#22 Objective Proposal: University Involvement
Closed: Fixed None Opened 9 years ago by sgallagh.

I alluded to this during the Council meeting on Monday, so I'm going to attempt to turn this into a formal proposal.

== Objective: University Involvement ==

=== Overview ===
Increase Fedora's exposure in university environments, particularly engineering universities.

=== Expected Impact ===
Increased user base with a specific focus on future contributors.

=== Timeframe ===
For maximum effect, if we elect to work towards this Objective, we should kick it into gear at the beginning of the summer with the intent of having events planned during the 2015-2016 school year.

=== Aspects ===
Coordinate marketing, ambassador and outreach groups to focus on university needs
Work with universities to provide install-fests during student orientation periods
Work with universities to regularly run Fedora-focused hackfests
Work with university IT departments to co-maintain one or more Fedora computer labs (and help them upgrade them during breaks)
* Establish work-study, co-op and for-credit programs at universities

=== Metrics ===
Increased contributions from university programs
Increased bug reports and feature requests
* Increased mind-share among potential contributors (not easily measured)

=== Additional Notes ===
Some prototypes of this have been performed at Brno universities over the last few years, with very positive results. We should coordinate with the contributors involved in those efforts and learn from their successes and failures.

There is also a University Outreach program run by Red Hat's "Open Source and Standards" department which was involved in the RIT partnership from which we eventually acquired Remy DeCausemaker. I assume he will have plenty to add to this discussion as well as contacts in the university world.


Adding spot to CC explicitly, since as far as I remember this is a large part of his role on OSAS.

Hey, I'm still boostrapping and getting set up on Fedora Infra, but, this on my radar, and interesting to me :)

Keep me posted

This was accepted at the April 27. 2015 Council meeting.

The graphic and spreadsheet above are a bit confusing because "resources" does not flow to "activities".. more of a multiplexor (sp?) relationship (i think)

Yeah, I agree that the connections aren't always apparent here. I wonder if a tree structure might provide a better visual representation.

Or, in the interest of function over form, maybe simply a wiki page using nested headers, with h1 for the Impact, h2 for the Outcomes, and h3 under that for Outputs which lead to that out come, and h4 under each of those for Activities which create each Output, and then h5 under each activity for resources needed.

  • Impact (followed by paragraphs with Mission/Vision)
  • Outcome 1 (followed by details and measurement)
  • Output expected to lead to Outcome 1
    • Activity which will create that output
    • Resources needed
    • Another resource
    • Another activity required for this output
    • Resource
  • Another output expected to lead to Outcome 1
    • Activity
    • Resource
    • Activity
    • Resource
    • Resource
  • Outcome 2 (followed by details and measurement)
  • Output expected to lead to Outcome 2
    ...

Then, later, some kind of tool could take that list and make a pretty chart.

I spoke with Remy about this and he's going to work on a version with the "dots" connected more clearly.

Should this ticket be re-opened? It's been closed since long.

No, it was closed because the Council approved the Objective.

I think continuing to use this ticket as an information source is probably a bad idea; we should open new, targeted tickets and/or set up a Wiki to centralize information.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata