Library of Congress Seeking a Civics Teacher-in-Residence!

Posted on March 8, 2019 by stevemasy

LOCTIR

From our friends at the Civic Mission of Schools comes this wonderful notice about a Library of Congress opportunity!

Calling All Civics Teachers!! The Library of Congress is seeking applications from current civics teachers for a Teacher-in-Residence position within its Learning and Innovation Office during the 2019-20 school year. The program description and application details for the position can be found at loc.gov/teachers/newsevents/teacher-in-residence/index.html. Applications are due on Monday, April 8, 2019.

This is a great opportunity to further your professional career AND make a difference on a national scale!!! We encourage you to check it out. You can find the call for applications here.

ILG TIERS Learning Lab Training Early Bird Now Available

Posted on March 8, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

If you work in local government and are looking to gain some more skills when engaging the public, then we recommend folks check out this great training from NCDD member org, the Institute for Local Government (ILG). ILG is offering their two-day TIERS Learning Lab training on Thursday, April 25th and Friday, April 26th in Danville, CA. This is a great opportunity for staff and elected officials working in local government to better engage and sustain their public engagement efforts, and early bird registration ends in two weeks, on March 22nd. You can read the announcement from ILG below and find the original version here.

TIERS Public Engagement Learning Lab – April 25 & 26 in Danville, CA

Upcoming Learning Lab & Registration
Danville, April 25 & 26, 2019
REGISTER HERE

Early Bird Registration ends March 22nd
Registration deadline is April 5th

For more information or to register contact Hanna Stelmakhovych at publicengagement@ca-ilg.org or call (916) 658-8221.

ILG’s TIERS Can Help Your Agency Take Your Public Engagement to the Next Level

Not getting the results you want from your public engagement efforts? Enroll in the Institute for Local Government’s (ILG) TIERS Public Engagement Learning Lab and receive customized coaching and learn a step-by-step framework to successfully plan and implement your next public engagement effort. This comprehensive training and coaching program is available to any city, county, special district and can apply to a variety of efforts ranging from housing and climate change to budgeting and public safety.

ILG will be hosting a TIERS℠Public Engagement Learning Lab on April 25-26, 2019 in Danville. Learn more about the TIERS Public Engagement Learning Lab, pricing and future training opportunities here: www.ca-ilg.org/tierslearninglab.

Learning Lab Overview
The TIERS Learning Lab is a comprehensive training and coaching program from ILG that provides local government teams of 2-5 individuals with hands-on instruction and coaching on the TIERS Framework. By participating in the TIERS Learning Lab, staff and electeds will learn how to utilize, customize and implement the TIERS tools and processes. The TIERS Learning Lab will help you build and manage successful public engagement in order to support local government work, stakeholder input and project success.

TIERS Learning Lab Components
The TIERS Learning Lab consists of training and support over a six month period for an agency team of up to five people. This six-month hands-on coaching opportunity includes:

A pretraining consultation with ILG to discuss your goals, plans and challenges; and to select your Learning Lab public engagement case
Immersive two-day Learning Lab: hands-on, participatory in-person training with expert coaches and peer learning
Post-training customized implementation coaching (up to 6 hours)
Monthly ’Open Lab’ for problem solving during the three months post training
Training workshop materials and meals
Scheduling and coordination of consulting calls for pre and post training

Register Now for April 2019 TIERS Public Engagement Learning Lab!

“The TIERS training was incredibly motivating for our team and we were able to immediately put what we learned about the TIERS process to work on our current projects. We left with best practices and a clear process we can follow”
– Mayor Gurrola, City of Arvin

You can find the original information of this training on ILG’s site at: www.ca-ilg.org/TIERSLearningLab.

a better approach to coalition politics

Posted on March 7, 2019 by Peter

Sometimes people view coalitions instrumentally and transactionally. You know what you believe, but unfortunately you don’t (yet) have enough support, or seats, or votes, or dollars to get what you want, so you must join with other people who either share roughly similar beliefs–close enough to settle for–or who will support your agenda in return for your help with theirs.

We see this approach most clearly in parliamentary systems, when parties come together to form majorities. The center-left party will form a government with the Greens if they need the Greens’ votes, but will drop them if they don’t. We also see it in US logrolling politics: Democrats from rural districts vote for HUD; urban Democrats vote for the Farm Bill. And we see it in social movements, when participants advocate for a “big tent” or invoke a “bird that flies with two wings”–clichés that usually mean: “Include me in your coalition or you won’t win.”

