[IAEP] [Grassroots-l] Planning for Sugar Camp Paris

[Walter Bender]

David,

Given that we have a one-day event (assuming the OLPC France agenda is
addressing a different constituency, how would be best build in the
notion of period caucusing to revisit the agenda that occurs in the
multi-day FUDCON meetings?

-walter

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:34 PM, David Farning <dfarning at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Caroline Meeks <solutiongrove at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>>
>>>
>>> I was extremely disappointed in our last two SugarCamps.  Rather then
>>> coming together as a community with shared goals, I got the feeling
>>> that we were just a bunch of people gathered in a room; each trying to
>>> push their own agenda.  The turning point for me was when a scheduled
>>> speaker said, 'God Damn It.  This is my hour and now YOU have to
>>> listen to ME.'
>>>
>>
>> I think we are in violent agreement here.  Please go back and reread your
>> response to my suggestion that we use protocols and I'll walk you through my
>> thinking.
>
> Actually, I believe we are in complete agreement.  We just differ in
> implementation and enforcement:)
>
>> First, I think its extraordinarily important that we appreciate what an
>> effective organization we are.  Especially in our distance communications.
>> David really covers that well in his response to my protocols post.  We are
>> doing a lot of things right and getting good results. Releases, publicity
>> and much positive interest and increasing attention.
>
> The rest is of the post is going to be a long meandering digression
> into community building, group dynamics and setting mutual goals.  If
> you are not to such things, the following is no more than psycho
> babble which has no more effect on your daily life than what Michelle
> Obama wore yesterday.
>
> 1.  The protocols (like bylaw and trademark policies) themselves don't
> really matter.  Every minute spent working on them is a sunk cost...
> because it take time and emotion away from improving the Sugar
> Platform.  What matters is that we set them and move on to other
> things.
>
> 2. The effectiveness of the Sugar Labs did not just happen.  Many
> people have worked to create and establish the community norms
> necessary to encourage effective communication and collaboration.
>
>> I share David's disappointment with the quality of our in person meetings.
>> We are not unique in this.  I am in a class that studies School Reform this
>> semester and the teacher spends huge amounts of time observing in schools.
>> He says that 90% of teacher "shared planning time" and "team" meetings are
>> like watching paint dry.  Its hard to get people who are used to working
>> alone to effectively collaborate in face-to-face groups. It doesn't just
>> happen on its own.  However, when it does happen the results and the
>> coefficient on the effects on learning are quite large.
>
> I care that in two weeks the participants who make the effort to to
> attend SugarCamp Paris have the opportunity to spend useful time
> together.
>
>> So schools are working on this problem with what they call "Protocols". I'm
>> not a huge fan of the name.  But I am a huge fan of accepting the culture
>> and language of our users and finding what in their existing culture can
>> help us help them use Sugar better.  We trying to go into schools and tell
>> them to use Sugar change to  constructivism, don't do things the way you
>> have been doing them.  That is not a huge recipe for long term success.  I'd
>> like to try whenever possible for us to also be learning from schools.
>>
>> In this case both Sugar Labs and Schools have a shared problem.  We know our
>> face-to-face group planning time is vital, but its expensive and we are
>> dissatisfied with the results.
>
> 1. _Everyone_ involved in Sugar Labs knows more about their area of
> specialty then I do.
> 2. _Everyone_ involved in Sugar Labs is more passionate about their
> area of specialty than I am.
> 3. _Everyone_ involved in Sugar Labs is willing to spend more time
> solving problem in their area of interest than I am.
>
> If we accept the notion that the participants are the valuable assets
> in Sugar Labs, managements job is try to provide the participants with
> the resource they need to work effectively and then get out of the
> way.  When participants arrive at SugarCamp they will already bring
> ideas of what they want learn about, talk about, and accomplish.
>
> The FudCon approach gives _control_ of the conference back to the
> participants.  The participants set the agenda, the participants
> decide what sessions to attend, the participants decide what sessions
> are useful and which are not.
>
> There is no man (or mother-ship) setting the agenda and planing the
> priorities. If three smart passionate people go off and work on a
> problem, that is much more valuable than 30 bored and angry people
> fighting for 'airtime.'  Three dedicated and motivated people are all
> that it takes to form a self-sustaining team around a project or
> feature.
>
> I am going to ask you to make a leap up faith and trust me on this
> one.  If it doesn't work we can try something else next time.
> SugarCamps, like releases, don't need to be perfect, they just need to
> keep getting better.
>
> david
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep



-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org