EA Groups Should Rename Intro Fellowships for Better Clarity

This is a quick post that serves as a call to action for university EA group organizers! 

For university EA groups (and maybe other EA groups) the term "introductory fellowship" can lead to various confusions: seeming religious, inaccurately prestigious, or too official, for example. I propose that most groups should switch to an alternative, such as Georgia Tech's "Effective Altruism Introductory Seminar" or (one that I'm particularly excited for, that we've used at LSU this semester) calling introductory reading/discussion groups the "IDEA Program":

 IDEA - Introduction to making a Difference through Effective Altruism.

Why is this better than the typical framing of "Effective Altruism Introductory Fellowship"?

1. Much harder to confuse as religious: In a recent popular thread in the EA Groups slack, there was discussion of alternative names to "fellowship"; quite a few group organizers expressed that newcomers to EA interpreted fellowship as religious, and that it promoted the idea of EA coming across as cult-ish. I would imagine this problem is not unique to the ~6  people who mentioned it in the slack thread, so eliminating this confusion seems useful for better outreach and communication for groups in the future!
2. Emphasis on both doing and learning: This framing puts more of a focus on what those in EA are actually trying to accomplish - making a difference (this is the D of IDEA). I think it does a good job of beginning to switch one's first impression of the fellowship from "Here's this community called EA, I can sign up for this fellowship to read about what they have to say" to "here are some ideas touted by this community called EA, maybe I can use their ideas to better make a difference/have an impact".
3. Better Epistemics: Similarly, this framing makes EA seem more like "a set of tools/ideas I can use to have an impact" (i.e. making a difference through effective altruism) as opposed to "a set of dogmas or predetermined ideas about how to have an impact". The former is a more accurate conception of EA (or at least of what EA would ideally be).
4. Petty reason: It rolls off the tongue better.
5. Less prestigious-sounding: (disclaimer: anecdote) When I first heard the phrasing "EA Introductory Fellowship" I was confused as to why a reading group was being advertised as a fellowship. My impression was that fellowships are reserved for more prestigious (usually paid) academic or intern-like positions, and it was a little off-putting to see people in EA try to oversell their intro programs. The term "fellowship" could definitely still be useful in some places where participants are more heavily-selected, or maybe at schools where EA groups have very impressive reputations, but I think the phrasing usually seems inaccurate, especially if we are aiming for big tent EA.

In general, catchy acronyms can be fun to come up with and more engaging than long bulky names. "IDEA Program" is probably not the best version of this, but it's a step in the right direction compared to the unclear, long-to-pronounce "Effective Altruism Introductory Fellowship".

For fairness: why we might NOT want to switch from "fellowship":

1. Intro programs/reading groups should be more selective, and "fellowship" better expresses the seriousness/commitment that is expected from participants.
2. "Fellowship" is already pretty common and well-used among EA groups, so we shouldn't try to disrupt the equilibrium (I think this is probably a pretty bad reason; name changes require minimal effort)
3. "IDEA Program" doesn't actually tell someone what it's about in the name. Effective Altruism Intro Fellowship is more explicit about: A) the fact that it's introductory and B) that it's affiliated with effective altruism.
   1. This is probably less of a problem with good marketing and design.

Overall, I find these latter reasons not as compelling, and changing fellowship names is low-hanging fruit for less confusing and more honest outreach. At the very least, I think more groups should try it out!

Thanks to Justin Guo for feedback, and Michel Justen for encouraging me to write this up.