Some circumstances–such as parliamentary votes of confidence–require a transactional approach to putting together coalitions of 50% plus one. But it is possible to view a coalition in a different way: as a network of valuable relationships among people who trust and respect one another.

Brad DeLong, a self-proclaimed “neoliberal” and “[Robert] Rubin Democrat,” recently announced his support for a coalition led by people to his left. Speaking of his own faction within the Democratic Party, he wrote:

Over the past 25 years, we failed to attract Republican coalition partners, we failed to energize our own base, and we failed to produce enough large-scale obvious policy wins to cement the center into a durable governing coalition. We blame cynical Republican politicians. We blame corrupt and craven media bosses and princelings. We are right to blame them, but shared responsibility is not diminished responsibility. And so the baton rightly passes to our colleagues on our left. We are still here, but it is not our time to lead.

Note that DeLong is not renouncing his own beliefs or exiting public life in defeat. Instead, has has reached an all-things-considered judgment that people who disagree with him on some important matters should lead a coalition that he will support. It’s their time.

In a Vox interview, he adds:

while I would like to be part of a political coalition in the cat seat, able to call for bids from the left and the right about who wants to be part of the governing coalition to actually get things done, that’s simply not possible as of now.
We shouldn’t pretend that it is, or that it’s going to be. We need to find ways to improve left-wing initiatives, rather than demand that they start from our basic position and do minor tweaks to make them more acceptable to their underlying position.

DeLong wants to contribute, but he thinks the left should lead. His role is non-coercive persuasion: offering market-based suggestions that the left can accept or not. He doesn’t suggest that his support will be conditional on their agreement. He is in, but he wants to retain his voice. His explicit renunciation of a claim to lead should engender some trust from the left. It’s an example of the general principle that Danielle Allen defends in Talking to Strangers. Our task is to become “political friends” who demonstrate “reciprocal goodwill”; and to get there, often the first step is to make an explicit sacrifice.

In turn, if the left were to lead the Democratic Party, it would become the main source of energy and ideas. Progressives would earn the voluntary support of a broader spectrum. They would not view leftover neoliberals as enemies to be rooted out but as fellow members of the coalition who can be inspired and persuaded. They would take seriously their own capacity, opportunity, and moment to lead. They would see themselves as better leaders if people like Brad DeLong continued to follow them. They would value not only the votes of such moderates but their insights.

They would also care about the condition of the coalition. Is it sufficiently attractive to a broad range of people? Does it offer entry-points for newbies and youth while also honoring the folks who have been working hard for a long time? Is it nimble but also principled? Can it manage dissent? How does it handle disagreement? You can’t answer those questions well if you are always thinking about whether your own policy goals will prevail. You must also care about the coalition as a community.

I am not saying that the currently insurgent left is failing to act this way. So far, so good. I am just offering a way to conceptualize leadership that doesn’t reduce a coalition to a pure means for accomplishing the leaders’ goals. I’d argue that valuing the coalition is a path to wiser strategies and more influence.

Talks in Spring 2019

Posted on March 7, 2019 by etweber@gmail.com

I’m pleased to report on two exciting invitations I’ve had to speak in the spring of 2019. For one of them, the Ron Messerich Distinguished Lecture that I delivered in February, I spoke on “Correcting Political Correctness,” a piece from my book in progress titled A Culture of Justice. On Tuesday, February 26th, I gave the talk at Eastern Kentucky University. While there, I had the pleasure of meeting with students in the journalism program, who interviewed me for Eastern Progress, their television program. I’m quite grateful to Mike Austin for inviting me to deliver this lecture. The attendance was great and the questions and comments offered after my talk were really rich and engaging. Here is the video interview:

If you can’t see this video in your RSS reader or email, then click here.

The next trip I’m taking will be next week, when I’ll be heading to give three talks at Texas State University San Marcos. I’ll be talking at the local library about “Democracy and Public Philosophy,” from 4:30-6pm on Wednesday, March 13th. Then, on Thursday, March 14th, I’ll be talking about “Culture and Self Respect” from 2-3:00pm in the Alkek 250 Theater on campus. Friday morning, March 15th from 9-10am I’ll be talking about “Democracy and Leadership” in PS3301. More on that as it develops, but it is coming soon.

