initial commit

docs/culture/psychological-safety.md

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+# Psychological Safety
+
+One of the primary reasons we host hackweeks is to help build a culture of collaboration. We do this because research is becoming increasingly interdependent, and because we know that cross-disciplinary exchanges increase the likelihood for us to address complex challenges. We also think that collaboration is fun and keeps our work more interesting and engaging!
+
+In order for collaboration to occur we must be able to share information, ask questions and express our opinions openly {cite:p}`edmondson_psychological_2023`. When we ask these questions of people outside of our disciplinary boundary, we might be stepping into situations were we feel incompetent or intrusive. This is where creating a psychologically safe environment can help.
+
+:::{admonition} Psychological Safety: Defined
+:class: note
+Psychological safety is a perception related to the consequences of taking *interpersonal risks* {cite:p}`edmondson_psychological_1999`. When people feel psychologically safe they can "express themselves physically, cognitively and emotionally" rather than disengage or "withdraw and defend their personal selves" {cite:p}`kahn_psychological_1990`.
+:::
+
+In this lessone we will work on developing more insight into risk and all the ways it might show up in a short format training setting. We'll do some exercises to assess our individual sense of risk, and build our capacity to assess how others might be experiencing risk in a classroom, small group and 1x1 learning setting. Then we will share strategies for increasing psychological safety by highlighting the positive outcomes that can occur when we willingly take risks.
+
+:::{admonition} Note 
+:class: warning
+Throughout this lesson we will be speaking about creating conditions for risk-taking in the context of interpersonal exchanges in a learning setting. It is important to separate this from other forms of risk that might impact people's physical or emotional wellbeing. We will never advocate for risks that bring about harm to others. For more information please visit our [Code of Conduct](https://escience.washington.edu/about/code-of-conduct/).
+:::
+
+## Hackweeks: a high risk environment?
+
+Let's begin by thinking about the factors that influence our perception of risk at one of our events. Over the years we as organizers have often noticed participants feeling anxious and wondering if they belong at a hackweek. In some ways this is understandable! Here are some reasons why:
+
+* Hackweeks are a relatively new modality of learning and participants are often not sure what they are signing up for. 
+* Hackweeks actively promote networking with people you haven't met before, which might cause a sense of anxiety for some.
+* The short duration of hackweeks may cause many participants to feel a sense of urgency to get a lot done in the time provided. People might also feel they need to make the most of the money they invested in attending the event in person.
+* Hackweeks require participants to make quick decisions about tutorials they attend and projects they join, often with limited time for deliberation.
+
+To bring home this point, it is instructive to compare hackweeks with other forms of learning. When we sign up for a course in a formal higher education setting, we can look at a detailed curriculum, talk with past students, and find online reviews of professors. If the class isn't what we expected, we can drop out after a few classes. Or, if we decide to learn through online resources, we can work at our own pace, and pick and choose content to our liking. All of these factors allow learners to minimize and mitigate risk in ways that might not be possible within a hackweek setting.
+
+## Lowering the stakes
+
+There are several ways we as organizers can work to reduce or eliminate some risks for participants. Some examples include:
+
+* providing more information in advance of an event about course content and project ideas. 
+* designing icebreakers and networking activities in ways that attend to a diversity of personality types and ways of seeing the world.
+* raising more funding to provide scholarship support and mitigate financial risks.
+
+There are also some risks that we cannot control, and might not want to eliminate. As a participant-driven learning model, some uncertainty and risk is going to be built-in to the hackweek experience. We believe the key to creating psychologically safe learning environments is to build our awareness of the *stakes* or *consequences* associated with each risk. If our assessment is that the stakes are low, then we can voluntarily step into risk without fear. 
+
+```{admonition} Note 
+:class: warning
+Lowering stakes to create a sense of psychological safety is not the same "lowering standards". We are aware that there are many high risk environements where the stakes are also very high. An example would be a surgeon performing a risky procedure on a patient. That would not be a time when we want to foster a "safe-to-fail" enviornment!
