 Welcome to How Wikia Education Foundation Promotes Knowledge Equity. My name is Frank Schuwenburg. I'm the Executive Director of Wikia Education. And with me today are my colleagues, Liana, Ian, Jamie, and Will. Let me start with telling you a little bit about our organization. Wikia Education Foundation is a small nonprofit based in California. We're a spin-off of the Wikimedia Foundation, and we started operations in 2014. We're running two programs. And one is our student program, and the other one is what we call the Scholars and Scientists Program. And our student program goes back to the year 2010 when we tried to find a way to support instructors who are using Wikipedia as a teaching tool. And we did that for a couple of years as part of one of the teams of the Wikimedia Foundation. And then in 2014, we started our own organization, and we've been running this program since. The general idea of that program is really simple. Students write Wikipedia articles instead of writing a traditional term paper. And the benefits for them are they gain really important 21st century skills, like online communication skills, better skills in research and critical thinking. And what starts as a pretty daunting task, students almost always say, oh, my god, I don't know whether I should or whether I even can edit Wikipedia, then ends up to be a very fulfilling thing that they do. Because many students feel like they're doing something, they're engaging in something that is bigger than themselves. And instead of just having an audience of one when they write a traditional term paper, they have many more people who are seeing the content that they're creating through Wikipedia. And in most cases, they're super excited about it, and they're far more motivated doing that assignment. Now, we've been supporting almost 100,000 students that way and turned them into Wikipedia editors since when we started. And we're very proud of that. But at the same time, what is also very meaningful is these student editors fill content gaps on Wikipedia that would otherwise not be filled. We have some ability through our program to ensure that we bring a more diverse crowd to Wikipedia. And my colleagues are going to talk about that in a minute. And so the student program is doing two things. On the one hand, it's bringing diverse group of editors to Wikipedia. We have significantly more African-American students in our programs than the average group of editors that is coming to Wikipedia in a natural way. And we're also targeting content areas on Wikipedia that are underdeveloped. So that's in a very short way a description of our student program. And the scholars and scientists program is relatively new. We started that in 2018. And the idea is that there are certain types of articles that are too difficult to write for students. And we also wanted to bring subject matter experts to Wikipedia. And that's what the scholars and scientists program does. So the way it works is people take courses. And currently, that's courses that stretch over six weeks. And they learn how to edit Wikipedia or how to add content to Wikipedia. And whereas the student program is all free and sponsored through the grant money that we try to bring in, the scholars and scientists program is a fee-for-service program. And people pay a certain fee. And then they are able to take a course and then hopefully continue editing afterwards. Wikiapputation strategic objectives are to improve equity, quality, and reach. And those are the areas that we've been focused on for the last couple of years. In our equity work, we're focusing on content areas and on communities that are underrepresented on Wikipedia. So for example, with our student program, we can systematically target content areas that are underdeveloped on Wikipedia and that need some additional work. And then we can reach out to instructors who we know work in those areas and work with them and support them in bringing their students to Wikipedia. And when it comes to bringing underrepresented communities to Wikipedia or to Wikitheta, that means that we're partnering with organizations like the Asian-American Journalist Association or we're participating in content drives and in content campaigns that are centered around African-American History Month or things like that. And then we're bringing those partners to Wikipedia and we're increasing diversity in Wikipedia's editing community. We're talking about quality. We want to make sure that information on Wikipedia is trustworthy and accurate and brings the most benefit to those people who rely on that information. And I personally, I feel like this is something that has gotten more important over the years. I started editing Wikipedia in 2005 and at that point, most people thought, still thought that this is a thing that can never work. And Wikipedia didn't have as many readers as it has today. But with that change that has happened over the last decade with more and more people relying on Wikipedia for making personal decisions or just looking something up, they trust Wikipedia tremendously. And so that's why we as an organization feel an obligation to ensure that the content quality is top-notch. And then reach means that we're also targeting areas as an organization that we know many people will look for information in that area. To just give you an example, we just recently ran a couple of courses in our scholars and scientists program to improve COVID-19 information on the English Wikipedia. There were certain areas that were really, really well developed already, and then certain other