jsms90
commented
7 years ago 22nd January - The formation of this agency, as a discussion for a FAC business meeting
I wrote this on January 22nd, but decided that putting this in a FAC business issue wasn't the best approach. This wasn't finished, or a final draft of any kind. Exactly what we are creating has evolved since then. So I only include this here to make the history clear.
This is not a proposal, but an idea for discussion. I would need a lot of advice, but first I want to understand whether there is a desire for this within our community, and particularly whether there is a desire for this model.
Why?
FAC's vision is not only to build a community for 16 weeks, but to "establish" this community i.e. build something that lasts for a long time. FAC was essentially born out of a desire to disrupt the education system, because of the deep-set inadequacies that were perceived in that system. Education should not be a job factory. It should not be based on getting the right answers and the right grades. It should be based on learning. It should be based on community. FAC needs, not only a school, but an entire eco-system that enables its vision.
- The school needs in-house alumni In order to stay in line with FAC's mission statement of "building democratically organised learning communities", we need to provide a viable option for FAC graduates to remain in the space. Although many employed graduates remain active members of the organisation, the school relies heavily on the technical expertise and experience provided by its in-house alumni. The 20-20-20 rule could not exist unless the previous cohort were full-time, or we have alumni. Project presentations are better off with input and code reviews from the alumni. Talks, whiteboard sessions, Q&A, project demonstrations don't have to be the domain of recent graduates alone.
- FAC has a responsibility to its students, to help them into the opportunity that is best for them. As an authority figure, FAC's advice will be listened to and asked for, by students who want to know what they should do next. Wherever possible, we should be enabling students to make their own, informed choice. If freelancing does not appear to be a viable option for them financially, they will seek employment. If they all seek employment, where is our community? If some remain as freelancers, why should we be doing more for those who gain employment, than we are doing for those who stay with us? If we continue indefinitely on our current trajectory, FAC will be working against itself financially unless it is encouraging its students into employment with one of hiring partners. We may only need half of each cohort to choose this route in order to cover our costs #143, but we would be foolish not to broadcast this option to all students throughout the course. Pooling our resources into making employment a viable option can and will make students more likely to choose this option. Our funding model will inevitably have an effect on the message that we send, and on the routes that students will see as available to them.
- We can't expect money unless we are providing opportunities We should not reasonably expect to get a recruitment fee, if we are not actively supplying students with the benefits that a recruitment agency offers. That is why Dan's focus has been on building relationships with employers. Students will choose to find employment through us if they believe that they are getting something through us that they could not get without us - connections & experience in order to filter out the "good" from the "bad" employers. In just the same way, we cannot reasonably expect graduates who become independent freelancers to then pay us a portion of their fees, unless we play a role in finding them this work through our connections and experience. If we are not providing opportunities, we cannot expect remuneration. Many of us may be so grateful for the experience, that we feel compelled to donate money back into the organisation. But it is my personal belief that expecting gratitude is toxic. Students are not getting this education from us for free. They pay with the time and the work that they put in - 4 months of their lives full-time, and more than that for the chance to attend (pre-reqs). I consider it a serious mistake to imply that after that, they should be grateful for everything that they get.
What?
Just as the school is democratically-led, so too should the agency be democratically-led, hence the co-operative model. The way that the agency is run should be entirely in line with FAC's mission statement, in order to create this ecosystem of "learning communities".
But they should be two separate entities, that have two relatively distinct reasons for existing.
bradreeder
Timeline
14th February - Bradley & Jen brainstorming
Right after meeting with Outlandish
Mission:
Principles:
e.g. if we have 5 members, rather than taking 1 project that requires 4 people, we find 2 projects that require 2 or 3 people
Questions:
Work out what each member needs & charge accordingly vs. charge market rate?
All profits go into a communal pot, then... Divide all income between all members? Divide project income between those who worked on that project? Divide equally vs. dependent on which job you do? Divide by no. of hours worked?