@Stake: A Role-Playing Card Game

The Engagement Lab at Emerson College created @Stake, a role-playing card game used to foster decision-making, empathy and collaboration. The players take various roles and create questions based on real life issues to deliberate on during the game. All participants pitch their ideas under a time limit and one of the players, “The Decider” will choose who has the best idea and award points.

More about the game@stake

Development of @Stake:

Planning issues often involve conflicting interests coupled with deep resentments and community divides. Building a new highway, for example, is seldom only a question of the highway’s design, but the destiny of the land, the community, and individual residents.

We were amazed at the success of @Stake in driving productive conversation at our UNDP workshop, and took it back to the Lab for further development. Since then, it’s been used at the Frontiers of Democracy Conference, The Jewish Federation, youth ambassador programs for inner city planning institutions in Boston, and the United Nations in New York. Numerous expansions and customization packs have made the game robust enough to aid in processes of all types nationally and across the world.

Since its inception, @Stake has become one of our best tools for proving to others that games can be productive civic tools.

How to play @Stake:

What is it about? Before the game takes place, the play group must brainstorm topics for the game. The topics selected should be important questions for whatever real world process matters most to the players and their organization (ex. “How can we get young people more involved in local issues?”).

The Decider Once the question for each round has been established, one player becomes the first “Decider,” the player who will pick from the other players’ pitches and determine which is best. It’s up to them to keep time, promote fair play, and make prompt decisions in awarding points.

Role Cards All other players are assigned roles such as Mayor, Activist, or Student. Each role card features a short bio and three agenda goals that the players try to include in their pitches for bonus points.

The Pitch Players hear the question for the round, and are then given one minute to devise an idea. Pitching occurs in two phases. Each player has one minute to give their initial pitch to the Decider, and then there is a short discussion period during which players may ask questions of one another and try to achieve compromises to attach their agenda items to others’ plans.

Decider At the end of the round, the Decider must pick a winning pitch. That winning player earns points, then every player earns bonus points based on their agenda items. The new decider is the player that won the previous round.

**When playing @Stake, please tweet or use the hashtag #AtStakeGame to share your gameplay moments.

About The Engagement Lab
The Engagement Lab is an applied research lab at Emerson College focusing on the development and study of games, technology, and new media to enhance civic life. The Lab works directly with its partner communities to design and facilitate civic engagement processes, augment stakeholder deliberation, and broaden the diversity of participants in local decision-making. Along with the Salzburg Academy on Media and Global Change, the Engagement Lab serves as the hub of a global network of engagement and new media organizations.

Follow on Twitter: @EngageLab

Resource Link: http://elab.emerson.edu/games/@stake/

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

Medicare and Medicaid (NIFI Issue Guide)

The National Issues Forums Institute published this 16-page Issue Guide, Medicare and Medicaid, in 2015. This guide is to help facilitate deliberation around the health-care choices.

From the guide…

NIFI_medicareNearly everybody will, at some point, get sick and need the help of health-care professionals. Finding the resources to cover these public programs is an ever-increasing challenge at a time when our national debt is at an all-time high. Ultimately, all Americans—policymakers as well as citizens—will have to face painful decisions about reducing the cost. This may mean fewer choices in health care for the tens of millions of people enrolled in these programs. The choices are difficult; the stakes, enormous.

The guide presents three options for deliberation:

Option One: “Do What It Takes to Maintain Our Commitment”
Keeping the programs solvent may mean higher taxes for workers and companies, or raising the age of eligibility for Medicare. It could mean asking Medicaid patients to share the cost of their coverage. We need to do what is necessary to continue the commitment even if that costs everyone more. But, raising taxes to pay for both programs may cost them the broad-based support they now enjoy. Making people wait longer to collect Medicare or forcing the poor to pay part of their health care may cause people to delay getting help, resulting in higher costs later on.

Option Two: “Reduce Health-Care Costs Throughout the System”
It is critical to put Medicare and Medicaid on a better financial footing. We need to pay for fewer lab tests people get and reduce money spent on end-of-life care. The U.S. government should negotiate for lower drug costs as other countries do. But, fewer tests may mean more people will die from undiagnosed illnesses. Less end-of-life intervention may mean that more people will die sooner than they would otherwise need to. And lowering the profits of drug companies will mean less money for research into better drugs that benefit everyone.