areas when it comes to the state level, so how different states in the United States, for example, reacted to the pandemic that were underdeveloped. And we brought in subject matter experts and it was sponsored courses. So these people could just take the course for free. And they were bringing their subject matter expertise to Wikipedia. And since then, these articles have gotten lots and lots of hits. And this is something that we deeply care about, again, like equity, quality, and reach. And that's our current strategy as an organization. Hi, everyone. I am Leanna Davis. I am the Chief Programs Officer and Deputy Director at Wiki Education. And Frank is giving you a bit of a history of our organization. And I want to talk about the people that we're bringing to Wikipedia through our program initiatives and why that matters for knowledge equity in particular. So this chart shows a general growth of the number of courses we have supported through our student program over the last 10 years, broken down by academic year. And while you can see, we obviously had a small dip in the last year due to the instability and just challenges amidst the pandemic. Fewer new professors were willing to take on a Wikipedia assignment in the midst of all of the other challenges. Over the last five years, we've particularly had significant growth and significant support of student editors who are working on the English Wikipedia to improve the quality and quantity of information there. And what that actually means is over the last four academic years, we've supported an average of 15,500 student editors each year, which is a really big number. And the key takeaways that I want you guys to get out of this is that Wiki Education is running programs at scale, which means we aren't just doing a couple of classes here or there. We're running hundreds of classes every year and supporting tens of thousands of student editors each term. And this enables us to really make some meaningful differences to Wikipedia in terms of the contributors that we are bringing to the projects. Speaking of those contributors, one thing that I think is important to note is that the work that we are doing is primarily targeted at new editors. So while a lot of programmatic initiatives in the Wikimedia movement more broadly, often work like edited forms can be a mix of new and old contributors, through Wiki Education's programs, we're primarily targeting bringing people who have never edited before or who haven't edited a lot to Wikipedia. And you see that in our numbers. So 87% of our program participants are new editors who create their account by participating in our program. About 13% of the participants actually already have a Wikipedia account, although very, very few of them have made substantive edits. And those that have are actually typically students who have already taken a Wikipedia assignment through our program. So this is the second, or in some cases, third time that they are writing a Wikipedia article for class through our program. So they were counted in the new editor's percentage, a term or two before. But mostly the existing account represents either those kinds of students or through our scholars and scientists program, often participants who had maybe attended an editathon or some other kind of event and got a start, but got overwhelmed when they tried to go home and do it on their own and wanted to engage in learning more about Wikipedia in an in-depth fashion by taking one of our scholars and scientists courses. And so the key thing that I'd like you to take away here from this is that because we are operating at scale, our participants can make a really big impact. And that is true in both the content that they're going to be editing, which my colleagues will talk about a little bit later, but also in who they are as contributors. So this is a chart from the Wikimedia Foundation's audiences team, their metrics and insights report back from 2019. And this was an opportunity where they had been looking at these spikes in new editors that were coming to English Wikipedia in January and September that were starting to be very noticeable every year. And so they wondered, sort of, what is that? Where are they coming from? And I was like, hey, I think that's actually our program. And sure enough, we gave them the user names and had them run this against the database that they have here. And what they came up with was the orange line at the bottom you can see is new editors to the English Wikipedia that are coming in through Wikia Education's programs. And the blue line is new editors that are coming into English Wikipedia through every other source. So this is all editathons, all education programs, all programmatic activities that are going on in the English Wikipedia other than those run by us, as well as new editors who are just clicking the edit button and getting started on their own editing journeys. And what this means is that 19% of all of the new active editors on the English Wikipedia are coming via our programs. And so what this means is that we have significant influence over the demographics of the new editing population that is joining the projects right now. We're joining specifically the English Wikipedia right now. So this means across all global participants, everyone who is new and creating their account and starting editing the English Wikipedia, nearly one-fifth of those from the entire world are actually coming directly through our programmatic initiatives, which is a huge percentage from one group. And just the obvious question is, who are these people? So