Iowa Caucuses Upgrade Participation Technology for 2016

We wanted to repost this interesting post that we first found on the Gov 2.0 Watch blog that NCDD organizational member the Davenport Institute runs. With the announcement that the 2016 Iowa caucuses will integrate mobile technology, it appears party politics may be catching up with some of the D&D field in terms of civic tech. Check out the post below or find the original here.


DavenportInst-logo21st Century Caucuses

The Iowa Caucuses are always of the highlights of any presidential campaign.  There is a sense of deeper, beyond-the-ballot-box engagement that can feel like a healthy dose of old-fashioned democracy.  But this year the caucuses will incorporate technology.  Planners hope to offer an example of how new technology can be incorporated into traditional experiences:

Tallying results from the Iowa presidential caucuses will rely on mobile technology for the first time in 2016. The Democratic and Republican parties and Microsoft jointly announced that apps are being developed for each party that will tabulate precinct results, verify them, and quickly make them publicly available.

“The caucus results will be delivered via this new mobile-enabled, cloud-based platform that will help facilitate these accurate and timely results,” says Dan’l Lewin, Microsoft’s Corporate Vice President of Technology and Civic Engagement.

You can read more and see a demonstration of the technology here.

UC Davis Extension: Conflict Resolution Courses

From UC Davis Extension, The Conflict Resolution Professional Concentration, which has proven tools to resolve conflicts, negotiate agreements, deal with difficult people, facilitate groups and build consensus. In a streamlined format composed of three courses, the program prioritizes theory and practical tools to equip students to resolve every type of conflict and positively impact people, organizations, programs and policies. These courses are designed for professionals seeking to further develop their effectiveness and leadership skills in a broad variety of fields including government, business, health care, education, human resources, law, land use, water and natural resources.

Who should attend

This program is designed for a broad audience—for those seeking conflict resolution skills to benefit their current careers and for those interested in a new career in conflict resolution. It is recommended for anyone interested in developing knowledge and skills in mediation, facilitation, collaborative decision-making and other forms of problem solving and conflict resolution.

The professional concentration can be completed in less than a year while working in a full-time position.

Courses required

Fall: Introduction to Conflict Resolution (online, 2 units) $795
Winter: Fundamental Conflict Resolution Skills (Sacramento 3-day course, 2 units), $795
Spring: Advanced Conflict Resolution Skills (Sacramento, 3-day course, 2 units) $795

If you enroll in all 3 courses at once, you pay a discounted price of $1,995.

***Please note, you must call (530) 752-0881 to enroll and receive the discounted price.

About the courses

Introduction to Conflict Resolution:
Become a vital problem-solver in your organization or community. Build a solid foundation in the basics of conflict resolution, and learn theory and new techniques for mediating conflicts and facilitating group dynamics. Discover leading models in the field and apply these to current cases using practical strategies to effectively transform conflicts.

Fundamental Conflict Resolution Skills:
Learn the communication skills and mediation models essential for successful conflict resolution. Practice facilitation skills and techniques required for successful group and team meetings. Learn strategies to minimize and address conflict in difficult conversations and with difficult people. Explore tools to assess and meaningfully engage diverse interests and participants.

Advanced Conflict Resolution Skills:
Discover collaborative methods and techniques for consensus building, negotiation and resolving complex conflicts. Learn to find mutually agreeable solutions to challenging situations so projects and programs can move forward. Gain leadership skills to address tough conflict and negotiation settings.

For more information or to enroll, call (800) 752-0881, email extension[at]ucdavis[dot]edu or visit the website here.

More about UC Davis Extension
UCD_Collab_CtrThe continuing and professional education division of UC Davis, has been an internationally recognized leader in educational outreach for individuals, organizations and communities for more than 50 years. With 62,000 annual enrollments in classroom and online university-level courses, UC Davis Extension serves lifelong learners in the growing Sacramento region, all 50 states and more than 115 countries.

Follow on Twitter: @UCDExtension

Resource Link: https://extension.ucdavis.edu/areas-study/collaboration-center

Links, Aggregated (Thursday Edition)

  1. Social Perfectionism and Why Suicide Unfairly Impacts Men
  2. Science isn’t Broken: It’s just a hell of a lot harder than we give it credit for
  3. “millions of lives may be about to change profoundly”
  4. The Chronicles of Prydain is the greatest fantasy series ever written
  5. Alternatives to Beats by Dre at every price point and for every use-case
  6. Why everything you know about wolf packs is wrong

Why Is Market Fundamentalism So Tenacious?

