The People’s Paper

NewsWhip, a site that collects and reports data on trending media stories, recently published some “people powered front pages.”

That is, they took selected newspaper’s home pages, and re-imagined them, “giving the most shared story the most prominence, the second most shared the second most prominence, etc.”

Here are a few of the covers – original on the left, “people powered” on the right. You can see them all over at NewsWhip.

This is interesting, but what should we take away from this little experiment?

Should publishers work harder to prioritize the most shared stories – a sort of democratic editorial process?

Do publishers have a responsibility to promote the most “important” news over the most “popular”? If so, who should decide what’s important?

Is “sharability” a measure that should determine a story’s prominence? Is a newspaper’s ”front page” archaic in an age when you can catch popular stories through your Facebook feed?

I don’t have the answers, but I think these are important questions. News coverage plays an important role in building, shaping, and sustaining public opinion. What stories get shared, what stories capture the public imagination, what stories get prominence – that matters almost as much as the stories themselves.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Tillamook Bay National Estuaries Project (Nationales Projekt zu Mündungsgebieten in Tillamook Bay)

Probleme und Zweck 60 Meilen westlich von Portland, eingeschnitten in die nördliche Küstenlinie Oregons, liegt Tillamook Bay. Die Bucht wird von fünf Nebenflüssen gespeist, welche von einem Wasserscheidebecken von ungefähr 540 Meilen ausströmen, und ist über einen Kanal an ihrem nördlichsten äußersten Ende mit der offenen See verbunden. Mit einer...

Group Decision Tip: Detachment

In principle, detachment is the key to peace.

Group Decision Tips IconSometimes we are so attached to things that we are apt to fight for them, so attached that when they disappear it brings great pain, so attached that our judgment is clouded to the point where we see and feel only conflict.

While right-sized compassion brings comfort, oversized attachment to people, ideas, or feelings brings turmoil and tension. While right-sized determination brings achievement, unwavering attachment to goals or ideals brings conflict.

Practical Tip: Do not be too attached to your group’s cause or decisions that you think the group should make. Do not be too attached to how you think things should be or how others should behave.

It is often those group members who are unreasonably dedicated — those who give an unreasonable amount of time or energy — who cause the most conflict.

Give your best without conditions. Speak your truth without expectations. Use the key, find peace.

introducing the Capabilities Approach

(DeLand, Florida) In Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach, Martha Nussbaum proposes that human beings have ten “Central Capabilities.” The first one is: “Life. Being able to live to the end of a human life of normal length …” The remaining nine all have a similar grammar: an abstract noun or noun phrase followed by a verb in the form “being able to …” The rest of the Capabilities are: bodily health; bodily integrity; senses, imagination, and thought; emotions; practical reason; affiliation; other species; play; and control over one’s environment.

I have criticized Nussbaum for making the state ultimately (and sometimes solely) responsible for the Capabilities. She is explicit about this on p. 64, and throughout the book, she writes sentences in which the government is the subject and people are the object. For instance, immediately before she offers the list of Capabilities on p. 33, she writes, “government has the job of making people able to pursue a dignified and minimally flourishing life.”

She does, of course, support human freedom: the government must enable people to pursue their own Capabilities as they wish. Yet I would assign the government a very different role than she does in her overall theory. I would say that we the people have the obligation to ensure one another’s Capabilities. We may decide to use the government as a tool for that; it has strengths and limitations. In any case, we make the government—not in some imaginary moment of signing a social contract, but every day, in how we vote, advocate, pay taxes, educate future leaders, and generate information. In similar ways, we also make churches, neighborhoods, and families. The government is us: a subgroup of us chosen or tolerated to influence the rest of the population by the means of laws and law-enforcement. I would put the state clearly in a subsidiary position and ask pointed questions about how we are supposed to get good governments in the first place. Those questions vanish in Nussbaum’s account.

That said, there is much to recommend in the Capabilities approach. For my colleagues concerned about youth development and civic education, it provides an impressive normative framework.

Why propose a list? Nussbaum does not imagine that she can dictate policies or that her moral assumptions are necessarily right. But her list starts a conversation that we must have if we are to assess policies and communities. If you disagree with her list, you should be able to respond with objections to the components, or add extra items, and give reasons for those changes. Not making a list just ducks the central moral questions.