we've always had, we've been doing demographic surveys of our program participants for many years now, but we never had good baseline information to compare it to, which is why we were super excited to see the 2021 Community Insights Report that the Wikimedia Foundation recently put out. And I included a Wiki link there, too, to where it lives on meta. And I would encourage you to check it out if you haven't already. And so they broke down the demographics of the existing editing population by gender in different geographies and overall. And specifically for the United States, for the first time ever, they asked about race and ethnicity. So this is the first time we've ever had data about this to compare the data we collect from our program participants on these two dimensions. In terms of gender, the Wikimedia Foundation study found that 22% of the existing editor base from Northern America identifies as women, which is in contrast to Wikia Education's program participants, where 67% of our program participants identify as women, another 3% identify as non-binary or another category, and 30% identify as men. The 67% has, you know, plus or minus a couple of percentage points stayed very steady through the decade that we've been running this program. We have perpetually brought anywhere from kind of 60 to 70% of our participants have been women, and this has been a key way that we have been helping address the gender gap on Wikipedia and potentially a key reason that a percentage of women from editors from Northern America has increased over the last several years, which is obviously great news. And then we get to the race and ethnicity information. So the Wikimedia Foundation specifically called out two of these categories as being a challenge where we have significant underrepresentation, and that is the Black or African-American category and the Hispanic or Latino and Latina Latinx category. And as you can see from this chart, the Wikimedia Foundation found that only 0.5% of contributors in the United States to Wikipedia are self-identified as Black or African-American, and that's in comparison to 8% of the program participants from WikiEducation's program. Now, obviously we still have some room to improve before we're on par with the 13% of the US population, but the fact that we are significantly better than the existing editing population in the United States, I think demonstrates the power and the work that we've been doing to diversify Wikipedia's editor base. Similarly for contributors who identify as Hispanic or Latino, Latina or Latinx, only 5.2% of the existing US contributors self-identify as such according to the Wikimedia Foundation's data, whereas our program shows 12% of our participants do versus a US population percentage of 18%. So similarly, we have room to improve on that, but we are significantly diversifying the editor base of coming from the United States, which is an important dimension of knowledge equity. And I mean, essentially the summing this up from both the gender and the race and ethnicity dimensions, WikiEducation is diversifying the editing community, particularly the editing community that's coming from the United States, and the fact that we are doing it at such a great scale means we are having meaningful impact on the diversity of contributors to Wikipedia coming from the United States. And so what does this kind of mean in the broader knowledge equity context? I would specifically call out that I think to work towards knowledge equity, we as a movement need to be running more of our programs at scale. And I think WikiEducation is a great example of how to do this, where we start small, we experiment and then we scale up our efforts so that we are bringing thousands and thousands of people into the projects and making sure that lots and lots of people are having the opportunity to join our wonderful community. And then, secondarily, the new editors that we bring to these programs need to fill the existing community's diversity gaps. And I think WikiEducation's work has done a very good job of specifically doing this from the contributor diversity gap perspective. We've also done this from the content perspective too. So just bringing diverse people isn't enough. We need to also ensure that content that is being contributed to the projects is diverse. And that is something that my colleagues will talk about next. Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to your questions after. Hi everyone, I'm Ian Ramchur and I'm going to talk about how WikiEducation's student program is diversifying content on the English Wikipedia. As Liana mentioned, WikiEducation brings tens of thousands of new editors to the English Wikipedia who have added tens of millions of words. These editors are also demographically distinct from the average contributor to the English Wikipedia. And there's an extra superpower in the mix. Because these are class projects, instructors can focus their students on a single topic area. This brings a lot of editing power to a single topic, creating focused value for Wikipedia and for free knowledge in general. And it's especially important, it's especially powerful in a knowledge equity area. Last fall, Dr. Delia Stevenson had students in her African-American literature class work on Wikipedia articles. One group focused on the biography of Ralph Fisher, a physician radiologist, playwright and novelist who was an important figure in the Harlem Renaissance. In subsequent decades, his work was largely forgotten and was out of print for a long time. So by expanding and revamping his biography, these