One of the great economists of the twentieth century had the misfortune of publishing his magnum opus, The Great Transformation, in 1944, months before the inauguration of a new era of postwar economic growth and consumer culture. Few people in the 1940s or 1950s wanted to hear piercing criticisms of “free markets,” let alone consider the devastating impacts that markets tend to have on social solidarity and the foundational institutions of civil society. And so for decades Polanyi remained something of a curiosity, not least because he was an unconventional academic with a keen interest in the historical and anthropological dimensions of economics. 

As the neoliberal revolution instigated by Reagan and Thatcher in the 1980 has spread, however, Polanyi has been rediscovered.  His great book – now republished with a foreword by Joseph Stiglitz – has attracted a new generation of readers. 

But how to make sense of Polanyi’s work with all that has happened in the past 70 years?  Why does he still speak so eloquently to our contemporary problems? For answers, we can be grateful that we have The Power of Market Fundamentalism:  Karl Polanyi’s Critique, written by Fred Block and Margaret R. Somers, and published last year. The book is a first-rate reinterpretation of Polanyi’s work, giving it a rich context and commentary.  Polanyi focused on the deep fallacies of economistic thinking and its failures to understand society and people as they really are. What could be more timely?

The cult of free market fundamentalism has become so normative in our times, and economics as a discipline so hidebound and insular, that reading Polanyi today is akin to walking into a stiff gust of fresh air.  We can suddenly see clear, sweeping vistas of social reality.  Instead of the mandarin, quantitative and faux-scientific presumptions of standard economics – an orthodoxy of complex illusions about “autonomous” markets – Polanyi explains how markets are in fact embedded in a complex web of social, cultural and historical realities.

read more

5 Reasons Scholars Need Facebook Author Pages

Scholars tend to be shy or humble, often going to great lengths to avoid anything that might smack of self-promotion or over-confidence. There’s good reason for this. The academy trains you to be skeptical, to demand evidence, and to be reserved about matters that you’ve not yet carefully considered.

Image of Bertrand Russell from 1951.

There are two troubling consequences of this phenomenon, however. The first is captured in one of Bertrand Russel’s famous sayings. In New Hopes for a Changing World, he wrote that

One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision.

It’s a riff on William Butler Yeats’s “The Second Coming,” where he writes that “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

In other words, self-doubt and the training for skepticism, so vital to good philosophy, can lead scholars not to speak up, while so many ignorant voices cry. If scholars are waiting for certainty, we’ll never hear from them. This is one of the troubling dangers.

Dog begging for scraps under the table.The second consequence ultimately results from the first: scholars who don’t speak up get frustrated that no one pays attention to or wants to support what they do.

It is more important than ever for scholars to speak up, to get our ideas out there for the public to read and engage. The good news is that there are exciting opportunities and new tools now for doing that.

News outlets more than ever before are receptive to scholars’ writings, especially if they don’t have to pay for them. It is reasonable to complain about that, but many of us in higher education have salaries already — no, not all. Those many fortunate people who are afforded some time and incredible intellectual resources (colleagues, libraries, databases, etc.), however, can and ought to see their privilege as a responsibility.

ripplesWhile scholars can engage folks through news media, we shouldn’t overlook social media. Even with our 200-2,000 connections, social media messages spread like ripples. We can affect our culture by speaking up. That said, sometimes we want our personal lives to be separate from our public or professional lives.

Scholars would be wise, therefore, to suspend their typical discomfort with the idea of self-promotion for a minute and make a Facebook author page. Why? Here are 5 reasons:

  1. You’ve gotta keep’em separated — Students. You often do not want your students to read messages that are for your friends and family only. A Facebook author page allows them to follow that content without “friending” you.
  2. You can spare uninterested friends and family. Facebook is a great place to share pictures of your children and other personal relations or content. You often don’t want to share your public messages with folks who would prefer only to see pictures of your kids.
  3. You shouldn’t hide your work. Your author page is an obvious place to post information about your own writings, and folks who want to learn about what you study and get your book will look there.
  4. If you don’t build your platform, no one will hear you. If and when you want to write for wider audiences, you need a platform from which you reach readers. Literary agents and book publishers can no longer evaluate proposals only on their own merits. They want to know that you can speak to an audience and that you have a platform from which you can reach them. A Facebook author page is part of that platform.
  5. You really believe in what you do.Weber sitting at his desk.It isn’t arrogant or pompous. If you’re doing it right, it isn’t even about you. Ok, look, the Web is much more interesting with pictures, so don’t be shy — put yours up there. Newspapers and others want a photo to include next to an article they publish of yours, so realize that and be ok with having your photo(s) there. That said, why do you do this work? It’s because you care about what you study — you believe the ideas to be genuinely important. If that’s true; if you do think that what you study matters; if you have some small part to contribute to public debate, then you are acting for others when you make sure that your ideas get heard.

