[ICANN Academy WG] Reality, Realism, and Responsiveness -- a few of the three Rs that we must consider + Accountability
William Drake
william.drake at uzh.ch
Wed Aug 29 08:25:22 UTC 2012
On Aug 28, 2012, at 6:44 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I very much agree with this perspective.
> I tend to think that any program is optimized if it has both online and face to face modes.
Online education done right is great as a supplement, but it's no substitute unless a F2F is infeasible, which isn't the case here. The relative dynamics and merits of the two have been studied to death and the evidence in terms of student preparedness at the end is pretty compelling. And designing and executing a serious online program from a full stop would be far more difficult for ICANN to pull off than organizing a right-sized and properly focused F2F.
>
> I think it is critical to get this right. I think it is critical that this has to be a genuinely bottom-up cross SOAC effort.
> And I beleive that a quickie program for Toronto, just because we have the money to do something, is not only the wrong thing to do, but that it will endanger future efforts by setting out on the wrong foot.
Agree, per previous. My preference would be something like a) have a planning session in Toronto and build more consensus, b) if that's achieved in Toronto or online thereafter, do a one-day pilot in Beijing, c) learn from that and consider whether and how to scale it up to serve a broader clientele, including by adding a well designed online component that could be leveraged more widely still. And in any scenario, I'd hope it can be genuinely bottom-up and substantively open. This began as a community-driven effort and it'd be really counterproductive to squander the energy, enthusiasm and expertise that's been mobilized by making it top down and indoctrination-oriented. The good work done prior by the WG should serve as a baseline to evolve from.
Bill
>
> As for Diplo, over the next months I will getting trained in their methods so I can teach one of their courses in the future, and would be glad to contribute what I learn as this effort continues beyond the Toronto kerfuffle.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 28 Aug 2012, at 12:29, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>
>> Online training has some big advantages: extensibility, accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scheduling. In-person training has some big challenges: it is not very extensible, accessibility is more difficult, it is expensive and scheduling is complicated, not only for trainees but also for trainers and experts. Two advantages of in-person training is the face-to-face time and networking but online training could be supplemented with some follow-up in-person sessions that are designed to facilitate that. Note that Marilyn in her message did not rule out some in-person activities.
>>
>> We won’t be able to maximize the value of this effort by delivering only in-person training unless large amounts of funding are provided and, even then, scheduling for trainees and trainers will always present difficulties.
>>
>> Maybe our time in Toronto would be better spent adjusting our work to design an online training program that is supplemented by some in-person follow-up sessions in various venues.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>> From: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:25 AM
>> To: Alain Berranger; tyokunbo at yahoo.co.uk
>> Cc: At Large ICANN Academy
>> Subject: [ICANN Academy WG] Reality, Realism, and Responsiveness -- a few of the three Rs that we must consider + Accountability
>>
>> I am struggling with what I will say in this email.
>>
>> first, I want all of us to stop, and think, and then try to agree.
>> What is the purpose of an ICANN sponsored/funded/supported 'academy'?
>> Is an 'academy' from ICANN our best strategy?
>> What are the topics?
>> Who is the audience?
>> What is the credibility of an ICANN academy?
>> Is this introduction, intro-doctrination, or something else?
>> Given the harsh demands of work on the Constituencies/SGs/ALAC, and probably others, is this 'overview' or a more formalized training approach that is 'verified' with the entities?
>>
>>
>> I understand that some are citing examples of sessions held in Europe or Latin America with guest speakers, none of whom are certified, or accountable to any entity, nor do they represent any official view. that has great value.
>>
>> Let's introduce a different model: ONLINE training.
>>
>> For instance, the DIPLO training is in fact highly successful in reaching large numbers of interested parties. Some become participants. Many just are better informed and more aware of ICANN, or IG, or the topic that is presented.
>>
>> I have no relationship to DIPLO,but I do have a concern. The Academy as proposed by whomever designed it is based on a model that makes assumptions that to me are elitist, and require face to face for a few. The BC strongly wants to support training for the many -- including information that can be widely distributed by entities like the BC, etc.
>>
>> Some seem, again, to want to provide indoctrination/orientation to NC appointees. It is of concern to the BC that people who know nothing about ICANN are being appointed to leadership positions. BUT, any information/briefings/orientation must be neutral. Orientation of newly appointed reps, whether Board or other, could be a one half day orientation session with the chairs of the various SOs/AC/Constituencies/SGs on Friday. That is a simple matter; less 'stressful' and is more an orientation session than an indoctrination opportunity. It also can be accomplished in a 1/2 day to 2/3 day segment.
>>
>> Decisions are needed on who can participate: all appointees? Chairs and designees? staff -- whom? BUT, it simplifies one of the objectives of the Academy and allows us to move the Academy concept into a more realistic and responsible discussion, which is not trying to solve too many problems at once.
>>
>> summary:
>> We are struggling with implementing a process that simply lacks full support. I have to focus on my responsibilities as BC Chair. I can come in a day early, but only if we decide now. I cannot stay after the ICANN meeting -- I have to travel to Montreal to a global event on ICTs. I'll travel Friday/late afternoon/early evening, so have some time during day Friday/post ICANN for a short discussion/debrief.