students took a step to reverse this. Their work was noticed by a journalist who used our dashboard to contact Dr. Stevenson and wrote a profile on the work done by this class, a factor which further would have amplified these students' work. Until 1990, the economy of equatorial Guinea was dominated by our culture and login. Since then, it has changed to a petroleum-based economy with major structural and social implications. But until last fall, this wasn't well documented on Wikipedia. When student editors from an African politics course at UC Berkeley created an article about the petroleum industry in equatorial Guinea, they began the process of filling an important gap in Wikipedia's coverage. But I was even more struck by the impact of student editors who worked on urban transit in Africa. So much of the global South is written about through an exoticizing touristy lens. The way we write and the images we choose to illustrate that writing affects how people perceive the developing world. So this image of urban rail in Casablanca and another they added about urban rail in Addis Ababa have the power to push back against this ingrained picture of underdevelopment in the third world. Last fall, two classes at Canadian universities focused on the Indigenous peoples of Canada. Students in Gina Starblanket's course at the University of Calgary worked on a wide range of articles, including the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry by the government of British Columbia and created an article on the group, Indian Rights for Indian Women. This was an advocacy group that worked for 20 years to restore the rights of Indigenous women who had lost their status before marrying non-Indigenous men. At the same time, another class at the University of Alberta by Professor Nikki Lugosi-Schimpf focused on the treatment of Indigenous Canadians in the criminal justice system and the inequalities in their treatment and outcomes. So once again, these classes were able to draw quality content to important knowledge equity topics. And this is a list that goes on and on. Mary Prendergrast's Archaeology of Africa class expanded many important articles. The one that caught my attention most was an Algerian rock art site, Tassili Nager, which I probably butchered. This site is a UNESCO World Heritage site and dates to the Neolithic when this part of what's now the Sahara Desert was a tropical savannah. The site includes over 15,000 documented pieces of rock art. But until the students started work on the article, there was only a short paragraph about this. What there was in a typically idiosyncratic Wikipedia fashion was a section about the depiction of fungi in these drawings and the question of whether this was the earliest depiction of psychedelic use. Another class whose work I found personally fascinating was Sylvia Wu's Mosques of the Islamic World class. They worked on a number of mosques throughout the world and added very detailed, very interesting information about the history and construction and use. But this one in particular, the Great Mosque in Xi'an in China, which dates to 1384 and may have first been constructed in 1742, really caught my attention. This is not how I picture a mosque with domes and minarets but has a very Chinese architectural form. And expanding this, adding this kind of content, adding a discussion of this kind of content adds important dimensions to what we think of as fairly stereotypical topics. In addition, this class created an article about a new mosque in Tehran which lacks these traditional features and pushback by Iranian conservatives led to a passage of a bill in Iran banning the construction of new mosques without domes and minarets. So while it's great to talk about the impact we're having and show off what the students have done, it's even more important when somebody else looks at our impact. Kaishu and colleagues looked at the impact of our student program on the development of articles in the network perspective and found that student work expanding articles drew more traffic and more edits both to the articles that the students worked on and to the articles they linked to. So there was a significant impact downstream from the actual articles worked on. And they figured this out by comparing the Wikipedia articles that the students worked on with a matched set of articles that didn't receive student edits. This is especially important when you remember that instructors can assign students to work on a linked group of articles. So when you're working on a single topic that in itself amplifies editing in the area, it amplifies links and odds are that this has a multiplier effect. So when instructors are assigning their students to work on knowledge equity areas, this is an especially powerful outcome. You can watch Kaishu's presentation of their findings at the Wikimedia research showcase from July and I would recommend it. Final piece of this diversification is the students themselves. Student editors have access to the latest scholarship and they have a mentor in the person of their instructor. This means that they can include the up-to-date views of things. They can include scholarship that reflects a different view than the very colonialist scholarship of the last generation. In addition, because universities in the United States and Canada attract a lot of students from outside of the United States, they are able to, that means that our student body includes a lot of non-US, non-Canadian students who can, who may be writing about their own countries. Finally, university students have perspectives