So, go forth and be heard!

Who are your favorite examples of scholars with great platforms, modelling great public intellectual leadership?

Message me or tweet me about that on Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn.

Register to Attend the National Dialogue Awards, Oct. 9

We encourage our members to consider registering to attend the 2nd annual National Dialogue Awards this October 9 in DC, which are hosted by the Sustained Dialogue Institute and supported by the Kettering Foundation, both of which are NCDD member organizations. You can learn more about the awards in the SDI announcement below or by visiting SDI’s new website at www.sustaineddialogue.org.


2nd Annual National Dialogue Awards

We sincerely hope that you will join us for the Second Annual National Dialogue Awards on Friday, October 9th, 2015 beginning at 6:30 pm at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.

We will honor those whose lives have been powerfully marked by the principles and values of Sustained Dialogue. Some recipients are drawn from our network, and some from beyond it, but all have displayed the qualities that our organization values. This year’s keynote awardee is Senator George Mitchell, a renowned diplomat and key architect of several peace agreements in the Middle East and Northern Ireland. Our corporate award will be presented to Evolent Health for its expression of diversity and inclusion in the workplace.

Additionally, we will recognize three leaders from the Sustained Dialogue Campus Network. These leaders include: Lane McLelland – a faculty member and administrator at the University of Alabama, Taylor Sawyer – an alumna of The Ohio State University, and Brittany Chung – a student at Case Western Reserve University.

We would be honored to have you and your guests attend.

Please RSVP at the event website to secure your tickets for this celebration. If you have any questions, please contact Sonia [soniaATsustaineddialogue.org].

Are you or your organization interested in becoming a sponsor? Learn more about sponsoring the National Dialogue Awards.

You can find the original version of this Sustained Dialogue Institute announcement at www.sustaineddialogue.org/?post_type=event&p=1333.

The Future of Work: How Should We Prepare for the New Economy? (NIFI Issue Guide)

The National Issues Forums Institute published the 13-page Issue Guide, The Future of Work: How Should We Prepare for the New Economy?, in February 2015. This guide is designed to help facilitate balanced deliberation about how we should prepare for the future economic reality of work.

From the guide…

NIFI_futureofworkThe nature of the work we do has changed in ways that few Americans a generation ago could have imagined, and it will undoubtedly be dramatically different in yet another generation. These changes will bring both opportunities and difficulties…

The stakes are high. Many Americans share concerns about the nation’s competitive edge, stagnant wages, and a sense that young people today will be worse off than previous generations.

We have choices to make together in shaping the future of work. Business, government, individuals, and communities all play a role in addressing this issue. This guide presents some of the options we might pursue, along with their drawbacks.

This issue guide presents three options for deliberation:

Option One: “Free to Succeed”
Give individuals and businesses the freedom they need to innovate and succeed

Option Two: “An Equal Chance to Succeed”
Make sure all Americans have a chance to succeed in an increasingly competitive environment

Option Three: “Choose the Future We Want”
Strategically choose to support promising industries rather than simply hoping that the changes in work and the economy will be beneficial

More about the NIFI Issue Guides
NIFI’s Issue Guides introduce participants to several choices or approaches to consider. Rather than conforming to any single public proposal, each choice reflects widely held concerns and principles. Panels of experts review manuscripts to make sure the choices are presented accurately and fairly. By intention, Issue Guides do not identify individuals or organizations with partisan labels, such as Democratic, Republican, conservative, or liberal. The goal is to present ideas in a fresh way that encourages readers to judge them on their merit.

Issue Guides are generally available in print or PDF download for a small fee ($2 to $4). All NIFI Issue Guides and associated tools can be accessed at www.nifi.org/en/issue-guides.

Follow on Twitter: @NIForums.

Resource Link: www.nifi.org/en/issue-guide/future-work

latest thoughts on animal rights and welfare

When we stand to affect another person or animal, at least four moral considerations seem potentially relevant:

  1. The creature’s suffering or distress versus its happiness, contentment, or satisfaction.
  2. The creature’s sense of meaning, purpose, and agency.
  3. The creature’s ability to live in its natural way or to be itself. And …
  4. The impact on other creatures that know and care about the creature that we are directly affecting.

