FW: [nodeval] prioritised aims for node.l evaluation questions

Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:02:28 -0000

Hello nodevaluators

I've just visited http://eval.nodel.org and inputted my sense of the
priority order of questions - and based on the quick Eurovision style
point allocation (6 poits for 1st choice, 1 point for last) the 4
questions are currently in this order of priority:

 1.  d. To build on the infrastructure for media arts in London. (19
pts)
 2=3D b. To explore and develop shared purposes, philosophies, resources
and vocabularies between the various discourses of media art, activism,
and technology. (18 pts)
 2=3D c. To raise the visibility of media arts in London. (18 pts)
 4.  a. To work in an open, cooperative and collaborative environment.
(15 pts)

Bearing in mind our limited capacity (and low points scoring) I agree
with Saul's proposal that we drop these 2 questions for now:
    * f. To challenge contemporary centralised and hierarchical
approaches to curatorial practice.
    * e. To explore and develop the sustainability of NODE.London=92s
activities.

(in fact I believe that (e) can be picked up as the central question
within a 'future nodel sustainability' research/development 5K GFTA bid
we plan to submit to ACE in March - this was discussed at the VOs
meeting on the 20th - minutes will be posted on the wiki soon!)

If anyone else from the eval subgroup (Corrado? Louise? Lewis?) could
visit http://eval.nodel.org asap and input their preferences that would
be really helpful and Saul will be drawing up provisional questions for
Monday - which I will need to act upon pretty swiftly in terms of
external evaluation methods!! (Saul it is worth looking through the
'Partnerships for Learning' document that Eva circulated to us - most
centrally the point about defining aims/objectives/measures of success
to create useful quantitative as well as qualitative readings against
the questions above.

A reminder that I am seeing Rebecca Maguire @ Goldsmiths today lunchtime
to explore the possibility of her involvement as a voluntary evaluation
consultant - I will take her through where we have got to so far and see
in what way she is interested in becoming involved. I wonder if she
could be the 'neutral facilitator' that Ruth describes in her
fascinating snowball method recommendation, for a workshop (or 2) that
we carry out with as many VOs as can make a late March/early April
session?

I think I'm proposing that =20

4.  a. To work in an open, cooperative and collaborative environment.
(15 pts)

could/should, in terms of internal/VO level evaluation, be left
"question free" by Saul at this point, and we ask VOs to identify the
questions themselves as part of the workshops (thus referencing Lewis's
illuminative eval principles) - and we use snowball + circulated paper
surveys etc as the method to deal with this question?

Any feedback before I go to meet Rebecca would be welcome - I'm leaving
the house just after 12 today - thanks everyone

Tim Jones
tim@tim-jones.co.uk=20
skype timjones27

---

Currently:

Project Coordinator for NODE.London, a month long season of media arts
in London http://www.nodel.org=20

Live music event programmer for the Albany, Deptford:
http://www.thealbany.org.uk=20

Researcher/fundraising consultant for artists and organisations
including:
CDR http://www.burntprogress.com=20
Roshini Kempadoo
http://web.staffs.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ariadne/show?artist=3Dkempadoo_r=20
The Albany http://www.thealbany.org.uk=20
London Slam Central http://www.x-bout.com/about.html

-----Original Message-----
From: nodevaluation-admin@lists.nodel.org
[mailto:nodevaluation-admin@lists.nodel.org] On Behalf Of Saul Albert
Sent: 24 February 2006 01:55
To: nodevaluation@lists.nodel.org
Subject: [nodeval] prioritised aims for node.l evaluation questions

Dear All,

So, after three days, we have 3 responses, including my own.

The top four questions so far, from Lauren, Ruth and myself are:

a. To work in an open, cooperative and collaborative environment.
b. To explore and develop shared purposes, philosophies, resources and
   vocabularies between the various discourses of media art, activism,
and
   technology.
c. To raise the visibility of media arts in London.
d. To build on the infrastructure for media arts in London..=20

Although we all ordered them differently, this is probably within our
capacity to ask 4 questions.

There is now a wiki-version of the evaluation structure:
http://eval.nodel.org/index.php/NODE_London_evaluation_structure

Please log in before tomorrow (Friday) and give your opinion on which
aimss are most important, and I'll do my homework of drafting questions
to fit each one for each group, hopefully we'll have something to put
out
by Monday.

Cheers,

Saul.

--=20
-- http://chinabone.lth.bclub.org.uk/~saul/

_______________________________________________
nodevaluation mailing list
nodevaluation@lists.nodel.org
http://lists.nodel.org/mailman/listinfo/nodevaluation

--=20
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/268 - Release Date:
23/02/2006
=20

--=20
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/268 - Release Date:
23/02/2006
=20