The post Talks in Spring 2019 first appeared on Eric Thomas Weber.

Engaging Everyday Individuals for Better Public Policy

Posted on March 7, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

A driving force behind much work in the D&D field is centered around the belief that individuals are the expert of their own experiences and should be the key consultants in shaping the policies that shape their own lives. The Jefferson Center – a NCDD sponsor org, shared an article on their blog this week, How can everyday citizens create better public policy? by Annie Pottorff, which offers tips on bringing in “everyday” individuals during policymaking. The article gives several key insights on why this is important and talks more about how the process of Citizen Juries can increase civic participation and more direct democratic practices. You can read the article below and find the original version on the Jefferson Center blog here.

How can everyday citizens create better public policy?

Each election, the United States Congress looks a little bit more like the country it represents. In 2018, we celebrated a record number of congressional firsts, including the youngest woman elected, first Muslim congresswomen, first Native American congresswomen, and many other ‘firsts’.

While representation is improving, there are still clear differences according to Pew: the share of women, people of color, and immigrants in the House and Senate lags behind the overall US population. Congress members are also typically highly educated and wealthier than the general public. These distinctions show a clear mismatch, and lead us to wonder: how can we better include diverse experiences, perspectives, and aspirations in decision-making?
Direct democracy approaches, including Citizens Juries, invite “everyday” people (like you, your neighbor, and your grandma) to participate. By using our incredibly different life experiences and personal expertise to shape public policy, we can create a more representative, transparent, and trusted democracy.

Turning to “Everyday” Experts

Average citizens have an incredible resource too often overlooked: their unique expertise. In the current Congress, 96% of House members and all senators have a bachelor’s degree or higher. But in 2017, only about a third (34%) of American adults 25 and older said they had completed a bachelor’s degree or more, according to Pew.

But education and degrees shouldn’t determine your contribution to democracy. Most of us have been shaped by our work, travel, volunteering, relationships, and more, in addition to traditional schooling. Within a Citizens Jury, you’ll find people of all education levels working together to create recommendations to a given challenge.

Participants have the rare opportunity to listen to one another, hear different perspectives, build off one another’s ideas, empathize, and establish common ground. This helps Jurors create recommendations that utilize one another’s expertise and experiences, and are more representative of the population as a whole.

Listening to the People Most Impacted

Last summer, we conducted a Citizens Jury in the Forest of Dean, United Kingdom. Two local hospitals, which were closely intertwined with the community, were set to close. The National Health Service wanted to hear from residents on where a new, centrally located hospital should be built.

Citizen input isn’t always clearly invited (or even welcomed) by representatives in similar situations. People may not be able to travel to their representative’s office, and if they do get there, their representatives might be booked or have other issues on the agenda. In the Forest of Dean, while the closure of the hospital was a sensitive topic for many, a Citizens Jury helped create a recommendation for the location new hospital that was actually trusted by the wider community.

As one participant put it, “People trust the outcome a lot more, they think there’s a fairer representation of views and that the people who are actually going to be using the hospital have a chance to give some insight into their needs which should be valuable feedback for the decision makers.”

Making Participation More Accessible

Getting informed on local, state, national, and global issues can take a lot of time that many people simply don’t have. Citizens Juries, meanwhile, pay people to participate and cover things such as childcare expenses, so participants can more easily take time to participate.

Juries also make participation easier for young people. In the United States, Senators have to be at least 30, and House Representatives must be over 25. And even though people younger than 25 will obviously be impacted by many of today’s issues, barriers such as moving often, work, and difficulty registering to vote all present big obstacles to civic participation. Citizens Juries typically invite participants 18 and older, providing much needed insight into these missing perspectives.

Free from Outside Influence

Instead of the policy issue at hand, politicians might be focused on winning the next election, gaining favorable public opinion, or keeping campaign funders happy.

But your average person isn’t usually worried about these issues. And if there’s ever extra pressure felt by Jury members from their peers, participants can remain anonymous. The experts that inform Jurors about the topic don’t advocate for a specific stance, but provide neutral background information for participants to reference. This sets the stage for more trusted policy, as Jurors made their decision based on high quality information and a transparent process.

Combining Direct & Representative Democracy

Wider citizen participation can complement representative democracies around the world: we’d more fully capture the range of citizen ideas and hear from underrepresented groups. Officials would have a much clearer picture of what the public thinks on complex issues, instead of just hearing from the loudest voices in the room.

