Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Nikola
2 min read 1

30

Building effective altruismCommunityEffective altruism groupsWorkshops / Retreats / Summits
Frontpage

Prefrosh - people admitted to a college who have not yet started studying

Tldr - prefrosh outreach (fellowships, retreats, especially tabling) seems like a very low hanging fruit, but has some reputational risks

The earlier, the better

Students at top universities have great potential to improve the world due to three main factors:

  • Open mindedness
  • Lack of career lock-in
  • High performance

The second point is much more true for freshmen than it is for seniors, which makes me think that freshman outreach is more effective than senior outreach. Social, professional, and club commitments pile up as the academic year passes, which means outreach efficiency is at its peak probably very early on in the academic year.

But what if we extrapolated to the left of the y-axis? What if we organized outreach before the semester starts, before college starts?

Ideas for prefrosh outreach

Many colleges have visiting periods where prefrosh visit for a weekend and attend events. Some have pre-orientation programs where prefrosh come to campus a few days earlier than the other students to participate in activities that introduce them to the college. These seem like great opportunities to table and have introductory talks, as prefrosh are on the lookout for activities they can participate in and clubs they can join. It seems like a no-brainer to at least table during visiting period and pre-orientation period.

A more extreme approach would be one where prefrosh should have the opportunity to get involved in your EA group before they even arrive at college. Having collected the emails of interested prefrosh during tabling at visiting period, you can invite them to an accelerated intro fellowship over the summer. You could probably invite the most promising prefrosh who do the fellowship to a retreat before the academic year starts/right as it starts. The retreat would ideally have a bunch (>60%) of non-prefrosh there so that the concentration of highly engaged individuals is high.

Risks

The biggest risk I see here is reputational, as I don’t know of any student groups that do extensive outreach on prefrosh. It might be an unwritten rule between student groups (one could imagine a race to the bottom scenario where the groups compete over who can get prefrosh the earliest, but for some reason this doesn’t seem to be happening - somehow student groups have settled on mostly starting outreach at the start-of-year club fair). Probably because outreach is not as much of a priority for most student groups, or because of incentive failures (members might care about being seen as helpful to the group, and pre-semester outreach might be less visible). It might also seem weird to parents that their children are being invited to club retreats before they’re even in college.

Call to action

In fact, if you want to make sure your university group tables before or during the beginning of the next semester, tell me if you want me to hold you accountable. I’d be glad to check up on you and help you work through issues you might have.

30

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments1


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Marcel D5
0
0

My very initial reactions to this (having briefly done some campus organizing in my last years in college): 