>>
>> However, the ICANN Board MUST meet in Toronto, or run the risk of conveying to the community that they simply don't care about accountability and transparency. So, we should assume an ICANN Board meeting on Friday. That still leaves a two hour segment Friday afternoon. However, I have work to do with my Constituency/SG, and I need to plan accordingly.
>>
>> Can we not use part of Friday - pre ICANN - and discuss key questions:
>>
>> Why:
>> Who:
>> What:
>> When:
>> AND WHAT NOT to do: what to co exist with, etc.
>>
>> Question to ICANN staff:
>> Can you accept that an academy may not be a physical event, but could best be an online and widely available service that is online? That doesn't preclude an ocassional face to face, but online training is a different matter in terms of development, skills, and capability. And reach.
>>
>> Is someone on staff or Board somehow so focused on having a physical 'academy' that using online training mechanisms are not an option? We should determine now how flexible staff/board are willing to be on this.
>>
>> And, I need to assess how much resource, commitment and time that the BC can devote to the needs we see for enhancing support for participation from business and others.
>>
>> Marilyn Cade, BC Chair
>>
>>
>>
>> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:03:14 -0400
>> From: alain.berranger at gmail.com
>> To: tyokunbo at yahoo.co.uk
>> CC: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [ICANN Academy WG] Pilot leadership training in Toronto - decision on the dates
>>
>> Three quick points:
>> 1) the majority of those expressing a preference for postponing are all experienced and well trained in ICANN matters;
>> 2) would it make sense to poll the prospective trainees? They have the most at stake in learning.
>> 3) an important benefit of training is the networking between trainees; given that this training involves a good chunk of ICANN stakeholders' leadership, this networking would produce substantial value.
>>
>> Alain
>>
>> On Tuesday, August 28, 2012, TYokunbo Abiola wrote:
>> Having read about the Toronto training program for some time, I strongly agree with Bill's ideas.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Adetokunbo Abiola
>>
>> --- On Tue, 28/8/12, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
>>
>> From: William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
>> Subject: Re: [ICANN Academy WG] Pilot leadership training in Toronto - decision on the dates
>> To: "sandra hoferichter" <info at hoferichter.eu>
>> Cc: "at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org" <at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org>
>> Date: Tuesday, 28 August, 2012, 3:18
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> While I strongly support capacity building and outreach/inreach and would not want to cause frustration among those who've worked hard on this, I think I agree with Avri and Chuck that postponement merits serious consideration. There still seems to be different baseline visions in play with regard to goals, substance, mechanics and governance, and it's not obvious that these can all be effectively resolved quickly enough to ensure a good outcome in Toronto. And if a "not ready for prime time" version is rushed out and doesn't go splendidly, this could have a negative impact on community perceptions of the utility of such efforts going forward. I'd rather see it unambiguously done right and build the support needed for a regular activity than have it be the object of gossip and dissensus (not that that could happen in ICANN, but…).
>>
>> A little more percolation and community direction seems advisable to me.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:53 AM, sandra hoferichter wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Avri, postpone the programme would be that last option only, which I put not as an option yet. Taking into consideration the NomCom selections and the new CEO participation, I still see some very good reasons to go for Toronto. The Autumn meeting was not proposed just by chance. Furthermore I believe we can get things done, now that we are in the dialogue.
>>>
>>> Best Sandra
>>>
>>> (Note: This message was send from my iPhone - I do apologise for any misspelling.)
>>>
>>> Am 28.08.2012 um 01:01 schrieb "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>:
>>>
>>>> Considering how late it is before the Toronto meetings, this is worth considering. At the same time, I personally will contribute however possible to do what needs to be done if we keep the Toronto target.
>>>>
>>>> Chuck
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>> [mailto:at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-
>>>>> lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 6:20 PM
>>>>> To: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ICANN Academy WG] Pilot leadership training in Toronto -
>>>>> decision on the dates
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>> other ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would it be possible/reasonable to add the option of postponing the
>>>>> leadership training from Toronto to a later time when a properly
>>>>> constituted plan can be considered?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Aug 2012, at 17:00, sandra hoferichter wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thank you again for the valuable comments which has been posted on
>>>>> this list. I did not respond to everyone, but they should all feed into
>>>>> the further discussion and the final curriculum.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Coming back to one of Filiz' earlier email I like to draw your
>>>>> attention to the following question and ask you kindly to express your
>>>>> opinion in a doodle.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Due to the time conflicts for some assigned participants, we like to
>>>>> get a clearer picture about the duration of the leadership training in
>>>>> Toronto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I propose 3 options and ask all WG members*** to choose, what do you
>>>>>> think is the most appropriate solution. Feel free to consider also
>>>>> the
>>>>>> feedback of your SO / AC / SG chair whilst making the choice
>>>>>> here:http://www.doodle.com/4c4fa7dehuaksckx
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** For group balancing reasons I ask the recent ALAC programme
>>>>> committee members (Avri, Tijani, Sala, Carlos) only to reply on the
>>>>> doodle.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The options are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. A one day orientation programme on Fri, 12th October à this
>>>>> will avoid time conflicts, especially for the GNSO, board and current
>>>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
>> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg mailing list at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg
>> _______________________________________________
>> at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg mailing list
>> at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg mailing list
> at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg
More information about the icann-academy-wg
mailing list