on social, racial and economic justice which are likely to differ as well from the broader mainstream of somewhat older and Wikipedia editors. So on that note, I'll pass things on to my colleague, Jamie. Hi everyone. Thanks again for joining us to learn about how Wiki Education approaches equity in our work. Wiki Education is wrapping up our final year of our current strategy in which we aim to improve equity, quality and reach on Wikipedia, Wikidata and other Wikimedia projects. I wanna share how our collaborations with external institutions are key to helping us achieve these goals. In short, Wiki Education develops and runs programs so we can facilitate as new editors at high quality information to Wikipedia and Wikidata to close content gaps. For years, we've worked together with academic institutions like academic associations, scientific network communities, museums, universities and libraries to bring their knowledge to Wikipedia, shaping content and the public's understanding of science, history and other topics. So how do we do this? Ian already talked about the Wikipedia student program and how thousands of students each year are helping us bring more diverse voices and content to Wikipedia. In 2018, we launched the scholars and scientists program especially to help us bring high quality knowledge to readers. We run virtual training courses to support newcomers to the projects as they make substantial edits to content related to their area of expertise. Typically, we run a course in partnership with an external organization who's interested in not only improving public scholarship of topics related to their work, but is looking for a professional development opportunity to provide their employees, members or others in their network, how to engage actively with Wikipedia or Wikidata. We found that these courses present an excellent opportunity for targeting content gaps in Wikipedia. We can target partners based on the work they're doing that we believe can improve Wikipedia's diversity and we can build most course topics around equity and missing or underrepresented information. So I wanna share a few examples of organizations we've collaborated with and the high quality content they've brought to the public through Wikipedia, making it more representative of the available literature and scholarship that's out there. First is our partnership with the Smithsonian and their affiliate museums and institutions. As part of the Smithsonian's American Women's History Initiative, Wiki Education is running a series of four Wiki Scholars courses. These courses have been away from museum staff to learn more about Wikipedia and use their extensive resources and archives to improve Wikipedia's coverage of notable American women. Often they're updating existing articles to expand or even correct information. Here are a few examples of the kind of work Wiki Scholars can do in our courses. One scholar who works at the doctor's Nicholas and Dorothy Cumming Center for the History of Psychology added the bio of Marie Skodak Chrissy, a developmental psychologist whose work helped expand educational access for children with intellectual disabilities. Prior to the course, Chrissy was missing on Wikipedia. Another participant helped bring reliable sources to the article about Sarah Emma Edmonds who claimed to have served as a man during the American Civil War. This claim was previously disputed on Wikipedia, a biography that has existed since 2003, but now has more resources and context thanks to the Wiki Scholar. One staff member at Grinnell College created a new article about Cornelia Clark, a notable photographer in the area who was missing until someone with access to archives about her could create it. And finally, a historian in Mississippi significantly expanded the biography about Minnie M. Cox, the first black postmaster in Mississippi, a position appointed by the president. The Wiki Scholar more than doubled the references and made Cox's page much more comprehensive. Though the first three Smithsonian Wiki Scholars courses wrapped up just in the last few months, the work they've done has already reached half a million readers. This is impressive at any time, but especially during a pandemic when so few people have access to in-person museums to learn about these important American women. Another partner we've been working with is 500 Women Scientist who sponsored several Wiki Scientist courses for their members to do a deep dive on Wikipedia before they helped coordinate editathons in their local communities. Their members are working to add women in science to Wikipedia and they've added dozens of new biographies of women scientists and expanded even more. Here we can see scientists across disciplines from ecologists to chemists to geologists to social scientists who are now discoverable on Wikipedia. And this cohort of participants who primarily identifies women themselves are continuing to improve Wikipedia's equity through the virtual editathons that they run in their local communities. The participants of the 500 Women Wiki Scientist courses have done a lot of great work to improve Wikipedia both during their courses and afterward. But in addition to making Wikipedia more equitable by increasing the number of women represented, they're helping ensure the existing literature and scholarship about these women's achievements are reflected on Wikipedia. Today they've added more than 1300 references to biographies of women scientists and that's just as a part of their courses. We're always looking for like-minded partners to add biographies of