  1. I don't think the reputational risks are a serious problem; there certainly weren't any "unwritten rules" as far as I know at my university (at least not for general student organizations; for Greek organizations—frats and sororities—there is literally a formal and enforced code of rules for certain things, but I know little about the specifics there)
  2. I agree that this is probably worth exploring further if groups are not already doing it, however:
  3. The main issue I see with this is practicality: most of this orientation targeting would probably have to take place over the summer, and in some cases students do not stay on campus during the summer. Additionally, my memory of orientation is a bit foggy, but there may not be many formal opportunities for groups to advertise to the prefreshies. Additionally, continued/immediate engagement could be a challenge. If there were some summer intro program or fellowship that could be nice, except it may be too late in the summer. (Weekend retreats, on the other hand, might be more doable? IDK)
Reply
More from Nikola
121
Orienting to 3 year AGI timelines
Nikola
·
15
15
64
Getting Actual Value from “Info Value”: Example from a Failed Experiment
4 authors
· · 4m read
0
0
42
Microdooms averted by working on AI Safety
Nikola
· · 4m read
6
6
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
[Cross-posted from my Substack here] If you spend time with people trying to change the world, you’ll come to an interesting conundrum: Various advocacy groups reference previous successful social movements as to why their chosen strategy is the most important one. Yet, these groups often follow wildly different strategies from each other to achieve social change. So, which one of them is right? The answer is all of them and none of them. This is because many people use research and historical movements to justify their pre-existing beliefs about how social change happens. Simply, you can find a case study to fit most plausible theories of how social change happens. For example, the groups might say: * Repeated nonviolent disruption is the key to social change, citing the Freedom Riders from the civil rights Movement or Act Up! from the gay rights movement. * Technological progress is what drives improvements in the human condition if you consider the development of the contraceptive pill funded by Katharine McCormick. * Organising and base-building is how change happens, as inspired by Ella Baker, the NAACP or Cesar Chavez from the United Workers Movement. * Insider advocacy is the real secret of social movements – look no further than how influential the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights was in passing the Civil Rights Acts of 1960 & 1964. * Democratic participation is the backbone of social change – just look at how Ireland lifted a ban on abortion via a Citizen’s Assembly. * And so on… To paint this picture, we can see this in action below: Source: Just Stop Oil which focuses on…civil resistance and disruption Source: The Civic Power Fund which focuses on… local organising What do we take away from all this? In my mind, a few key things: 1. Many different approaches have worked in changing the world so we should be humble and not assume we are doing The Most Important Thing 2. The case studies we focus on are likely confirmation bias, where
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
I speak to many entrepreneurial people trying to do a large amount of good by starting a nonprofit organisation. I think this is often an error for four main reasons. 1. Scalability 2. Capital counterfactuals 3. Standards 4. Learning potential 5. Earning to give potential These arguments are most applicable to starting high-growth organisations, such as startups.[1] Scalability There is a lot of capital available for startups, and established mechanisms exist to continue raising funds if the ROI appears high. It seems extremely difficult to operate a nonprofit with a budget of more than $30M per year (e.g., with approximately 150 people), but this is not particularly unusual for for-profit organisations. Capital Counterfactuals I generally believe that value-aligned funders are spending their money reasonably well, while for-profit investors are spending theirs extremely poorly (on altruistic grounds). If you can redirect that funding towards high-altruism value work, you could potentially create a much larger delta between your use of funding and the counterfactual of someone else receiving those funds. You also won’t be reliant on constantly convincing donors to give you money, once you’re generating revenue. Standards Nonprofits have significantly weaker feedback mechanisms compared to for-profits. They are often difficult to evaluate and lack a natural kill function. Few people are going to complain that you provided bad service when it didn’t cost them anything. Most nonprofits are not very ambitious, despite having large moral ambitions. It’s challenging to find talented people willing to accept a substantial pay cut to work with you. For-profits are considerably more likely to create something that people actually want. Learning Potential Most people should be trying to put themselves in a better position to do useful work later on. People often report learning a great deal from working at high-growth companies, building interesting connection
 ·  · 31m read
 · 
James Özden and Sam Glover at Social Change Lab wrote a literature review on protest outcomes[1] as part of a broader investigation[2] on protest effectiveness. The report covers multiple lines of evidence and addresses many relevant questions, but does not say much about the methodological quality of the research. So that's what I'm going to do today. I reviewed the evidence on protest outcomes, focusing only on the highest-quality research, to answer two questions: 1. Do protests work? 2. Are Social Change Lab's conclusions consistent with the highest-quality evidence? Here's what I found: Do protests work? Highly likely (credence: 90%) in certain contexts, although it's unclear how well the results generalize. [More] Are Social Change Lab's conclusions consistent with the highest-quality evidence? Yes—the report's core claims are well-supported, although it overstates the strength of some of the evidence. [More] Cross-posted from my website. Introduction This article serves two purposes: First, it analyzes the evidence on protest outcomes. Second, it critically reviews the Social Change Lab literature review. Social Change Lab is not the only group that has reviewed protest effectiveness. I was able to find four literature reviews: 1. Animal Charity Evaluators (2018), Protest Intervention Report. 2. Orazani et al. (2021), Social movement strategy (nonviolent vs. violent) and the garnering of third-party support: A meta-analysis. 3. Social Change Lab – Ozden & Glover (2022), Literature Review: Protest Outcomes. 4. Shuman et al. (2024), When Are Social Protests Effective? The Animal Charity Evaluators review did not include many studies, and did not cite any natural experiments (only one had been published as of 2018). Orazani et al. (2021)[3] is a nice meta-analysis—it finds that when you show people news articles about nonviolent protests, they are more likely to express support for the protesters' cause. But what people say in a lab setting mig
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
45
The CEA Events Team is Hiring for Three Program Lead Positions
OllieBase
· · 3m read
0
0
22
Call For a University of Minnesota EA Group
Kenneth_Diao
· · 2m read
1
1
49
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
8
8
View more