Why many Capabilities instead of one ultimate good, such as happiness or freedom? Because there are many dimensions of human life and they cannot be measured on a single scale.

Why Capabilities instead of goods, rights, processes, or outcomes? The argument is complex and multifaceted, but in short, Capabilities recognize individual freedom and diversity while also acknowledging the human need for tangible support. If you have a Capability of imagination, you are not obliged to use it in any particular way–or at all. But you will not develop that Capability just by being left alone: you need education, access to public art and nature, leisure time, and other supports that cost money. And nothing (such as cash or pleasure) will substitute for your using your own imagination. Thus imagination is a Capability rather than a right, a good, or a choice. (A strong argument against the Capabilities Approach would take the form of a defense of one of these other keywords.)

Why one list for every nation and culture? I’d answer  just as I did the question “Why a list?” Like individuals, members of whole cultures may dispute the contents of Nussbaum’s list. If they do, they should speak on behalf of alternatives. The deliberation about what Capabilities humans should have is a global one, and there will be disagreements. But they are disagreements about the human good. It makes no sense to say, “Bodily integrity is a Capability for you, but not for us.” That means it is not a human Capability.

See also: Putting Philosophy Back in Developmental Psychology.

The post introducing the Capabilities Approach appeared first on Peter Levine.

Expertise and Knowledge Sharing

Someone came to me today, a look of I don’t know what to do written across her face. She had a question. Something had come up. She wasn’t sure how to respond. It’s possible I laughed inappropriately.

And then I took a deep breath, asked her some questions, and tried to help troubleshoot the situation. She left with a plan of action.

I’d just gotten back from class where we’d talked about civic education. Specifically, we discussed this colorful story from Myles Horton. Meeting with a group of striking workers in his motel room, the workers “kept throwing out ideas….Finally they said they couldn’t come up with anything, any strategy, or anything to do. They were getting desperate.”

That’s when things get exciting:

They said: “Well, you’ve got more experience than we have. You’ve got to tell us what to do. You’re the expert.” I said: “No, let’s talk about it a little bit more. In the first place, I don’t know what to do, and if I did know I wouldn’t tell you, because if I had to tell you today then I’d have to tell you tomorrow, and when I’m gone you’d have to get somebody else to tell you.”

One guy reached in his pocket and pulled out a pistol and says, “Godddamn you, if you don’t tell us I’m going to kill you.” I was tempted to become an instant expert, right on the spot! But I knew that if I did that, all would be lost and then all the rest of them would start asking me what to do.

I’d been discussing this story not thirty minutes before my advice was sought, yet the moment someone asked me for help I went straight into problem solving mode. I didn’t quite tell her what to do, but I essentially told her what to do. Well, I told her what I would do.

I told her she should come back with other questions any time.

The moment she left I went back to thinking about dear old Myles Horton.

Maybe I should have refused to tell her.

I have a great respect for Horton. In his writing he comes off as thoughtful and open and genuine. The kind of person I’d want to just sit and think with for hours.

And I appreciate where he’s coming from with this story. The rise of expertise can be a problem – convincing “average” people that they are non-experts, that they have no skills, or wisdom, or insights to share.

That belief often becomes deeply internalized. People turn to the “experts” because that is what you’re supposed to do. It’s like turning to the back of the book to find the answers. Even if you try to work out the problem for yourself first – you check the back to make sure you are “right.”

Horton is bold to confront that paradigm – arguing that he would rather risk his life then perpetuate the myth of expertise.

Yet since I first heard Horton’s parable years ago, its continually been coupled with concerns that Horton takes education too far. I’ve even heard some call Horton less than charitable names. I see his point, but really? Seems to be a common consensus.

Like so many things, though, I think it comes down to context.

If someone asked me for advice on what to wear to a certain kind of social gathering, I’d give it freely. I mean, really, that stuff is hard to figure out. It’s like there’s a secret code. But its essentially a factual question. From experience, I’ve learned how to figure it out.

