Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Lisanne van den Bosch
3 min read 1

52

CommunityBuilding effective altruismConferencesCommunity Builder Writing ContestEffective Altruism GlobalEAGx
Frontpage

Positive Impact Society Erasmus (PISE) recently organized a preparation evening for EAGx Oxford. To my knowledge, not many groups organize these types of evenings. In this short post I will outline why I think organizing such an evening for every EAG(x) should be prioritized and what our preparation evening looked like.

 

Why organizing a preparation evening should be prioritized

  • It allows newcomers to understand how to prepare and get the most out of a conference – it would be a shame if newcomers don’t realize how valuable one-on-ones are and spend their whole weekend in talks without speaking to anyone new (speaking from experience).
  • It gives people the accountability to actually sit down and prepare the conference.
  • It is a great opportunity to exchange goals and approaches and get feedback on them.

 

PISE’s EAG(x) Oxford preparation evening

Our preparation evening took place the Wednesday before EAGx Oxford. We started the evening with dinner followed by a presentation and a collaborative preparation of the evening. The presentation had the following components:

  • Pictures and the experiences of an organizer who attended an EAG(x) before.
  • Answers to: What is an EAG(x)? What does it look like? What can you expect?
  • Tips for the EAG(x), for example:
    • Bring a notebook
    • Don’t be afraid of cool people
    • Don’t be afraid to ask if you can record a one-on-one for later reference
    • Prepare well
    • Skip recorded talks
    • Plan a lot of one-on-ones
    • Recognise the amount of rest/breaks you need to get the most out of the conference
    • Schedule time after the conference to follow-up, reflect, and get started on to do’s.
    • Keep a page at the end of your notebook in which you can write down concrete to do’s.

After the presentation, we individually worked on the steps to prepare an EAG(x). Once everyone had had some time to reflect on a step, there was the opportunity to share with the group and get feedback. The steps were as follows:

  1. Claim your ticket– we asked people to do this before coming to the evening.
  2. Arrange you travels and upload your vaccination certificate – we asked people to do this before coming to the evening.
  3. Make a great Swapcard profile – we asked people to do this before coming to the evening.
  4. Set goals and think of questions you would need answered to achieve the goal – questions we provided for people to define their goals were: What do you want to get out of the conference? What did you fill in as the ideal outcome of the conference?
  5. Sign up for the workshops (and talks) you want to go to based on your goals.
  6. Start exploring Swapcard profiles: who are the people that can answer the questions you need answered to reach your goals? Reach out to those people for a meeting. Reach out to at least 7 people.
  7. Block a timeslot for after the conference to follow-up, reflect, and get started on your to do’s.

 

What we think could be improved from our evening

  • Host the evening earlier in the week – the evening is great for getting started reaching out for one on ones, but might not be sufficient in time to prepare everything. Hosting the session on the Monday or Tuesday before an EAG(x) allows participants more time to continue with their preparation.

 

We think preparing such an evening can significantly improve the EAG(x) experience of your members and can be very impactful. Please let me know if you have any questions, I’d love to help. See you at the next conference!

52

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Mentioned in

More posts like this

Comments1


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
EdMathieu11
0
0

We also did this for EA France a few days before EAGx Oxford (on Tuesday), and it was indeed very helpful. We answered many questions that people had about 1o1, explained how to use Swapcard (some people hadn't quite realized how important it would be during the conference), the 'etiquette' for contacting people on the app, important physical & mental health tips, etc.

I'd also suggest creating a WhatsApp or Messenger group. It's very useful for practical coordination before (hotels, admin stuff, COVID restrictions, etc.) and during the event, and gives first-timers the feeling of going to the conference as part of a larger group.

Reply
More from Lisanne van den Bosch
48
Why a 4-week fellowship is better than an 8-week fellowship
Lisanne van den Bosch
· · 10m read
4
4
View more
Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
LewisBollard
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
> How the dismal science can help us end the dismal treatment of farm animals By Martin Gould ---------------------------------------- Note: This post was crossposted from the Open Philanthropy Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. ---------------------------------------- This year we’ll be sharing a few notes from my colleagues on their areas of expertise. The first is from Martin. I’ll be back next month. - Lewis In 2024, Denmark announced plans to introduce the world’s first carbon tax on cow, sheep, and pig farming. Climate advocates celebrated, but animal advocates should be much more cautious. When Denmark’s Aarhus municipality tested a similar tax in 2022, beef purchases dropped by 40% while demand for chicken and pork increased. Beef is the most emissions-intensive meat, so carbon taxes hit it hardest — and Denmark’s policies don’t even cover chicken or fish. When the price of beef rises, consumers mostly shift to other meats like chicken. And replacing beef with chicken means more animals suffer in worse conditions — about 190 chickens are needed to match the meat from one cow, and chickens are raised in much worse conditions. It may be possible to design carbon taxes which avoid this outcome; a recent paper argues that a broad carbon tax would reduce all meat production (although it omits impacts on egg or dairy production). But with cows ten times more emissions-intensive than chicken per kilogram of meat, other governments may follow Denmark’s lead — focusing taxes on the highest emitters while ignoring the welfare implications. Beef is easily the most emissions-intensive meat, but also requires the fewest animals for a given amount. The graph shows climate emissions per tonne of meat on the right-hand side, and the number of animals needed to produce a kilogram of meat on the left. The fish “lives lost” number varies significantly by
Neel Nanda
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
TL;DR Having a good research track record is some evidence of good big-picture takes, but it's weak evidence. Strategic thinking is hard, and requires different skills. But people often conflate these skills, leading to excessive deference to researchers in the field, without evidence that that person is good at strategic thinking specifically. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, but it's hard, and you shouldn't assume I succeed! Introduction I often find myself giving talks or Q&As about mechanistic interpretability research. But inevitably, I'll get questions about the big picture: "What's the theory of change for interpretability?", "Is this really going to help with alignment?", "Does any of this matter if we can’t ensure all labs take alignment seriously?". And I think people take my answers to these way too seriously. These are great questions, and I'm happy to try answering them. But I've noticed a bit of a pathology: people seem to assume that because I'm (hopefully!) good at the research, I'm automatically well-qualified to answer these broader strategic questions. I think this is a mistake, a form of undue deference that is both incorrect and unhelpful. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, and I think this makes me better at my job, but this is far from sufficient. Being good at research and being good at high level strategic thinking are just fairly different skillsets! But isn’t someone being good at research strong evidence they’re also good at strategic thinking? I personally think it’s moderate evidence, but far from sufficient. One key factor is that a very hard part of strategic thinking is the lack of feedback. Your reasoning about confusing long-term factors need to extrapolate from past trends and make analogies from things you do understand better, and it can be quite hard to tell if what you're saying is complete bullshit or not. In an empirical science like mechanistic interpretability, however, you can get a lot more fe
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
41
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
0
0
10
EAGxNordics in Norway: apply now
Amalie Farestvedt 🔸
· · 3m read
1
1
32
Introducing Effective Accountability: Project and Job Search Accountability Groups
2 authors
· · 2m read
1
1
View more