Option Three: “Get Serious about Prevention”
One reason Medicare and Medicaid are headed for a crisis is because so many Americans have unhealthy lifestyles that cause them to develop preventable illnesses like diabetes and heart disease. We should stop expecting others to pay for the consequences of our bad choices. Government incentives should reward those who weigh less, eat right, and exercise more. But, an emphasis on prevention and requiring that people adopt healthier lifestyles would invite unfair scrutiny of their behavior and would increase government intrusion into people’s lives.

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/medicare-and-medicaid

Minding Our Future: Investing in Healthy Infants and Toddlers (DMC Issue Guide)

Minding Our Future: Investing in Healthy Infants and Toddlers is an issue guide created by the David Mathews Center for Civic Life for our Alabama Issues Forums 2014 – 2015 series. The issue guide provides a brief overview on the importance of early childhood development, outlininDMC_MindingFutureg three approaches towards investing in healthy infants and toddlers across the state of Alabama. The David Mathews Center—a non-profit, non-partisan organization—does not advocate a particular solution to this issue, but rather seeks to provide a framework for Alabamians to thoughtfully examine multiple approaches, weigh costs and consequences, and work through tensions and tradeoffs among different courses of action.

The issue guide’s introductory essay, authored by Dr. Ellen Abell, Associate Professor and Cooperative Extension Specialist at Auburn University, highlights the importance of healthy infant and toddler development:

“Research tells us that the structure of babies’ brains is built in the first three years. During this time, the brain creates 700 neural connections each second, a rate faster than at any other time of life. These simple, beginning connections develop into stronger, more complex connections if babies are exposed to a variety of experiences appropriate for their stages of development… [E]arly adverse experiences lead to poorer learning outcomes, reduced immune system function, and a decreased ability to manage basic levels of stress… Differences in early childhood experiences contribute greatly to the growing gaps in children’s learning and achievement.”

The issue guide outlines three possible approaches to addressing the issue:

Approach One: “Develop Capable and Caring Parents, Guardians, and Caregivers”
During their first three years of life, children are completely dependent on parents, guardians, and caregivers. We must ensure that infants and toddlers receive the support that they need during these important years. Although programs and services aimed at helping children and improving community are important, we need to focus additional time and energy on strengthening the capabilities of the individuals who are responsible for raising and caring for young children… We also must prepare future parents and guardians for their upcoming responsibilities.

Approach Two: “Create Healthy and Thriving Communities”
Communities directly impact infants and toddlers. If we want to “mind our future,” then we must work to foster safe and healthy communities that support young children and their families. Parents and guardians may want to provide children with everything that they need, but unsupportive neighborhoods and workplaces that increase stress may reduce their abilities to do so. We must create additional family resource centers, encourage workplace policies that embrace families, and organize community events that focus on young children and parents.

Approach Three: “Provide Access to Comprehensive High Quality Services for All Children”
If we want to provide children with a strong foundation during their first three years of life, then we must offer wide access to necessary support services. Alabamians must make genuine commitments to invest in education, healthcare, and nutrition for all infants and toddlers; otherwise, growing children may face challenges that will impact them for the rest of their lives. Parents, guardians, caregivers, and community groups cannot provide everything that children need during their first three years – some services and support must be provided by institutions and agencies. Also, access to and use of existing services may be limited due to lack of awareness and understanding.

More About DMC Issue Guides
David Mathews Center issue guides are named and framed by Alabamians for Alabama Issues Forums (AIF) during a biennial “Citizens’ Congress” and follow-up workshops. Alabama Issues Forums is a David Mathews Center signature program designed to bring Alabamians together to deliberate and take community action on an issue of public concern. Digital copies of all AIF issue guides, and accompanying post-forum questionnaires, are available for free download at http://mathewscenter.org/resources/

For further information about the Mathews Center, Alabama Issues Forums, or this publication, please visit http://mathewscenter.org/

Resource Link: http://mathewscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Minding-Our-Future-singlepages.pdf

This resource was submitted by Cristin Foster, the Executive Director at David Mathews Center for Civic Life, via the Add-a-Resource form.