When someone asked for my advice today, I flashed back to not so many years ago when I was encountering situations I didn’t know how to handle, desperately turning to friends for advice asking what should I do???

Ah, I remember those days. And as I helped her think the situation through, I knew that one day – in not so long – she’d be in my seat, helping someone else through some situation they weren’t sure how to handle. So it goes.

But, perhaps, Horton is right to respond as he did in his situation. There is no right answer, no secret formula, no guaranteed path to success. He makes a point of starting his answer with that. In the first place, I don’t know what to do.

It’s when he continues – and if I did know I wouldn’t tell you - that he tends to lose people’s favor.

But it’s what he says after that which is critical: because if I had to tell you today then I’d have to tell you tomorrow, and when I’m gone you’d have to get somebody else to tell you.

If you’re looking for a guideline to go by, that seems like a good one.

I like to think that wasn’t true in my situation. By telling her today, I prepared her for tomorrow.

But in Horton’s case, perhaps it is true – telling them today wouldn’t prepare them to deal with a problem tomorrow. Telling them today would only reinforce the myth of expertise. He certainly thought was the case.

Truth be told, I’m not sure I know where the line is, but you can rest assured – I went back to my visitor shortly thereafter and apologized for possibly stunting her development.

Ah, man, I was just trying to help.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

a concise and general argument for civic education reform

(Logan Airport) This article is newly out and publicly available:

Peter Levine, “Teaching the Deeper Aspects of Civic Education,” The Standard (National Association of State Boards of Education), March 24, 2014, pp. 37-39.

It is my best effort at a 3-page argument for policymakers and advocates, describing what we should want young people to learn, what obstacles stand in the way of satisfactory outcomes, and what policy changes would help.

The post a concise and general argument for civic education reform appeared first on Peter Levine.

Deal for NCDDers on Tamarack’s Evaluating Community Impact workshops

Many of us in the NCDD network are part of community-based initiatives for creating change, in local government, healthcare, poverty, education, and numerous other arenas. And while we know it is important to stand back and evaluate the impact we are making on these issues and how to do things better, we often don’t know how to evaluate the effects of our work in meaningful ways.

That is why we are pleased to invite NCDD members to participate in a great program run by our friends at the Tamarack Institute called Evaluating Community Impact: Capturing and Making Sense of Community Outcomes. This high-quality program is being offered this June in Halifax, and again in Winnipeg in November.

We are so impressed by the program and its potential to benefit our community of practitioners that NCDD recently signed on as a sponsor of the initiative. In fact, we are willing to subsidize part of the registration costs of supporting NCDD members (whose dues are in good standing) if you commit to sharing some of your learnings and observations from the workshop with the rest of the network here on the blog. If you are interested in learning more about attending with an NCDD sponsorship, please email sandy@ncdd.org for more information.

So what is the program all about? Tamarack describes the initiative this way:

Evaluating Community Impact: Capturing and Making Sense of Community Outcomes is a three-day workshop intended to provide those who are funding, planning, and implementing community change initiatives with an opportunity to learn the latest and most practical evaluation ideas and practices.

This workshop is best suited to those who have an interest and some basic experience with evaluation but are eager to tackle the challenging but critical task of getting feedback on local efforts to change communities.

EvalCommImpactBanner

There is a lot that goes into doing quality program evaluation, so the workshop focuses on covering key skill sets and topics for evaluation. The learning agenda for the workshops includes:

  • Models and dynamics of community change, i.e. theories of change
  • Evaluative thinking, utilization focused evaluation, and developmental evaluation
  • Program evaluation and the evaluation of community change evaluation
  • “Measuring” systems change, dealing with unanticipated outcomes, attributing outcomes to change activities and participatory sense-making
  • Evaluation Planning Tools and Outcome Evaluation Tools

You can get a taste of some of the content of the Evaluating Community Impact initiative by checking out Tamarack faculty member Liz Weaver’s recent article in Engage! magazine, Evaluation: An Essential Learning Resource.

We highly encourage NCDD members to find out more about the Evaluating Community Impact program at http://events.tamarackcommunity.org/evaluating-community-impact. The program was overbooked last year, so we encourage you to register today for the Halifax event this June or sign up for the Winnepeg event in November.

