As we get going on the bid of course we’re getting interested in process. At the same time, I wasn’t able to make the Birmingham Meet-Up, so I’m missing having a really good debate about what we want to achieve. Reading all the posts on this blog I feel the need to try and summarise a vision for what we hope the Digital Mentors programme will deliver. This is a very poor attempt, so just a starter for further discussion. Apologies to all those posts that I’ve not understood or not included.
(1) A new way to have a voice
Working in disadvantaged communities to inspire and skill people to communicate using digital and social media.
(2) Community-up
Driven by the needs of people in communities, not imposed top-down.
(3) Communities AND Tech-savvy helpers
To help individuals and communities to develop their use of technology through training, support and toolkits to bring the right technology to the communities in a way which is useful to them.
(4) Not just one kind of digital mentor
Digital mentors who are local people who motivate and encourage people, and don’t know anything about technology (someone else does that bit). Digital mentors who are local people and who are brimming with excitement and expertise in the use of social media, digital media, digi TV or community radio. Digital mentors who strategically join community development workers, internet training/access centres, and digital media experts together across different local communities.
(5) Innovating AND building on what’s happening now
Big scale coordination and bringing in the expertise of social media/community development experts who have done some of this already on the ground. Doing some new things that haven’t been done before - led by the mapping and by an analysis of community needs. It can’t just be about doing what’s already happened before.
(6) Building in sustainability
At least in the places touched by the demonstrators, the skills and enthusiasm for communicating using digital media remains. And, of course, the successful models can then be rolled out by CLG across the whole country!
What have I missed? Do let me know in the comments here.
Tags: bid, opportunities, themes, threads
Entries (RSS)
Hi Helen - good effort at trying to clean things up.
For number 4 I don’t personally think that ‘local people who motivate & encourage people and don’t know anything about technology’ should be classed as digital mentors. To me these would be the people the programme seeks to quickly engage and skill up so that they could become Digital Mentors ie. they’re beneficiaries - although there probably is sense to explicitly include these people in design & delivery in so far as recruiting others, but I don’t think they’re yet ‘Digital Mentors’.
For number 6 I think it would be useful to try and have some debate about what this means. My opinion is that sustainability should be in the model of inspiration and support ie. looking to develop a process that can be easily picked up by others and not dependant on having an expensive infrastructure beyond this getting the ball rolling stage. Others may disagree though and think that sustainability is more to do with income generation or resource selection so that would seem a good debate to have.
And as an addition I think there should start to be some practical examples of possible delivery approaches. With the massive variety of organisations and people that have showed an interest I think theres a risk of trying to please all. Instead the programme needs to have a clear focus on how it thinks it can achieve its aim and then seek to recruit the best orgs/people towards that. I slightly get the impression that if not it may become more about trying to fit in those who are already on board in just because they’re doing good similar stuff - which while useful may not necessarily fit. If some practical approach examples could be set up it may be for example that it turns out there are skill shortages, or that there becomes opportunities that at this stage are not clear and would then attract the relevant orgs who at the moment don’t see a role for them.
Hi to all
I think Helens approach is a strong one - but wanted to add a few additional thoughts
In our community projects we have a top down/bottom up model that is combined. In this case the support to users is provided from the bottom up with local communities organising themselves and integrating support to disabled users within their programmes and initiatives, however this is combined with a “topdown” or support function that provides those local groups with information, resources, training and often equipment that they need to effectively deliver at a community level - clearly the two are not incompatible, but rather are an example of each type of organisation playing its relevant role.
To do this we need to make best use of available technologies, for disabled users we need to explore open source and free assistive technology solutions, but we also need to make real use of web 2.0, social networking and internet connectivity to deliver information and advice
For examples look at some of the resources we have available such as
http://www.abilitynet.wetpaint.com
http://www.youtube.com/abilitynet
http://www.abilitynettraining.org
http://www.abilitynet.org.uk/soc
Using these tools alos allows us to utilise different platforms to help users expand their cofidence base - if they are comfortable with a Mobile Phone and not with a PC we can deliver support via the phone to support a transition to the more flexible tool etc
Well be presenting this approach at the Vienna eInclusion conference on the 29th - hope that we may see some of you there
[...] I also talked to them about the open innovation exchange experiment and how it’s model of open collaboration to pitch for contracts is using trust to disrupt existing ways of doing business and improve the [...]
Hi All
Much of our recent experience has been overcoming a significant level of ‘distrust/ignorance/scepticism/unwillingness to try’ - not necessarily just from the community, rather from the policy makers / stakeholders.
The long slow process of mainstreaming of digital culture, that is beginning to show a shift in momentum now at last with 2008 proving to throw up some interesting things such as this initiative.
But we need to find ways to share the enthusiasm we have and embolden those who have yet to grasp what is going on, this may be anything from making subtle changes to communications policies to opening up other funding streams so they can be accessed.
So I’m saying we need something linked up around advocacy / or hand holding local authorities / and the education sector to reach 21st century decisions.
Cheers
Taylor
Hi
NAVCA are supportive of any bid that will ensure that :
- primary funding is to ensure digital mentors work with communties to give them a stronger voice and that they are supported to give direction to their digital voice through local infrastructure so it is aimed at the correct stakeholders in the public and third sectors
- that the third sector (non-govt speak, the voluntary and community sector, social enterprises, co-operatives, volunteers) is primarily well represented through the reach that exists in local infrastructure organisations through local small groups advisors and community development workers
- that efficency in training is established through regional general digital mentoring training or national workshops on specific digital technologies
- established regional and national networks are utilised to speed maximum efficiency
- good practice is shared through online and ‘good old’ face to face peer networking and story sharing
- that established digital innovations are refined and made replicable in other parts of the country
- that the methods of digital inclusion are researched as platforms can change when methods to innovate stay constant
Just a few of many thoughts - which fit with most peoples’ thinking it seems
Paul Webster - NAVCA Regional ICT Support and Development