The first consideration is relevant to all sentient beings in proportion to their capacity for sensation and experience. Perhaps a clam cannot suffer appreciably. But there is no reason to think that we human beings are the most sensitive of all creatures–or at least, not by much. And since the first consideration applies to most other animals, it is wrong to reduce their happiness or increase their suffering.

A more difficult question is whether a sudden and painless death reduces happiness. On one account, the net of a creature’s happiness accumulates like a running tally over the life-course. In that case, a painless death freezes the score permanently in place, which can make the total higher than it would have been if the future would have been less happy than the past was. A different views is that a creature has no happiness or suffering at all after death, and therefore death has no impact on happiness. In Epicurus’ phrase, “Death is nothing to us.” I am dissatisfied with both views but not sure that I have a better proposal. Certainly, happiness has a temporal aspect, because suffering on one day lingers on the next. But I struggle to say what impact ending a life has on the creature’s happiness.

The second consideration depends on an ability to make meaning or sense of one’s life and to make consequential choices according to one’s sense of purpose: in a word, “agency.” I am not committed to the premise that agency is a capacity of human beings alone, but we certainly have a very advanced version of it. Note that this capacity is temporal: we make meaning by putting our present state and our current choices in a longer narrative that includes a past and a future. One reason that killing a human being is badly wrong is that it ends the narrative that the person is constructing and thereby destroys her agency. I don’t think the same argument applies to the instantaneous and painless termination of the life of a chicken.

The third consideration–naturalness–seems to apply most to creatures that are not human beings. If possible, a bear should be left alone to live as a bear. Our family dog would not be better off if he were left in the woods to fend for himself like coyote, but he should be able to live the life natural to a domesticated dog, with activities like walks and cuddles. And as for a cow–I am inclined to think that its natural state must include time grazing in a field and nursing a calf. I am not sure that suddenly being slaughtered violates its ability to live a natural life. That means that factory farming is unacceptable but family farming may be consistent with respecting the natural states of farm animals.

As for human beings, we are also natural creatures in the sense that we are an evolved species with many innate limitations and tendencies. But we are capable of reflecting on the whole range of our inherited traits and distinguish the better from the worse. We have a natural proclivity to altruism but also to aggression, even to rape and murder. For us to live according to nature is not nearly good enough. We build institutions and norms to change our inherited natures for the better. That forfeits a right to live naturally and makes the third consideration irrelevant to us.

The fourth consideration applies to any animal that cares for another. In the old Disney cartoon, the death of Bambi’s mother deeply hurt Bambi. Although the cartoon anthropomorphized its animal characters, Bambi’s emotional reaction seems plausible enough for a deer. Still, people may be unique in that our relationships with other people are mediated by language and other forms of communication. We can suffer–or have our sense of purpose and agency frustrated–by learning of the death of someone we have never even met. In contrast, if Bambi had not directly experienced his mother’s death, he wouldn’t have suffered from it.

Freedom is certainly a moral consideration as well, but for human beings, it has a lot to do with #2 (purpose and agency), whereas for animals, it is related to #4 (naturalness). For a person, to be free is to be able to live according to her own sense of purpose. But a bear is free if it’s left alone to be a bear.

What all this means: Intentionally causing the suffering of another creature is always wrong, albeit a wrong that should be balanced against other considerations. Reducing the ability of a non-human creature to live naturally is also a wrong, at least ceteris paribus. But that is a complex question when it comes to farm animals. Killing a person is a special evil because it not only causes suffering but it ruins the purpose and agency that came from that person’s ability to plan and foresee the future. Furthermore, the impact on other human beings of killing a given person is particularly deep and widespread. This is one reason that it is badly wrong to kill even a human being who does not have much agency, such as a neonate. Killing an advanced animal painlessly and suddenly (beyond the sight of its kin) does not necessarily violate considerations #3 or #4. It may violate #1, depending on how we understand the temporal dimension of happiness and suffering. And it may violate #2, but only to the degree that other advanced species have capacities for long-term planning.

See also my evolving thoughts on animal rights and welfare.

The post latest thoughts on animal rights and welfare appeared first on Peter Levine.

Hope and Higher Education — The Role of Citizen Professionals

There are new resources for a "long march through the institutions and professions" of modern society that works democratizing change. That was my argument in a talk the other day at the University of Cape Town (UCT), "Democratizing Universities and the Future of Democracy - The role of citizen professionals."

Citizen professionals will be key architects of such work, in collaboration with self-organizing lay citizens.

One can see early intimations in places like Augsburg College, where their commitments to preparing "citizen nurses" and "citizen teachers" as change agents in systems. Many faculty and staff also have begun to think of themselves as "citizen professionals." The Citizen Professional Center at the University of Minnesota has gained international visibility for similar work. Albert Dzur chronicles hidden democratizing professional and institutional changes, across many fields, in "Trench Democracy," a blog for the Boston Review.