Although Citizens Juries don’t always create immediate policy adoption, the recommendations guide legislation and community initiatives. These recommendations aren’t influenced by money or power, but represent the aspirations, interests, and needs of everyday people, creating a stronger democracy we can all believe in.

You can find the original version of this article on the Jefferson Center blog at https://jefferson-center.org/2019/03/how-can-everyday-citizens-create-better-public-policy/

The Birth of a Poop/Drug Cartel?

Posted on March 6, 2019 by David Bollier

I’ve always been amazed at the things and activities around which commons have been unexpectedly developed – noncommercial theater, humanitarian rescue maps, specialized scientific microscopes. Little did I suspect that I would encounter a commons based on....human excrement. Even more surprising is that this valiant little commons, dedicated to using the human biome to benefit everyone, may soon be enclosed by Big Pharma. Yes, there is big money in turning our shit into branded, proprietary product.

First, a little background (from an excellent NYT article on the topic). OpenBiome is a Cambridge, Massachusetts stool bank that provides people with bottles of a “mud-colored slurry” used in fecal transplants. In recent years, physicians have made the amazing discovery that transferring the microbiota of healthy donors into the guts of people with certain illnesses can rescue them from death’s door and cure them. OpenBiome assists in this process by collecting stool donations from the public, processing them in safe and reliable ways, and making them available to patients and doctors for F.M.T., or fecal microbiota transplantation.

Tens of thousands of people suffer from the bacterial infection Clostridiodes difficile, or C. diff, for example. Fecal transplants have proven to be effective in 80% of these patients. Some feel much better within hours. Working as a nonprofit, OpenBiome helps such people by producing between 900 and 1,000 fecal transplant treatments each month, for about $800 apiece.

But now many pharmaceutical companies see fecal transplants as the Next Big Thing: a new way to deliver their drugs to treat diabetes, cancer, obesity, autism ulcerative colitis, and Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases. As the Times put it, “Human feces, it turns out, are a potential gold mine, for both medical researchers and drug makers.”

Based on the huge success of fecal transplants for C. diff, drug companies would love to extend and control this drug-delivery system for other diseases. Naturally, this would mean pharmaceutical companies destroying the fecal transplant commons and creating a new market order that they could dominate.

Ah, but how to achieve this goal? Answer: Through the strategic use of government regulation.

If the Food and Drug Administration can be persuaded to classify fecal transplants as a “drug” (rather than as organs, tissues, or blood, or some entirely new category), then FDA regulations would greatly favor drug companies and markets as the way to provide fecal transplants. The US Government would in effect create a regulated market for feces, to the exclusion of other potentially reliable, safe, and affordable options, such as commons.

Naturally, policymakers are not likely to regard a fecal commons of the sort facilitated by OpenBiome as the preferred option. Pharmaceutical companies don’t like that kind of competition, and Big Pharma calls the shots in Washington. In the name of rigorous health and safety, federal regulation is likely to be invoked by industry as the most effective way to invent a new market for itself. This would eclipse OpenBiome and preempt the idea of a viable fecal commons.

The drug industry would surely find this option attractive because it is currently having trouble getting patients to participate in clinical trials for fecal transplants – a necessary step for getting FDA approval. Sidelining OpenBiome could only help. The FDA has already stepped up its oversight of OpenBiome, which has caused its prices for fecal treatments to double to $1,600. It doesn’t take much imagination to see how prices would soar much higher -- and OpenBiome would suffer -- if Big Pharma truly got its claws into this market, selling our own excrement back to us as branded product.

In short, we may be about to witness an historic moment -- the market enclosure of human excrement as a medical treatment. Or as one gastroenterologist put it, the rise of the “poop drug cartel."

Such enclosures are a familiar pattern of capitalism. To meet an important need, commoners demonstrate the feasibility of an innovation through their hard work and mutual aid. Then for-profit businesses swoop in to monetize, privatize, and marketize everything. Commoners lose control of what is theirs, pay more for what they used to get for free or inexpensively, and suffer under the extractive terms of a market order, with the blessings of industry-friendly regulation.

Another path is feasible, but will the FDA make it illegal?

will the Democrats keep talking to their young voters?