We hope that many of you will take advantage of this great opportunity and the chance to share what you learn with the NCDD community. Don’t forget to write to Sandy at sandy@ncdd.org if you plan on attending. We hope to see you there!

Poetry of the Commons

I’ve always thought that the commons, in its attempt to achieve a holistic balance of relationships, is profoundly aesthetic and ethical.  It aspires to a certain dynamic but disciplined shapeliness.  How wonderful, then, to encounter Harris Webster’s Japanese-style poetry about the commons, inspired by his reading of The Wealth of the Commons:  A World Beyond Market and State!     

A few years ago, Webster, a retiree living in Montpelier, Vermont, heard a presentation on the commons by University of Vermont professor Gary Flomenhoft.  Then he read a number of pieces on the commons in Kosmos journal and discovered The Wealth of the Commons.

Webster has a hobby of writing tanka poems, a genre of classical Japanese poetry akin to haiku.  He had developed a taste for Japanese poetry in the course of several exchange visits with the prefecture of Tottori, Japan, as the representative of the Japan-American Society of Vermont.  Webster decided that he wanted to capture the essence of some essays in The Wealth of Commons in the succinct, austere style of tanka. (Links to the original essays are embedded in the authors' names and essay titles.)

I hope you enjoy this wonderful poetic experiment as much as I do! 

Introduction

Question: Should earth’s people share

our earth’s seven seas?

Answer: When some Somalians

lost their share of fishing grounds,

they became pirates.

 

Good church members are stewards

of the church commons,

its resources  and culture.

Earth’s people should be stewards

of the earth’s Commons.

 

Unknown Elinor Ostrom

won a Nobel Prize

for research on the Commons

throughout our wide world.

May it be well known world wide!

 

The Commons looks at the ‘whole.’

resources, people, and norms,

(oceans, fishermen, and rules,)

nested together.

Do markets and government?

 

Do people value

good soil and fresh air?

Of course , but they are not priced,

advertised or for sale.

Is that why they’re uncommon?

read more

YUM: A Taste of Immigrant City

DSC04977

Yum! Literally.

In just a few short weeks – on April 10, 2014 – Somerville non-profit The Welcome Project will host its fifth annual YUM: A Taste of Immigrant City celebration at 7pm at the Armory. Oh, and hey, you can buy your tickets online. ($35 in advance, $40 at the door).

YUM is themed around some of my favorite things: food, community, and diversity.

In Somerville, these things go together like Cuppow a mason jar. I mean, really.

Diversity is at the heart of what makes our community great, and what better way to celebrate our community and our diversity than delicious food?

Food is an integral part of every culture. It tells a story – the dish your grandma used to make. It brings a community together – bread broken among friends. It shares a history, a culture, a climate.

Importantly, YUM doesn’t just celebrate diverse food – delicious though it may be. The event actively supports immigrant-owned restaurants in Somerville.

Independent, locally-owned businesses of all stripes play an important role in any thriving community – as the good folks at Somerville Local First can tell you. But local, immigrant-owned restaurants play a particularly important role.

They are gathering places, informal cultural centers. They are expressions of our many unique voices, and they are central to who we are as a city.

It’s possible that I’m biased – I serve on the board of The Welcome Project and this is my third year chairing the event committee for YUM. But I wouldn’t put so much time and energy into this work if I didn’t think it was important.

It’s no secret that the city is changing. There’s rezoning in Union, it’s an hour wait to get a table in Davis, and I can’t even keep up with the updates from Assembly Square. With more T stops on the way and housing costs already ridiculous, this is our moment to shape the future of the city.

I’m excited about the changes. I am. I’ve watched the city grow over the last decade and I look forward to what I find in the decade to come.

But even as the city changes, we know where our soul lies – and events like YUM help us remember that. We are a diverse, thriving community, and, of course…we love food.

