[Rigf_program] Proposed rating and evaluation system for APrIGF proposals

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]

Excellent Thank You Paul...

*Cheryl Langdon-Orr ...  **(CLO)*
 http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr


On 6 June 2013 12:38, Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic.net> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> here is a proposal for a lightweight evaluation system for APrIGF
> proposals.
>
> for discussion tomorrow.
>
> i will shortly also share a Google spreadsheet which should give a better
> idea of how the ratings system would work.
>
> Paul.
> ===
>
>
>
> APrIGF Proposal evaluation system - Draft
>
> Paul Wilson
>
>
> Criteria for Evaluation
> -----------------------
>
> Proposals will be evaluation according to 3 criteria, interpreted
> according to the following guidance:
>
> 1. Relevance
>
> Is the proposal relevant to the themes of this APrIGF meeting?  Are the
> themes clearly stated and/or evident in the proposal?  Are the specific
> issues to be addressed by the proposal also clear and relevant?
>
> 2. Completeness
>
> Does the proposal provide all information as requested in the CFP,
> specifically:  discussion theme and issues, format and approach, and
> panelists.  Is this information clear and complete enough to properly
> describe an acceptable proposal?  Does it appear than panellists are
> actually confirmed, or are they just invited, or only proposed?
>
> 3. Diversity
>
> Does the proposal include panelists and viewpoints from multiple
> stakeholder perspectives, from multiple geographic, economic or cultural
> perspectives?  Are all panelists properly qualified to represent one or
> more distinct stakeholder groups?  Do the proposed panellists contribute to
> the overall diversity and multi-stakeholder representation of the APrIGF
> event?
>
>
> Each proposal will be evaluated on each criterial, with a score between 0
> and 3 as follows:
>
>  3 = criteria is fully satisfied
>  2 = acceptable
>  1 = needs improvement
>  0 = absent
>
> (giving each proposal a total score between 0 and 9)
>
>
> Selection Committee
> -------------------
>
> A volunteer subcommittee (Selection Committee) of the MSG will be
> assembled for the purpose of rating the proposals, as follows:
>
> 1. After a call issued by the MSG chair, volunteers will submit their
> names and stakeholder affiliation to the MSG mailing list
>
> 2. Names will be accepted in order of appearance on the list, providing
> that no single stakeholder grouping is represented by more than 40% or less
> than 20% of committee members.
>
> 3. Up to 21 volunteers will be accepted by this means (less if the
> deadline passes before reaching this number)
>
> 4. The selected members of the Selection Committee will be published on
> the MSG mailing list.
>
> Committee members serve in their individual capacity to further the aims
> and success of the APrIGF, and not in a representative capacity for their
> stakeholder grouping or organisation.
>
> Proposal Ratings
> ----------------
>
> Following the assembly of the selection committee, committee members will
> submit their proposal ratings to the APrIGF secretariat, using the agreed
> ratings form. After the deadline for submission, the secretariat will
> publish a report of proposals showing the anonymised ratings received,
> average rating, and rank order from highest to lowest average rating.   The
> ratings given by specific (named) individual committee members will not be
> published.
>
> Selection Process
> -----------------
>
> As its next meeting after publication of proposal ratings, the MSG will
> consider the list of rated proposals and select proposals in order of
> average rating, in consideration of diversity of the proposals, and
> possible merger of proposals which involve duplication of content, theme or
> issue.
>
> During this discussion, selection committee members may modify their
> ratings, providing this can be achieved in a secure real-time manner.
>
> The final decision of the MSG will be made by consensus.  MSG members with
> personal involvement in any proposal (as proponent, panelist, subject, or
> otherwise) may participate in the discussion but may not block not the
> consensus of the MSG.
>
> After this meeting, the selected proposals (including proposals for
> mergers) will be published on the MSG mailing list and APrIGF website.
>
> ---
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at aprigf.asia
> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.dotasia.org/pipermail/rigf_secretariat/attachments/20130606/5530616d/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at aprigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program