Posted on March 6, 2019 by Peter

According to CIRCLE’s latest analysis of its own survey data, young people who were contacted by candidates and parties in the 2018 election cycle were much more likely to vote. Some of this is probably selection-bias: campaigns try to contact the most likely voters. But there is also accumulated evidence that contact is effective: it boosts turnout, even for low-propensity voters.

Democrats contacted substantially more youth than Republicans did in 2018. Demographics influenced who received the most contact:

These differences do not track disparities in political power and SES. On the contrary, young Black women generally face compounded disadvantages in America, yet 60% were contacted in 2018 (presumably by Democrats, for the most part). They top the list. Meanwhile, young white men were ten points less likely to be contacted.

What does this mean? It all depends on the nature of the contact and the follow-up. If Democratic candidates were simply trying to mobilize a reliable segment of their base by sending one-way messages before the election, and if African American women don’t hear from politicians again until October 2020, then the graph demonstrates political opportunism.

On the other hand, if the contact involved some listening and learning by campaigns, and if elected officials now recognize their debt to Black women and continue to engage them between elections, then the graph offers grounds for optimism.

I wouldn’t bet on the more optimistic interpretation, but it’s something to work for.

It’s also worth focusing on young Latino men, who really are left behind. I think this is partly because they are (for the most part) less involved in conventional organizations where people can be found and reached. In social science jargon, they have less “social capital” than the other categories of young Americans.

Finally, I don’t think it’s good news that’s young white men were contacted at low rates. From a partisan Democratic perspective, it could be a reasonably good sign. Democrats, who did most of the outreach to youth in 2018, directed their resources to people of color for a mix of tactical and principled reasons. But we also know that many young white men live in “civic deserts,” where they are generally disconnected from civic and political institutions. That can reinforce combustible forms of alienation. If the low contact rate reflects low levels of membership and belonging, it is evidence of a problem.

Weekly Online D&D Roundup – March Confab Announced!

Posted on March 6, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

As part of this week’s roundup of online D&D events, we’re excited to include the announcement we shared yesterday for the upcoming NCDD March Confab call on Wednesday, March 13th in collaboration with Net Impact, National Issues Forums Institute, and the National Conversation Project. This free 1-hour webinar will be from 3-4 pm Eastern, 12-1 pm Pacific, and will be an opportunity to learn more about Net Impact’s youth engagement work, the new national debt issue guide they created with NIFI, information on a paid opportunity to host forums, and more about the upcoming National Week of Conversation. Register ASAP to save your spot on this dynamic and informational call here. We encourage you to check out the webinars below from the following NCDD member orgs Living Room Conversations, Bridge Alliance, and IAP2.

Do you have a webinar or other event coming up that you’d like to share with the NCDD network? Please let us know in the comments section below or by emailing me at keiva[at]ncdd[dot]org, because we’d love to add it to the list!

Online Roundup: NCDD March Confab, Living Room Conversations, IAP2, Bridge Alliance

Living Room Conversations webinar – Police-community Relations

Thursday, March 7th
2 pm Pacific, 5 pm Eastern

Join us for a free online (using Zoom) Living Room Conversation on the topic of Police-community Relations. Please see the conversation guide for this topic. Some of the questions explored include: What has been your personal response to instances of police-citizen shootings, if any? What do you think is contributing to the police-citizen shootings right now? What role, if any, do you see racism playing in our current attention to law enforcement?

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/online-living-room-conversation-men-victims-perpetrators-and-allies/

Living Room Conversations webinar – Mental Health

Saturday, March 9th
11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern

Join us for a free online (using Zoom) Living Room Conversation on the topic of Mental Health. Please see the conversation guide for this topic. Some of the questions explored include: What experiences in your life, your work or your family inform your thinking about mental health? Is mental health an important issue in your community, and if so, why? In your experience, how are mental health issues affecting young people? (If you are a young person, how do mental health issues affect you and your peers?)

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/online-living-room-conversation-mental-health-3/

IAP2 Monthly Webinar – Visual Engagement

Tuesday, March 12th
11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern

Encouraging members of the public to take part in an engagement process is challenging. How do you provide them with the information they need to make an informed decision without bogging them down with data, policy and jargon? For that matter, how do you attract their attention in the first place?