This year, YUM will feature nine immigrant-owned restaurants – which, incidentally, are all Shape Up approved. 2014 restaurants are:

7119520401_0fdaf77bb8_zAguacate Verde, Mexican, Porter Square
Fasika, Ethiopian, East Somerville
Istanbul’lu, Turkish, Teele Square
Los Paisanos, Central American, East Somerville
Masala, Indian and Nepali, Teele Square
The Neighborhood Restaurant, Portuguese, Union Square
Sabur, Mediterranean, Teele Square
Vinny’s at Night, Italian, East Somerville
Yak and Yeti, Nepali and Indian, Ball Square

The event will also honor:
Regina Bertholdo, will receive The Welcome Project’s annual Intercultural City Award. Regina is Director of the Parent Information Center for the Somerville Public Schools and co-founded the Brazilian Women’s Group. Along with her leadership as Director of the Parent Information Center and as the Schools’ Homeless Liaison, Regina is also known throughout the community as a tireless advocate and champion for Somerville’s diverse immigrant community.

Suzanne Sankar will receive The Welcome Project Founder’s Award. Suzanne was a social worker at the Mental Health Clinic at Mystic Housing in the mid 1980s when the public housing development was integrated. After seeing first hand just how poorly new immigrants were being treated as they moved in, she helped lead the effort to create The Welcome Project. Through 23 years of service on The Welcome Project board, Suzanne broadened and deepened the work of the organization.  Suzanne is currently Professor of Practice and Associate Dean for Student Affairs at Simmons School of Social Work.

And just in case you missed the link, you can buy your tickets online.

See you there!

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Dewey and the current toward democracy

Nevertheless, the current has set steadily in one direction: toward democratic forms. That government exists to serve its community, and that this purpose cannot be achieved unless the community itself shares in selecting its governors and determining their policies, are a deposit of fact left, as far as we can see, permanently in the wake of doctrines and forms, however transitory the latter. They are not the whole of the democratic idea, but they express it in its political phase. Belief in this political aspect … marks a well-attested conclusion from historic facts.

– John Dewey, The Public and its Problems, chapter v

This passage connects at least three ideas: 1) a principle: government exists to serve its community; 2) a mechanism: public selection of office-holders; and 3) a factual generalization about history: it is moving toward democracy.

The usual way to connect these would be to say that people have discovered or created the moral principle of equal political power. To make this principle influential in the world, they have invented and advocated certain “doctrines and forms,” such as regular elections. As a result of their efforts, some communities are now governed by means of these mechanisms. We can use the democratic principle to the assess the actual governments of the world and will conclude that some regimes serve their communities, while others do not.

Dewey puts the elements together in a different way. He detects an underlying current, a tide in the affairs of humankind, that throws up both concrete procedures (such as regular elections) and ideals consistent with those procedures. The importance of the procedures and ideals is a fact that we can observe in the world around us. The deeper explanation is some kind of natural process of human development. I think it has a basically Hegelian form: We homo sapiens naturally associate. Because we have language, we can reflect on the forms that our association takes. Because we have huge potential, we strive to reform our associations so that they give us more scope for creativity and flourishing. Our striving makes the current flow steadily toward democratic forms.

Dewey does not want to separate ideals ["mystic faith"] from facts; and, above all, he does not want to attribute causal power to ideas.

[We] must protest against the assumption that the [democratic] idea itself has produced the the governmental practices which obtain in democratic states: General suffrage, elected representatives, majority rule, and so on. … The forms to which we are accustomed in democratic governments represent the cumulative effect of a multitude of events, unpremeditated as far as political effects were concerned and having unpredictable consequences.

Problems with this method:

1. The current is hardly steady. Indeed, when Dewey wrote these passages, most of the world was under colonial domination; and soon thereafter, most of the colonial powers fell under evil tyrannies. Why should we be confident that the current will generally or ultimately flow in a democratic direction?

2. Many ideals are facts, in the sense that they motivate and inspire human beings. That is true not only of democracy and freedom but also of nationalism, greed, and religious fanaticism. We could substitute nationalism for democracy in Dewey’s argument (above) and conclude: “That government exists to lift its own people over all the other peoples of the world, and that this purpose cannot be achieved unless a government builds a powerful and aggressive military, are a deposit of fact.  …” We must be able to use independent reason or judgment to conclude that democratic ideals are desirable, or else they are just some of the ideals that exist in the world.

The post Dewey and the current toward democracy appeared first on Peter Levine.