitment that is not on the list below, feel free to do so. Note that a recruitee does not need to complete the program within a certain amount of time. If it takes a week, it takes a week; if it takes a month, it takes a month, however, if there is no progress made in 10 days, the recruitment will be closed without notice.


 * Question: I wonder if we should reword the content about deadlines. I mean, of course WP:TIND; that's true everywhere in the project.  How about we direct the recruiters' attention to this policy, and remind them that based on recruitees' time, commitment, and learning style, this step will be completed at varying lengths.  I also think that the 10-day no progress policy here is a good one; perhaps we should say, though, that if the recruiter puts a note on his/her recruitee's talk page, and there's still no progress, then the recruitment should close.  See below my what this would look like:

Step 3 Follow the instructions below. Remember there is no deadline in Wikipedia, so make sure that you give your recruitee plenty of time to complete each instruction. Also remember that people learn at different speeds and levels, so be patient. If no progress is made at any point, however, put a reminder on his or her talk page and explain that if no further movement is made in ten days, the recruitment will be closed without notice.


 * Make sure your recruitee understands the Good article criteria and what the Good article criteria are not, and then ask him or her to inform you on your recruitment page. Then give your recruitee a short quiz, consisting of 7-10 questions, on the GA criteria. He or she should get at least 80% on the quiz; explain the incorrect questions, even if he or she passes the quiz. If your recruitee scores under 80%, create a new quiz, and if he or she fails the quiz again, suggest that the recruitment end at that point and recommend that he or she studies more before returning to the centre.  (Note: If you'd like a sample quiz to either use or help you write your quiz, email the coordinators (User:Dom497 or User:Figureskatingfan).


 * Note: In my own experience, I found that recruitees need to be asked to inform you when they've read the GA criteria, so that's why I included the addition above. I've also added something about sample quizzes, as per our previous discussion.


 * Introduce your recruitee to the nominations page and explain how to find a nomination (sub-sections, date of nomination, etc) and how to start a review. No quiz is needed. (It is also recommended that you introduce the instructions page, though not required.)


 * I suggest that we recommend to recruiters that they do introduce the instructions page. The more information they can teach, the better, I think.  How about: Introduce your recruitee to the nominations page and explain how to find a nomination (sub-sections, date of nomination, etc.), how to start a review.  It is highly recommended that you also introduce your recruitee to the instructions page at this time. No quiz is needed.''


 * First Review: You should conduct this review. Pick any article and review it as you normally would. You should also use either one of these tables or one of your own so recruitees can learn how organize their future reviews. Also explain the passing, failing, on hold, and second opinion options. Remember (when passing an article) to tell your recruitee that he or she needs to list the article in the appropriate sub-topic (sub-topics can be found here).


 * Second Review: Same idea as the first review.


 * In my own experience, I found that asking my recruitees if they wanted me to demonstrate/model another review at this point, or if they felt comfortable to move forward and conduct their own review. It depended on how successful the review was, and how advanced the recruitee was in his or her own editing.  I also think that we should warn the recruitee that "results vary", as they say.  Some of my recruitees have asked if it's appropriate that we take articles out of order of the queue, so I think we should address that here as well.  Hey, how about we restructure this a little; let me show you what I think below:


 * Model reviews:'' At this point, demonstrate how you conduct reviews. Pick any article and review it as you normally would; you may have to explain that despite the back-log at GAN, it's appropriate to choose articles out of order, and that reviewing any article will help decrease the long queue there.  You should also use either one of these tables or one of your own so recruitees can learn how organize their future reviews. Also explain the passing, failing, on hold, and second opinion options. Remember (when passing an article) to tell your recruitee that he or she needs to list the article in the appropriate sub-topic (sub-topics can be found here).  Some recruitees, depending upon their editing experiences and abilities, and upon the success of your review, will only need to see one review modeled, while others will need to see more.  It is up to you to ascertain how many reviews your recruitee needs to see.  Remember that "results will vary"; reviews can go either smoothly, or be problematic, so you need to evaluate if a review is a good example or not.  When your recruitee feels comfortable, move on to the next step.


 * At this point, ask your recruitee if they feel comfortable reviewing an article under your supervision. If they don't, continue to use the first & second review concepts as stated above.
 * If we go with the above, this paragraph would be struck.


 * Third Review: Once your recruitee feels ready to do his or her review, let him or her pick a nomination to review. Your recruitee can choose an nomination here, if any articles are listed.  DO NOT allow them to review their own nominations.  It's a courtesy to notify nominators that your recruitee is using their article for the centre and that they getting two reviews "for the price of one"; most nominators are happy to assist other editors to learn how to review articles, and happily accept more feedback.  As your recruitee conducts the review, supervise him or her: make sure he or she makes good corrections and point out issues.  Once the review is complete, give your recrutree some feedback on what can be improved next time.


 * Fourth Review: Same idea as the third review.


 * In the spirit of re-structuring, how about if we change the title of "Third review" to "Solo reviews", and strike the "fourth review" point. See what I think we should change above.  I've given my recruitees the option of choosing their own article to review, or allowing me to choose for them; notice that I've included that.  I also cut the "If they're doing something wrong..." part because I don't think there's any right or wrong way to conduct reviews--just better ways. ;)


 * At this point, if you feel that more reviews are needed, feel free to do so. If not, award your recruitee with this barnstar (along with a short message from you); congratulate him or her on completing the program and wish him or her luck. You should also tell your recruitee that if he or she has any questions to leave a message on your talk page or at the Help Desk. NOTE: Please avoid introducing the reassessment page as it will likely just confuse recruiters. Being new reviewers, knowing how to review an article is enough for them to absorb. If they personally request to learn about it, use your own discretion in terms of if it will benefit them or not.


