Open Stack

Interesting. Educational attainment as a proxy for merit ;)

Education is one of the designated interest areas for the Diversity WG,
hence it's inclusion. I'm happy to remove it of course if there is broad
consensus that it isn't appropriate or needed.

Having said that, the question isn't whether something "should" matter. The
whole point of exclusionary practice is that it focuses on attributes that
may not matter. What is important is what is used to discriminate, and
analysing which of those are valid and invalid.

Is Education one of those attributes? Dunno. I've seen it used that way and
it certainly could be in our community (or in the hiring practices of
employers in the community).

Roland

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 at 02:16 Eoghan Glynn <eglynn at redhat.com> wrote:

>
>
> > > > > I've added all the categories identified in the 3 phases that were
> > > > > previously agreed, and altered the questions somewhat. There are
> now 10
> > > > > questions. I'm not keen to try to add any supplementary questions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Where I think we need to move beyond binary or simple data
> (country,
> > > > > age),
> > > > > I have stayed with free text entry.
> > > > >
> > > > > I haven't yet written any introductory blurb about privacy
> protection,
> > > > > the
> > > > > optional nature of the survey all the questions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Similarly, I haven't yet addressed any issues around how the survey
> > > > > should
> > > > > be targeted. I'm leaning towards a surveying a subset of the
> > > > > population,
> > > > > and trying to provide an incentive to participate (don't ask,
> haven't
> > > > > got
> > > > > one yet), so as to reduce self-selection bias. Anyone with
> professional
> > > > > knowledge in this area please speak up.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm unlikely to make the next meeting, so I'm afraid I can only
> discuss
> > > > > via email. We're running a little behind the original schedule,
> but I
> > > > > hope
> > > > > to be able to engage the Foundation to commence the process of
> > > > > executing
> > > > > the survey by the end of next week.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > One area I always wonder about is English as a second language, does
> it
> > > > hamper efforts to get engaged in the community? I suspect so and
> would
> > > > like
> > > > to find solutions for further inclusion.
> > > >
> > > > Can that be added if the goal of the survey is to identify areas
> where
> > > > underrepresented people may be struggling?
> > >
> > > It's an interesting question, but may be somewhat problematic to
> > > include in a survey.
> > >
> > > For one thing, there are many in the community (who I've worked with)
> > > who would fall into that category of English-as-a-second-language
> > > but would also have excellent proficiency in the language.
> > >
> > > So simply measuring the number of non-native-speakers doesn't
> necessarily
> > > tell us much in terms of hampered participation.
> > >
> > > Also, it seems to cross the line between counting those with some
> innate
> > > characteristic (gender, orientation, race etc.) into counting those
> with
> > > an (assumed) lack of mastery of a skill needed to thrive in the
> community.
> > >
> > > Their proficiency can and will improve over time with sustained use.
> Also
> > > the community can make allowances and level the playing field somewhat
> by
> > > say promoting co-presenters for design sessions or mandating the use of
> > > IRC as opposed to voice comms, but I would suspect that some bar in
> terms
> > > of baseline English fluency will remain long-term.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Eoghan
> >
> > Good points, Eoghan. Why not phrase the question directly?  Something
> > like "Does the fact that the OpenStack community communicates
> > primarily in English make it harder for you to participate?"
>
> Sure, that's better - at least it only counts those who consider
> themselves truly hampered by a language barrier.
>
> Though thinking about it some more, and looking again at the latest
> draft survey with the new question about educational attainment, I'm
> thinking that concentrating on innate personal characteristics (that
> shouldn't matter in terms of participation) would serve us better in
> building diversity ... rather than straying into the area of malleable
> characteristics like having earned an under-grad/post-grad degree
> (that do, and arguably should, matter).
>
> Cheers,
> Eoghan
>
> > Doug
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > Also, just to comment on the survey sampling, we got less than 30
> > > > responses
> > > > to our Women of OpenStack survey, so keep it in mind that we may not
> get
> > > > meaningful data that you can act upon. We may need to dig into the
> > > > Foundation data and enhance those profiles instead, if the goal is
> "find
> > > > ways to reach underrepresented groups."
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Anne
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Roland
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 at 11:42 Johnston, Tamara <
> Tamara.Johnston at emc.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> The Diversity WG is actively working on many things, including
> moving
> > > > >> forward with our Data Diversity Plan that includes analyzing what,
> > > > >> where
> > > > >> and how we’re currently collecting this information, determining
> where
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> store this information, defining how to enable the core team to
