(Note: All EA Berkeley retrospectives can be found here. This post includes the summary of our Spring 2016 retrospective because the full document is 28 pages long. In addition, we have created a public version of our Google Drive, which we encourage people to use. In particular, we have had a lot of interest in the course we teach -- details of the last iteration of the class can be found in this folder of the Drive.)
This is a report by the Effective Altruists of Berkeley on work done during Spring 2016. It was written mainly by Rohin Shah, with contributions from Ajeya Cotra, Jacob Straus, Matthew Borchardt and Joshua Price. It’s really long, so you may want to first read the one-page summary and then decide what else to read. Please email [email protected] with questions and comments, or comment on this post!
(Note: This table of contents links to an external Google Doc)
Summary
The Good
The Okay
The Bad
Club Activities
EA Global X
DeCal
Giving What We Can Pledges
Tabling
Fundraising
Berkeley Crowdfunding
Generous U
Weekly Meetings
One on One Meetings
Advisors and Colleagues
Prospective Members
Internet Outreach
General Mailing List
Facebook Page
Websites
Club Email
Socials
Giving Game Website
Greek Life
Club Management
Member Engagement
Organizational Structure
Retrospectives and Planning
Communication
Plans for Future Semesters
Appendix
Financial Transactions
Time put in by Co-Presidents
Chronology
Summary
The Good
-
We organized EAGxBerkeley on April 30, with about 70-80 attendees. (More)
-
We taught a 2-unit course about Effective Altruism. Of our 16 students, at least 7 took the Giving What We Can pledge, 2 will be new active members next semester, and 2 became vegetarian. (More)
-
In total, we got at least 9 students to take the Giving What We Can pledge, which Giving What We Can values at $540,000. (More)
-
We were awarded a $2,500 Generous U grant. (More)
-
We had one-on-one meetings with EA chapter leaders and EA community members that helped us with high-level strategy. (More)
-
We had one-on-one meetings with prospective members that were likely beneficial in retaining those members over the semester. (More)
-
We had club socials once every two weeks, which helped member engagement. (More)
The Okay
-
We played over 1,100 speed Giving Games, which resulted in around 300 mailing list signups and other changes. However, we do not think the results justify the costs. (More)
-
We held weekly meetings that were well attended, but a lot of the content was logistical and not relevant for many of the attendees. (More)
-
We built up our online presence, but are unsure about its impact. (More)
-
We got a group of students to build us a website for playing Giving Games, but it is not yet fully functional. (More)
-
We solidified our organizational structure, which will hopefully be helpful next semester, but it was not very helpful for this past semester. (More)
The Bad
-
We tried to organize a Giving What We Can pledge drive, but it failed, primarily due to lack of effort. (More)
-
We applied for Berkeley Crowdfunding, but were rejected. (More)
-
We tried to organize a retreat for club members, but it fell through. (More)
-
We tried to collaborate with fraternities and sororities to encourage them to fundraise for effective charities, but ultimately nothing changed. (More)