 * I suggest that we cut the part about reassessment, because I don't think it's necessary. We can discuss that if you like.

Okay, this section is done; I'll move on to the rest in a few days. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:20, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Wow, my head hurts....so.....much.....reading!!! Haha, I agree with all of it. But to be honest with you, I rather see the changes in the actually format (in the sandbox in this case) as it helps give me a sense of what's on the table. Again, I've read through it and agree with it right now but one its all neat and organized on the sandbox page I may see something I don't see now.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 00:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I get you, man. How about I create another section doing just that. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Wait, are you saying that we should change the project's name to "The GA Mentorship Centre"? I assume you agree, so the draft below will reflect that. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 01:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Like you said, Mentorship sounds friendlier so I would go with it. :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 01:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Instructions
Becoming a mentor

You must meet all of the criteria listed below to become a GA mentor. There is no training required and you don't need any "special" skills; if you understand the GA criteria and would like to pass it along to other editors, all you have to do is teach it.


 * Has a good understanding of the Good article criteria and what the Good article criteria are not.
 * Has a familiarity with the review process.
 * Has read and understands the "Instructions" section below.
 * Has completed at least 15 reviews with no assistance.
 * Is a registered Wikipedia user.

If you meet these criteria, you can become a mentor! All you have to do is add your name to the list of mentors, provide a brief explanation why you would be a good mentor and put your status as "Available" or "Not Available". Make sure to change your status to "Not Available" if you do not want to mentor anyone else for the time being.

Retiring

If you wish to resign as a mentor, please remove your name from the list of mentors. If you are taking a sabbatical from the Mentorship Centre, change your status to "Not Available". Please note that any mentor that does not work with at least one mentee after a 9 month span will be removed from the list of mentors.

Step 1

If there are no users on the waiting list, wait for a mentee to request that you work with him or her. If you see users on the waiting list, contact the user at the top of the list and ask to be his or her mentor. Users have 48 hours to respond.

NOTE: You should only work with a maximum of two mentees at a time because working with more than two can be overwhelming; however, you can recruit more if you can keep the quality of your mentorship high.

Step 2 After accepting a mentee, create a sub-page using the box below. Insert the mentee's name at the end of the pre-loaded page name and click "Create page". If the recruitee has been recruited more than once, add a 2, 3, 4, etc to the end of their name. Before click the Save page button, fill in the "status", "date started", and "recruiter" blanks in the pre-loaded text. Notify your mentee that this page will be the place where everything related to this program should be put (discussions, questions, quizzes, opinions, etc).

Also, please add a link to your mentee's sub-page under the "In Progress" section here and update your "Current Mentees" column here.

NOTE: If at any time your mentee decides that he or she wants to end the mentorship early, or if the mentorship cannot be completed, proceed to Step 4b.

Step 3

Follow the instructions below. Remember there is no deadline in Wikipedia, so make sure that you give your mentee plenty of time to complete each instruction. Also remember that people learn at different speeds and levels, so be patient. If no progress is made at any point, however, put a reminder on his or her talk page and explain that if no further movement is made in ten days, the mentorship will be closed without notice.


 * Make sure your mentee understands the Good article criteria and what the Good article criteria are not, and then ask him or her to inform you on your mentorship page. Then give your mentee a short quiz, consisting of 7-10 questions, on the GA criteria. He or she should get at least 80% on the quiz; explain the incorrect questions, even if he or she passes the quiz. If your mentee scores under 80%, create a new quiz, and if he or she fails the quiz again, suggest that the mentorship end at that point and recommend that he or she study more before returning to the centre.  (Note: If you'd like a sample quiz to either use or help you write your quiz (or if you want an example of how to conduct a mentorship), email the coordinators (User:Dom497 or User:Figureskatingfan).


 * Introduce your mentee to the nominations page and explain how to find a nomination (sub-sections, date of nomination, etc) and how to start a review. No quiz is needed. (It is also recommended that you introduce the instructions page, though this is not required.)


 * Model reviews: At this point, demonstrate how you conduct reviews. Pick any article and review it as you normally would; you may have to explain that despite the back-log at GAN, it's appropriate to choose articles out of order, and that reviewing any article will help decrease the long queue there.  You should also use either one of these tables or one of your own so mentees can learn how organize their future reviews. Also explain the passing, failing, on hold, and second opinion options. Remember (when passing an article) to tell your mentee that he or she needs to list the article in the appropriate sub-topic (sub-topics can be found here).  Some mentees, depending upon their editing experiences and abilities, and upon the success of your review, will only need to see one review modeled, while others will need to see more.  It is up to you to ascertain how many reviews your mentee needs to see.  Remember that "results will vary"; reviews can go either smoothly, or be problematic, so you need to evaluate if a review is a good example or not.  When your mentee feels comfortable, move on to the next step.


 * Solo reviews: Once your mentee feels ready to do his or her review, let him or her pick a nomination to review. Your mentee can choose an nomination here, if any articles are listed.  DO NOT allow any of your mentees to review their own nominations.  It's a courtesy to notify nominators that your recruitee is using their article for the Centre and that they getting two reviews "for the price of one"; most nominators are happy to assist other editors to learn how to review articles, and happily accept more feedback.  As your mentee conducts the review, supervise him or her: make sure he or she makes good corrections and point out issues.  Once the review is complete, give your mentee some feedback on what can be improved next time.


 * At this point, if you feel that more reviews are needed, feel free to do so. If not, award your mentee with this barnstar (along with a short message from you); congratulate him or her on completing the program and wish him or her good luck. You should also tell your mentee that if he or she has any questions to leave a message on your talk page or at the Help Desk. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:10, 22 May 2014 (UTC)