+```
+
+## Risk Depends on many factors
+
+So far we have explored the risks inherent in the structure and design of a hackweek. Now we turn to they was in which individual perception and experience of risk can vary with a number of intersecting characteristics. 
+
+### Career Stage 
+
+Academia has traditionally been organized around a set of hierarchical positions defining various phases of career stage and professional expertise. Sadly, some people abuse their positional authority to oppress people at earlier stages, creating damaging power structures. Our position within this hierarchy, together with our accumulated positive or negative personal histories, shapes how we perceive risk when we step into any kind of academic environment. 
+
+Here are some things we think might be going on in people's minds at a hackweek:
+
+* "I have a question, but I'm only a lowly graduate student and don't want those professors knowing how little skill I actually have! I am going to find another graduate student to talk with first."
+* "I came here to learn from the experts, so I am going to find a more senior person to talk to: they must have the most knowledge of anyone in this room!"
+* "I have been doing this work for 25 years, and I am a leader in my field, but I am completely lost! I don't want anyone else to find me out so I will keep quiet for now."
+* "This team I am in is all over the map! If this were my lab, I would be telling more people what to do."
+
+:::{admonition} Questions for Reflection
+:class: note
+* How does my position in the academic hierarchy make me feel about myself?
+* What career stage are others at who are around me? How does this compare with my position?
+* Given our relative positions, what kind of dynamic do I think this sets up in the room?
+:::
+
+### Individual Identity
+
+Our intersecting identities of gender, sexual orientation, race, cultural background, ability, age and many other factors shape our perception of risk. If we occupy one or more identity groups that are or have been marginalized, we may be less inclined to step into risk, depending on the environment we are in. For example, people who have experienced marginalization in the past typically engage less in group discussions, and are less likely to ask {cite:p}`questions heilman_no_2005`. In contrast, those who are part of more historically dominant identity group might be less concerned about taking risks because they have experienced fewer negative consequences for their behavior in the past. 
+
+:::{admonition} Questions for Reflection
+:class: note
+* What dimnesion(s) of my identity feel particularly important for me to express or have awareness of in this space?
+* Do I know anything about the unique identities of others around me? What can I be doing to learn more?
+* How does my identiy compare / contrast with others around me? 
+* What are the opportunities and potential challenges of the assembly of identities in the room? What dynamics might need specific attention from me?
+:::
+
+
+### Personality Types
+
+### Group Norms
+
+
+
+## Hackweek Examples
+
+### Tutorials
+
+### Projects
+
+### Leadership 
+
+
+```{note} Exercise
+Paired sharing about an experience you had when you felt you could show up and share ideas. 
+```
+
+
+https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/second-thoughts-psychological-safety-peter-cappelli/    

docs/participant-selection.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+# Participant Selection
+
+We strive to welcome a diverse cohort of hackweek participants to our events. For our in-person events, we set limits on the total number of participants that depends on the venue size as well as the number of people helping us support the event. We feel it is important to have a low helper to participant ratio so that people can get the individualized attention they need to have questions answered.
+
+Our selection process is continually evolving, and different hackweeks employ different methods. Below we describe the approach adopted for the NASA Earth Sciences 2024 Hackweek.
+
+## NASA Earth Science Hackweek 2024
+
+For this event we follow the approach described by Huppenkothen {cite}`Huppenkothen2020`. The people reviewing applicants include the eScience Hackweek Program Director (Arendt), the eScience Program Manager for Community Engagement (Welden-Smith) and the Community leads of the 3 hackweeks (Joachim Meyer, Jessica Scheick and Nicoleta Cristea).
+
+Selction steps:
+
+* the eScience Program Manager does an initial blind review of every application to remove duplicates or any applications that fit poorly with our broad program objectives (for example, someone only interested in acquiring software skills).
+* the hiring committee works with this list to pre-select up to 5 people per hackweek (15 total) who are within our networks. This provides an opportunity for us to empower specific people 
+
+