historically excluded populations to Wikipedia and improving Wikipedia's equity is at the heart of our conversations with prospective partners when we're pitching any course to them. For example, we've been working with the American Physical Society now for a few years. They've sponsored courses where their members work directly on physics articles which is of course a great fit for them but they continue running courses focused on biographies of underrepresented physicists. This initiative not only motivates their members but we've helped with APS see the value that they and their members can play in better representing physicists contributions to the public. This work is better documenting the history of physics and also inspiring children especially girls to pursue a career in physics or other sciences. The APS Wiki scientists have added a ton of knowledge to Wikipedia, 173,000 words and we're still collaborating to support more of their members through this process. So we're excited to see that continue to grow. And finally, I wanna share some other ways our partnerships help make Wikipedia more equitable. Though we do run a lot of courses focused on adding women in other marginalized groups. We also partner with organizations to add missing or misrepresented scientific information on Wikipedia especially in areas of need of an expert like women's health. We've worked closely with the Society of Family Planning, a nonprofit professional organization specializing in abortion and contraception science. Their members primarily medical professionals and researchers came to our courses with no prior experience editing Wikipedia. By the end, they'd improved articles like tubal ligation, self-induced abortion, reproductive rights, medical abortion, doula, compulsory sterilization and other important topics. And of course they're especially interested in ensuring the public has better access to reliable verifiable medical information related to family planning. And their work has already reached 60 million readers. So we're really excited about their continued impact on public knowledge and understanding of this topic. Okay, so now I'm gonna hand it over to Will who's gonna talk about similar work that we're doing on Wikidata. Hey everyone, Will Cantier from Wikiducation to continue talking about knowledge equity which others from Wikiducation have been talking about. I'm gonna be discussing it specifically through Wikidata and how Wikidata can help build knowledge equity both at local institutions and also improve it on Wikidata as a whole. So let me just share my screen. I've got a little presentation for you and some live demos. So I wanna emphasize that every single edit on Wikidata helps. Wikidata is an ongoing project that is incomplete and so far there are still a lot of gaps on Wikidata. And so in these courses that we run, we work with a lot of GLAM professionals who represent large collections and are eager to add them to Wikidata which is fantastic but it's always important to remember that the more we add, the more that it helps. And targeting what we add and contribute to Wikidata and how we improve what already exists there really has a huge impact on knowledge equity. So when we share collection data, we are talking about many collections, people, works, ideas that are not yet represented on Wikidata or if they are, they might not be modeled very with a lot of detail. There could still be gaps even if things exist on Wikidata. GLAM institutions are really excited to share their data but it's not always clear how to go about doing that. And so what these courses do is provide a little platform and create space for asking these questions. What are the best practices? What are ways that we can really have a large impact in approaching filling in gaps and engaging with knowledge equity? We also spend some time with Wikidata tools which can reveal new insights about collections, what's there, what's not, what that means and where to go next. And let's not forget too that Wikidata can help enrich collections locally and fill in the blanks. So it could well be the case that other Wikidata community members have contributed some vital collection data that doesn't list in a local, or doesn't yet exist in a local collection and they can download it from Wikidata because everything on Wikidata is shareable, downloadable, CC0 license, easy to incorporate into existing collections. And the more institutions share, the more equitable that the data on Wikidata becomes. But it's more than just the data. So it's one thing to contribute the data but it's another thing altogether to understand how that fits together and how the community interacts with it. So if you do more than just add data, it allows you to create things like properties on Wikidata, create project coordination pages, run queries and share them with other institutions that can help engage with knowledge equity, diversity issues, inclusion issues, in a more pointed way that will have a greater impact not only locally but also on Wikidata as a whole. And our course leaves plenty of space for pedagogical questions, questions of data ethics and how Wikidata can improve equity through a lot of different lenses. And having those conversations I think is just as important as adding the data to Wikidata. So there are a lot of tools that we use to help understand knowledge equity. One of these tools is Cradle and I can share this with you really quickly and it's a simple step to start adding things to Wikidata that will impact knowledge equity and I'll show you how that works. So Cradle is a form-based