At UCT, I told the story of my first encounter with South African university students in 2002. Dr. Mzwanele Mayekeso, a lecturer in planning at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg who knew of my work on community organizing and democratic change, invited me to speak to his class.

The class, all black, about 30, mostly came from nearby townships like Soweto and Alexandra. I described traditions of empowering professional practices that the Center for Democracy and Citizenship seeks to renew, which I had seen across the South in the civil rights movement. These involved "citizen professionals," civic leaders with a large sense of public purpose who know how to work as equals in public problem solving, with their specialized knowledge "on tap not on top." Citizen teachers, citizen doctors, citizen nurses, citizen clergy, citizen city planners are examples.

The students were furious. "Why haven't we heard anything about this?" they asked. "This is why we came to the university - to learn how to go back to our communities, not to leave them, and work in an empowering way."

"If we were learning this in university, there wouldn't be the brain drain we see today." This is a story of young people's aspiration to be "world-creators," through work that is socially useful.

The student aspirations furnished a counterpoint to Ethan Zuckerman's keynote address last May to Re:Publica, the European Internet and Society conference, which Mary Hess, a friend at Luther Seminary, had drawn my attention to. The address, "The System's Broken - That's the Good News," is a skillful overview of recent change efforts in Europe, the United States, and Latin America. Zuckerman's "third way" strategy is also deeply pessimistic about any possibilities for changes such as the Wits students wanted.

Zuckerman, director of the Center for Civic Media at MIT, brought together a significant body of research which suggests that while protests can play crucial roles in highlighting injustices, and while elections are important ways to affect public policy, neither alone makes substantial social change. He analyzes movements like Occupy Wall Street, the Indignados movement in Spain, the Arab Spring, the Turkish protests in 2013 which brought more than 3 million people into the streets, and the anti-government protests in Brazil, as well as the experiences of insurgent parties like Podemos in Spain and Syriza in Greece.

Such movements, he concludes, "throughout Europe, North and South America have demonstrated huge energy and enormous popular support. But it's hard to point to tangible, systemic changes that parallel the scale of mobilizations that have taken place." Zukerman suggests a number of reasons -- protests are different than fixing problems. The internet is good at getting people out in the streets, but internet mobilizations short-circuit the relational, face to face organizing that went into earlier large movements.

The structural constraints of the global economy are increasingly severe. "We can oust bad people through protest and elect the right people and put them in power, we can protest to pressure our leaders to do the rights things, and they may not be powerful enough to give us the changes we really want."

But the challenges he outlines dwarf his strategies for change. He said that his students at MIT distrust all sorts of institutions -- schools, banks, businesses, nonprofits, churches - not simply government, and proposes that the world is dividing between "institutionalists" who work in institutions and "insurrectionists" who "believe we need to abandon these broken institutions and replace them with new, less corrupted ones or with nothing at all." Zuckerman's "third path" beyond elections and protests includes monitoring institutions from outside to holding them accountable; starting new institutions from scratch; and abandoning the idea of institutions altogether.

Such strategies may have impact. But they are not going to significantly affect the power relations of modern societies. The Wits students were hoping for something else. They wanted to change the world through their actual professions, in institutions as well as beyond them.

But why, many ask, is there reason to believe this is possible? As Aaron Schutz has observed, scholars like Gloria Ladson-Billings (especially in her marvelous book Dream-Keepers: Successful Teachers of African-American Children), have described teachers who are highly effective in motivating African Americans and other disadvantaged students by working with the unique strengths and backgrounds each child can bring to their learning. But they despair about changing the educational system.

At UCT, I outlined three resources which hold potential to crack what Max Weber called "the iron cage" of growing bureaucratization:

• New understandings of the ways technocracy has replaced relational cultures with informational cultures, brilliantly illuminated in Pope Francis' new climate encyclical, and new practices for reversing the process;
• Understandings of politics that focus on self-interests and power rather than ideology, growing from broad-based community organizing methods. There is growing evidence that these can be translated into professions and systems;
• The concept and practices of "free spaces," where people develop civic agency.

My talk summarized the argument, and my academia.edu site is reorganized to highlight these resources. They are not exhaustive but all are important. The book collection Democracy's Education is full of other examples.

I believe the discussion is just beginning.

Harry Boyte edits Democracy's Education: Public Work, Citizenship, and the Future of Colleges and Universities (Vanderbilt, 2015)