> > > > >> analyze
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> report on this data, so on and so forth.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I support the stance the Foundation has taken in the past, which
> was
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> provide an open text field (and/or option to select “prefer not to
> > > > >> say”)
> > > > >> that enables a community member to, if they so choose, share their
> > > > >> identity.  While we’re trying to better understand the makeup of
> our
> > > > >> community we cannot limit the options they can choose from or ask
> what
> > > > >> will
> > > > >> likely be perceived as personal questions (do you identify as a
> gender
> > > > >> minority).  We can either choose to use an open text field /
> prefer
> > > > >> not to
> > > > >> say approach or take the hybrid approach that Facebook has taken
> where
> > > > >> they
> > > > >> list 50+ identities but still have an open text field.  I suggest
> we
> > > > >> stick
> > > > >> with what the Foundation has been doing, as this will enable our
> > > > >> community
> > > > >> members to decide if they want to share their sexual identity and
> > > > >> they’re
> > > > >> not boxed into choosing X, Y, or Z.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> *Tamara Johnston*  |  Cloud Portfolio  |  EMC Global Services  |
> (C)
> > > > >> 1-510-398-9114  |  (E) tamara.johnston at emc.com
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> From: Roland Chan <roland at aptira.com>
> > > > >> Date: Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 5:15 PM
> > > > >> To: Stefano Maffulli <stefano at openstack.org>, "
> > > > >> foundation at lists.openstack.org" <foundation at lists.openstack.org>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Diversity] re: Diversity
> > > > >> Workgroup
> > > > >> APAC 2015-08-27
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The existing data is being handled by another sub-team on the
> > > > >> Diversity
> > > > >> WG. I'm certainly keen to see it, but getting it isn't my focus.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regarding the opt-out capability, my intent is that every
> question is
> > > > >> optional. The survey itself will require a one page intro where we
> > > > >> address
> > > > >> this and other privacy related issues.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Roland
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 at 02:39 Stefano Maffulli <
> stefano at openstack.org>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On 09/01/2015 08:53 AM, Amy Marrich wrote:
> > > > >>> > I had sent this to a smaller section of the group but it deals
> with
> > > > >>> > how
> > > > >>> > the University of California asks the gender question and also
> > > > >>> > includes
> > > > >>> > sexual orientation.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>>
> http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/28/university-california-offers-six-choices-for-gender-identity/
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > We may be able to get a hold of their survey as a possible
> > > > >>> > guideline.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> At the beginning of 2014[1], the OpenStack Foundations started
> asking
> > > > >>> its members to specify their gender. The intention was to start
> > > > >>> measuring that aspect of diversity in order to improve it. Since
> the
> > > > >>> gender issue is extremely new to society, there are lots of
> acronyms
> > > > >>> and
> > > > >>> constant fluxes of differences among the non-binary genders. We
> > > > >>> decided,
> > > > >>> after long debate and research, to use an open text form to
> specify
> > > > >>> gender because that's the most flexible one. Any other system we
> > > > >>> found,
> > > > >>> including the one from UC above, had criticism because the debate
> > > > >>> even
> > > > >>> among scholars is not set.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> You may have noticed that the form to subscribe to the Summit for
> > > > >>> example asks gender offering 4 options:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> - male
> > > > >>> - female
> > > > >>> - let me tell you
> > > > >>>    > open form
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> (I noticed now it's missing the very valuable 4th option "prefer
> not
> > > > >>> to
> > > > >>> say", which I think may be useful to have even if the response is
> > > > >>> itself
> > > > >>> optional)
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Has anybody looked at the historic data about gender from the
> members
> > > > >>> database?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> /stef
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> [1] A summary of that conversation is on my blog
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> http://maffulli.net/2014/02/05/tracking-gender-diversity-in-the-openstack-developer-community/
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > > >>> Foundation mailing list
> > > > >>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > > >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Foundation mailing list
> > > > > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Anne Gentle
> > > > Rackspace
> > > > Principal Engineer
> > > > www.justwriteclick.com
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Foundation mailing list
> > > > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foundation mailing list
> > Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20150903/b2a4edfe/attachment-0001.html>