Wikidata editing tool and if we wanna add information about artists, we can load the Cradle form for artists and if we're able to add some demographic information like sex or gender, we can start to analyze the breakdown of a certain collection and gender representation within that collection. I realize the sex or gender property on Wikidata is a complicated one but this is one simple way that we can start to answer these questions. There are a couple other tools that we use regularly in this course including Tabernacle and Mix and Match. Mix and Match is an excellent reconciliation tool to kind of combine collections from local datasets into Wikidata and it's really easy to start to address knowledge equity through this where you just pick a collection from an underrepresented country on Wikidata. So in this case, we'd be adding or reconciling personal identifiers for Chilean filmmakers or people in the Chilean film industry and this is a great way to just start adding names to Wikidata so that people can build them out from there and we also teach course participants how to do batch uploads. So if you do represent a whole collection once you figure out how to phrase that in terms of quick statements or an open refine you can have thousands or tens of thousands of updates on Wikidata which is fantastic. Another way that we engage with knowledge equity is through queries and querying. So we teach GLAM professionals how to analyze specific areas of Wikidata using queries getting that exact right slice of data that you might need for a specific project. And this works really well if collections have identifier properties. So things that keep track of artists like authority files and also for works on Wikidata we spend a lot of time talking about that. Queries also reveal how institutions are approaching different kinds of data whether it's ambiguous or it's hard to define. And the way that it does this is by seeing how Wikidata as a community uses specific properties or uses specific data models. And I think this is a really important aspect of understanding our collections is running these queries and kind of understanding how it works. But just to give you a quick example let me run a query for you just so that you can see this in practice. So I've constructed a query that pulls all of the artwork that's currently on Wikidata from the Art Institute of Chicago's collection. And I've also asked it to pull the gender of the creators of those artworks and we can run the query quickly this way. And we can see this list of about 3,000 works of art and this isn't complete but this will just illustrate how easy it is to start to drill down into some demographic data. And then we can sort the genders of the artists just by modifying the query slightly. So I'm just gonna filter for all the artists who identify as female at least according to Wikidata. And we can see that the number drops from 3,000 to 183. So there's a lot to learn about the collection just running those two quick queries and you can apply that to a lot of different variables in a collection. So that's one really easy way that we've been helping institutions engage with some knowledge equity within their own collections. So that's how the querying side of these courses work. But additionally, we spend a lot of time discussing the Wikidata community and ensuring that we can connect our course participants with the Wikidata community. So they can have conversations about building our projects, navigating data models, building your data models, proposing your data models and how to best represent data on Wikidata since there's a lot of different ways to do that. Also, we highlight specific channels like the Wikidata Telegram channel, Wikidata link data conferences and the project chat on Wikidata. So that course participants know where to ask these specific questions that require a lot of thought and good community interaction. And so with all of this, these participants are able to bring the data that they share home and also add new data. And so they can start answering these complicated questions about how representative is our collection of any given variable? Is it geographically representative? Is it age representative? What's the gender balance in our collection like? And then they can start acting on those answers. And so they can also enrich local collection data with existing Wikidata data's data. So if other art institutions start to share their collection data, they can have a fuller picture since no one art museum or institution has a complete set of collection data. And then they can also tell their collection data story through the Wikidata query service visualizations. They're very simple and effective and easy to replicate and embed in websites. And then let's not forget that this is also reflected back through larger platforms like Wikipedia, search engine results and digital assistance. We know use Wikidata structure data to answer questions. So this all builds up to a large impact with knowledge equity. One Wikipedia article can go a long way in representation, but a whole collections worth of data can have an enormous impact on equity on Wikidata and back in local collections. Establishing these workflows early on to continue to add data to Wikidata will have a huge impact for all future collection growth. And the more that we continue to add to Wikidata, the easier it becomes to identify gaps, analyze quality and engage with more issues. And then I can't emphasize this enough, but having a diverse set of course participants and the perspectives that they bring to the course