User:RexxS/Training

Thoughts on creating teaching modules

Brainstorm topics, then categorise them.

Different kinds of topics: mechanics of editing - wikitext, visual editor; context of editing - conventions, policies, guidelines. Different topics consume more time, or are more difficult to grasp at first. Could be categorised on difficulty scale 1-n? Or binary classification, easy/hard.

Initial axes:

editing topics; policy topics.
easy to teach; difficult to teach.

Example

Simple scheme of categorisation
Type	Easy	Hard
Editing	create a page save text bold text italic text heading level	add reference
Policy	heading levels verifiability sourcing	conflict of interest neutrality

Prioritisation

One of the problems that face new editors is that of seeing their work reverted because they didn't follow some of our conventions.

I've come to believe that two factors are most important to ensure that contributions are not reverted:

The new editor needs to look serious. A user page that describes their interests and any relevant non-personal background does a lot to establish the bona fides of the editor.
In the beginning, every contribution in mainspace needs to be sourced. Although an established editor may be given the benefit of the doubt, a new editor seems far more likely to have unsourced material reverted.

With that in mind, I suggest that the two key things to learn are how to create a user page and how to add references. As I once said to a fellow trainer who pointed out that I hadn't taught a group how to make text bold, "I've never seen a new editor's work deleted because they didn't make a word bold".

For that reason, topics covered should follow some prioritisation to ensure that trainees can at least edit text and add references. Anything else is bonus.

Topics to be covered

The topics to be covered in a training session will depend on:

available time;
baseline wiki-skills of audience (usually none);
ability of audience to learn new skills and knowledge;

Ideally, we would tailor the training to each individual trainee. Most of the time, the numbers are too great; the trainers will not have learned sufficient background of the trainees to plan individual work; the trainers won't have the skills to individualise training on-the-fly. The next best thing is to aim at somewhere around the middle ability for group work, and have helpers available to pick up on anyone who falls behind. Then break off into individual working regularly, and have extension work available for the high-fliers.

Aside: younger audiences seem to appreciate the visual more than older trainees. Adding images to Wikipedia pages from Commons is popular with youngsters and should be higher in the priorities, the younger the audience is.