Goals of the Education Program -- what do professors want from it? Students? Wikipedia?
Measuring success -- there are some efforts going on right now to put metrics in place -- we could review those efforts and see if we agree on how they're measured and how we might be able to use them.
What kind of output are we going to produce? We can't force any particular structure on either editors or professors, though the constraints are different. If we recommend something that involves Wikipedian behaviour or internal structure it has no guarantee of being accepted; professors who don't like the results can simply decline to participate, or bypass the program and work directly on Wikipedia outside the Education Program's umbrella. So what's the force of our recommendations?
What's our scope as opposed to the scope of the organization we're being asked to invent? What decisions must we try to make ourselves and what should be put off to the future organization? Two examples: if a class is doing more harm than good to the articles it's working on, what should happen? Do we have to have Wikipedian ambassador support for a class to be accepted? I think the answer is that if we don't consider these questions ourselves, we won't get a good picture of how the future organization is going to have to operate, but if we try to come up with definite answers we'll spend time trying to run the EP instead of planning how it should be run.
Discuss what should happen on-wiki, in IRC, and on email. My preference is to have as much as possible happen publicly on-wiki.
Brief mention of the BOE draft for those who aren't aware of it. I don't think it's necessary to have a detailed discussion about BOE at this time, but since Mike has brought up some points that BOE addresses I think I can give a brief overview of the BOE draft and how it might help with some of the same goals that the Working Group may pursue. Pine✉09:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