is probably the largest asset where we've got great minds thinking about challenging ways of representing all of this data on Wikidata and really kind of parsing out the best practices from there. So a lot of different ways that the Wikidata program engages with knowledge equity on Wikidata. I'll pass the baton to whoever's next in the group, but please stay in touch and learn more. You can reach me at will at wikieducateedu.org or learn.wikiedu.org. Thanks so much for listening. Now, before we wrap up and we get to the question and answer session, let me just share some thoughts with you about what the future holds for our organization. I will also talk about a couple of projects that we've already started and that we're pretty excited about. Number one is our work that we're doing on the programs and events dashboard. And the programs and events dashboard is currently a project that came out of our work on our own dashboard software that we're running for the student program. And we decided at some point that this software platform that allows program leaders to track their participants in their programs and to evaluate the work that they're doing to have that be available to a larger group within the Wikimedia universe. And now the number of program leaders and organizers that have been using this programs and events dashboard has increased tremendously over the last couple of years and we're super, super happy that people are using our software and that we can support them. Now that also means with an increasing number of users that our software architecture has reached a point where we run into scalability problems and into stability problems as well. So that means we've been working recently on improving the stability for the obvious reasons, right? If you're using that software, you're running a program, you wanna make sure that that software is there when you need it. So we've already moved our own dashboard that Wikia Education Foundation is using to a distributed server architecture and we're currently working on doing the same for the programs and events dashboard that people outside of our organization are using. And that is something where we've actually invested quite some money in order to make that happen. Sage, who's responsible for technology at Wikia Education Foundation has worked with an outside contractor and basically we're almost there. So that's the good news. Now at the same time, we think that our organization providing that infrastructure to a growing number of program leaders and organizers is an extremely important value that we bring to the Wikimedia movement. And that's why we're investing more money into this and we're investing more effort and time into this. What does that mean? That means that just recently we started a survey among people who are using our programs and events dashboard and we're asking them, okay, what can we do for you in order to make your work easier? What are the features that are missing? How are you using our programs and events dashboard anyway? And what are maybe the one or two things that if we implemented those things into the dashboard that would make a real difference for how you run your programs in whatever country you're in. And so this specific survey is gonna help us with developing a roadmap going forward. And that's something that we're pretty excited about and this is gonna be something that is gonna take on a more room and a bigger role in our organization. So we're moving resources and capacity into that area of the programs and events dashboard. And then in general, we are eager to expand our services to instructors and scale our student program more than what we've done in the past. Now, we've been through a pretty difficult year, pandemic year, due to COVID-19, we had to make some cuts. We had to lay off some people on staff and the last year was a really difficult year for us and I'm pretty sure for you as well. Now, in order to rebuild things and then to scale things up, we have just made some investments in the revenue area which means I have hired a fundraiser and we have hired someone additional for our sales team and the point is really to improve our revenue situation because the only thing that keeps us from growing our programs currently is really like we need better financial support. And that is kind of, I always feel like that's a very good position to be in because like there can be many things that you don't know how to scale things or you're at an early phase with your programs and things are not going as smoothly as you want them to. That's not where we are. Wikia Education Foundation is in a position where we've been doing programmatic work for many, many years and the one thing that is holding us back currently is having more financial resources in place in order to scale our programs. And that is the thing that we're currently focused on and in the end, I truly believe that every student should have the opportunity to have better learning outcomes and to contribute to Wikipedia or even to Wikidata. The same is true for subject matter experts. No matter who they are and what kind of their background is, I feel like they should have an opportunity to share their knowledge with the world and to improve the information that the many million readers of Wikipedia have at their hands and that's what we care deeply about are the readers of Wikipedia and we're very passionate at Wikia Education about free knowledge and that's our path forward for equity, quality and reach. And with that being said, we're now entering the question and answer session. Thank you.