FINAL VERSION SUBMITTED (IF RATIFIED)
The final version to be submitted, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here by upon completion of the vote.
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.
DRAFT SUBMITTED FOR DISCUSSION
The first draft submitted will be placed here before the call for comments begins. The Draft should be preceded by the name of the person submitting the draft and the date/time. If, during the discussion, the draft is revised, the older version(S) should be left in place and the new version along with a header line identifying the drafter and date/time should be placed above the older version(s), separated by a Horizontal Rule (available + Insert More Content control).
ALAC COMMENTS ON THE DOCUMENT “Proposal of the New Fellowship Program Approach”
July 2018
The ALAC is very grateful to have the opportunity to comment on the draft Proposal of the new Fellowship Approach. We have detailed our suggestions and comments in the sections proposed in the draft for ease of reference
Application
- We would encourage prospective Fellows to join and engage with their Regional At-Large group as a general introduction to ICANN and its policy developments especially while they are completing their online ICANN Learn course, in case they have questions to ask a community member.
- The application process should provide for the diversity of language so that it does not dissuade prospects from applying because of their lack of English. It should also encourage applications from people with disabilities as well as those from indigenous communities.
- Regional GSE representatives need to make themselves known at events they attend, to encourage more Fellows applications and At-Large memberships from among the technical community.
Selection Committee
- With regards to the committee structure we would recommend that as well as skills and commitment required by the committee members, that diversity should also be a prerequisite to reflect and encourage diversity across our ICANN community.
Selection Criteria
- The Fellowship Dashboard on the ICANN Stakeholder Tool V7, lists previous Fellows and could be used as a reference to ensure that there is fair representation of geographic as well as other forms of diversity.
- We would also suggest that the Fellowship Programme takes advantage of the huge pool of talent within our current At-Large Structures, especially among those who would benefit from the experience and understanding gained by their further integration through the fellowship programme.
- Given the significant focus on policy activities within the ICANN community, the Fellowship Program should ensure that Fellows are willing and able to contribute to the policy work within their specific SO/AC/SG/RALO.
Verify proof of engagement
- We appreciate that different ways of demonstrating engagement have been listed to enable Returning Fellows to show how they have effectively used their learnings from the Fellowship programme to integrate themselves into the ICANN system, as well as how they have organised and participated in initial outreach about ICANN within their own communities. It is important that we instil these practices early in their Fellowship programme in order to ensure that later policy outreach is more easily facilitated.
Pre-meeting preparation:
- We support the ICANN Learn courses offering different types of courses according to the Fellowship levels: introductory -> policy induction -> topics specific to their constituency of choice and encouraging them to apply the theory to practice at a F2F meeting.
- ICANN Learn could consider a course that enables Fellows to study case scenarios that look at different PDP topics to demonstrate the different perspectives of the various constituencies and why the bottom-up multi-stakeholder approach is important to ICANN's decision-making process.
- We would also like ICANN Learn courses to be more accessible to Fellows with disabilities and specific needs. Perhaps they could be involved in the development and testing of ICANN Learn courses that are directed at Fellows. This connection would also encourage participants of different abilities to become more involved in ICANN.
- We appreciate that some consideration has been given to volunteers who may not have had an opportunity to become Fellows themselves (due to earlier ICANN policies) but whose interests and skills would be an ideal match as mentors for Fellows.
On site
- Fellow mentors should already be active participants in ICANN so that they can give appropriate guidance based on experience of the system and its processes, but there should be a limit to the number of times a Fellow can be a mentor-coach to give others an opportunity for leadership.
- SO/ACs should contribute both to the development and implementation of a programme for Fellows at ICANN meetings where Fellows can suitably observe their constituency of choice and decide on how they might become engaged. More involvement by the SO/ACs on onsite activities is seen as critical to early engagement by the Fellows.
- SO/ACs may wish to consider ways in which to more formally engage and interact with Fellows during their meetings. This might mean the allocation of a role for the Fellows, including possibly serving as a rapporteur or preparing a summary of a meeting.
- SO/ACs should allocate some time specifically for interaction and feedback from Fellows, possibly as part of the Fellowship wrap-up session.
Post-meeting requirements
- The specific focuses for each fellowship level offer different levels of outreach which will further help with each Fellow’s development as ICANN participants. An extended timeframe of perhaps a year between fellowships plus relevant metrics will help to provide a gauge of both the impact and effectiveness of the Fellow's outreach, but also give them an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment by actually joining up with a constituency and getting involved in the interim.
- SO/ACs may wish to invite Fellows to relevant meetings or other means of continued communication as part of post-meeting follow up.
Maureen Hilyard - penholder
Alfredo Calderon
Judith Hellerstein
David Morar
Daniel Khauka Nanghaka
