Continuing Education to keep reviewers up to date with Criteria

GearGlider-INGGearGlider-ING Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭✭✭

Had this idea mulling around in my head for a bit: What if Wayfarer implemented a ConEd quiz with rewards so Reviewers stay up to date with Criteria, or don't become unfamiliar with them?

It could be offered weekly/monthly, and could be similar to the initial Wayfarer quiz to become a reviewer. It could have trickier questions too. And if the Reviewer gets most/all of them right, they earn some kind of reward (some percentage points towards an upgrade, cosmetic change options to website, etc). And wrong answers could be pointed out so the reviewer learns from them.

Anyone else have any good ideas of a possible ConEd implementation?

Comments

  • AgentB0ss-INGAgentB0ss-ING Posts: 555 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Fantastic Idea. Something I've always thought was needed since I first began reviewing back in the OPR days. I always thought it should be mandatory but the voluntary quiz/test with rewards would be way better received by a player base. I think on a monthly basis would be best. As far as rewards doing it monthly a say for "passing" award a full upgrade to the account or maybe 5 nominations added to your pool and you get to pick. I think 5 extra nominations or an extra upgrade overall isn't too much while still incentivizing players to keep up to date.

    I feel like quizzes shouldn't be longer than 5-10 minutes otherwise players might not want to complete them. Keeping them short but impactful would garner the best results to the player base as a whole. It could also be a way to push new criteria or changes.

    The quiz could have a slightly reading requirement beforehand and then quiz players on what was read to promote news/changes to Wayfarer at the same time.

  • GearGlider-INGGearGlider-ING Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yeah, I agree that making it optional with rewards would be better received than it being mandatory. Especially since [Mandatory -> Learning] or [Mandatory -> Punishment if wrong] would make more people quit rather than [Optional -> Learning & Rewards].

    I didn't want to make the rewards too huge (like full upgrade) cause then you would just have people logging in to do ConEd without reviewing much. But better rewards could possibly be offered if ConEd were tied to something like getting a certain number of agreements, but I would prefer people do a ConEd quiz as often as possible.

  • DerWelfe2205-PGODerWelfe2205-PGO Posts: 374 ✭✭✭✭

    Good idea. Judging by the current rate of updates we can probably expect this to be on the road map for 2026.

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,534 Ambassador

    Another really good community driven suggestion I would love seeing!

    At my work, we have monthly "refresher" training that is usually nothing more than clicking through a few pages or signing a document that says I was shown a new/updated Work Instruction. There isn't much value at it, but it at least leaves a trail that I/we have seen a change. With some of the more recent clarifications on abuse and the criteria "refresh," even just forcing us to acknowledge it would be good and might even get a few people to read the whole thing.

    As for quizzes, I agree that they should be optional, as well. Some of my refresher training at work does require quizzes, but I think it could turn some people away from reviewing and I think most of us agree that Niantic resources available aren't the greatest to really warrant punishing people who aren't aware of all clarifications.

    Personally I'm not a fan of more agreements/upgrades, but I may be a slight minority in that. From seeing how rewards have been implemented in the past, I don't think Niantic is capable of rewarding more nominations or allowing them to bank at this time, but that's the type of reward I would rather see.

    I wonder if there could be different types of "continued education" available and you could focus education on different types of categories? Like, I can take a training this week that specifically focuses on identifying abuse. For the next month, I have a special option to forward abuse reports with prioritization to Niantic. Or I can do training on "recognizing local hotspots," so for the next month if I flag a business as a hotspot it gets a rating boost.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 3,470 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My recommendation is this:

    Submitters get asked the "What is it?" category question first, and then they get category-specific guidance about criteria during the submission process.

    During the review process the first step is to confirm or update the "What is it?" category, and then reviewers get shown cateogry-specifc guidance during the review process. The advantage of doing it this way is that Niantic never has to rely on reviewers remembering what the current guidelines are-- they're always available.

    I would also like it if Wayfarer had a mandatory "Hey, things have changed and here are the updates" screen the first time someone reviewed after a criteria update, and submitters got a "Hey, things have changed and here are the updates" screen the first time they submitted something after a change.

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,534 Ambassador

    I'm not sure what your first point has to do with this discussion - the point of which is continued education for reviewers.

    Your second point may be problematic for things that meet multiple criteria or we consider meeting different criteria than Niantic (for example a restaurant could be a place to be social and a place to explore the local community) and similarly problematic if we consider the criteria differently (for example, I would consider a sports arena a place to be social, whereas Niantic defines it as a place for exercise). Obviously this doesn't really matter if Niantic can implement it well, but we also know how problematic "what is it" category already is and has been since added.

    Your third point is something I've asked for since Wayfarer launched and was met with tentative agreement from @NianticCasey-ING, but nothing has really changed, yet, other than the soft pop-up but we aren't required to read it.


    Do you have an opinion on the discussion topic - quizzes or similar?

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 3,470 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2021

    @Gendgi-PGO I was defining the way the system as a whole would work, with continuity between submitter and reviewer.

    If someone picks Sign / Trail Marker during the submission process, for example, they'd get a quick blurb about the rules for trail markers. I provided this part of my proposal here largely as setup for what I would want to happen for reviewers.

    During the review process, Sign / Trail Marker would be the category that shows up with the submission since that's what the submitter assigned it, and the reviewer would see guidance for trail markers. If they decided that it was actually a Sign / Welcome Sign and changed the "What is it?" category then they would get guidance for the new one.

    The advantage of doing it this way is that, assuming the "What is it?" category was correct, reviewers would always have 100% up-to-date guidance on the screen in front of them. They wouldn't have to search their memory or make things up or remember that the guidance of that category changed a month ago, or look things up. Building it in on the submission side would probably reduce the number of abysmal submissions since reviewers would have guidance in front of them and at least some submitters would go, "Oh, oops, I forgot that elementary schools are ineligible." That would reduce pressure on the review pipeline.

    As for quizzes, yes. My opinion is that quizzes would be better than where we are now, but would be less effective than putting the information in front of every reviewer on every submission they review. Quizzing people would still mean that we're relying on people's memory and specifically on their ability to remember changes. Humans are really bad at updating specific details in established memory, so they might get through the quiz and then forget that something changed since the old memory is stronger than the new detail. (I had this exact conversation with my management team last week. "Why can't people keep track of...?" "Well, grandboss, it's because it changes constantly and we generally get one quick notification of the change. Humans are not good at keeping all of those details in their heads, and if they overlook or forget one detail in an update then they're just not going to have the right information in their heads. This is why several of us have asked for a reference document.")


    Or, more simply, I think the most effective continuing education is sticking the most recent information in front of them at all times. Take memory out of the equation completely.

  • silverkali-INGsilverkali-ING Posts: 92 ✭✭✭

    It needs to be part of a two stage process though, submitters need education/training (which is sorely lacking at the moment) and all reviewers should go through retraining on a regular basis.

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,313 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If we are going to have regular "refresher" type trianing and tests (no a problem for me) then Niantic would need to start being a little more specific over what is acceptable in some of the more contentious criteria categories, and start providing some more details guideance for things like Trail Markers and "Generic Business" and the like. I'm in favour of stricter and better defined criteria myself.

Sign In or Register to comment.