The Visual Engagement Awards — a new Core Values Award presented by IAP2 Canada in conjunction with the Dazzling Notice Awards — rewards public entities which have made that extra effort to get people’s attention and make sure their many voices are heard. In 2018, the first awards went to the Region of Waterloo, Ontario, for its Biosolids Strategy, and the District of Squamish, BC, for its Official Community Plan Update. Watch the Waterloo video here. Watch the Squamish video here.

REGISTER: www.iap2canada.ca/event-3093147

NCDD March Confab with Net Impact, NIFI, and National Conversation Project

Confab bubble image

Wednesday, March 13th
12 pm Pacific, 3 pm Eastern

This free one-hour webinar will be a great opportunity for anyone passionate about cultivating the next generation of leaders, those interested in learning how to apply for the microgrant to host forums, more about the new national debt issue guide, and/or hosting a conversation during the upcoming National Week of Conversation. You won’t want to miss out on this discussion – register today!

REGISTER: http://ncdd.org/29225

Living Room Conversations Training (free): The Nuts & Bolts of Living Room Conversations

Thursday, March 14th
12 pm Pacific, 3 pm Eastern

Join us for 60 minutes online to learn about Living Room Conversations. We’ll cover what a Living Room Conversation is, why we have them, and everything you need to know to get started hosting and/or participating in Living Room Conversations. This training is not required for participating in our conversations – we simply offer it for people who want to learn more about the Living Room Conversations practice.

Space is limited to 12 people so that we can offer a more interactive experience. Please only RSVP if you are 100% certain that you can attend. This training will take place using Zoom videoconferencing. A link to join the conversation will be sent to participants by Wednesday 10am (PT) / 1pm (ET).

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/training-free-the-nuts-bolts-of-living-room-conversations-3/

Living Room Conversations webinar – American Culture: Melting pot or salad bowl or something else?

Saturday, March 16th
11:30 am Pacific, 2:30 pm Eastern

Join us for a free online (using Zoom) Living Room Conversation on the topic of American Culture: Melting pot or salad bowl or something else?. Please see the conversation guide for this topic. Some of the questions explored include: What is your cultural heritage? Have you experienced cultures other than your own? What did you appreciate? What made you uncomfortable? What value do you see in having a single, shared American culture? What would that culture look like?

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/online-living-room-conversation-american-culture-melting-pot-or-salad-bowl-or-something-else/

Bridge Alliance webinar – Peer Learning Session: Get to Know the 116th Congress with the Congressional Management Foundation *this webinar is for Bridge Alliance members only – learn more here

Monday, March 18th
10 am Pacific, 1 pm Eastern

A new Congress means new committee and subcommittee chairs, new alliances, and significant changes in the political terrain on Capitol Hill. With the shift in power, and term limits for committee chairs in the House and Senate, an advocate who may have been represented by an anonymous back-bencher last year might now be the conduit to the most important legislator for your cause. This webinar will offering a snapshot of the 116^th Congress, offering participants a window into how to build relationships with lawmakers. The presentation will be conducted by Bradford Fitch, President and CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF).

RSVP: www.bridgealliancefund.us/cmf_peer_learning_session

approaching deadlines for summer opportunities at Tisch College

Posted on March 5, 2019 by Peter

March 31 is the application deadline for three opportunities:

1. The Summer Institute of Civic Studies

The Summer Institute of Civic Studies is an intensive, selective, interdisciplinary seminar that brings together faculty, advanced graduate students, and practitioners from many countries and diverse fields of study. Topics for the readings and discussions include:

How do social systems look from the perspective of people who want to change them?
How can people form and maintain functional groups that improve the world?
How can people reason together about what is right to do?
What practices and institutional structures promote these kinds of citizenship?
How should empirical evidence, ethics, and strategy relate?

The Summer Institute was founded and co-taught from 2009-17 by Peter Levine, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs at Tisch College, and Karol So?tan, Associate Professor in the Department of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland. This year it will be led by Peter Levine alone. You can read more about the motivation for the Institute in the Civic Studies Framing Statement.

The 11th annual Summer Institute will start with the Frontiers of Democracy Conference (see below) on June 20-22 and then continue as a seminar until June 28 at 5pm.

Daily sessions take place on the Tufts campus in Medford, Massachusetts. Tuition for the Institute is free, but participants are responsible for their own housing and transportation. One option is a Tufts University dormitory room, which can be rented for $69/night (single room) or $85/night (double room).

The application consists of a resume, a cover letter about your interests, and an electronic copy of your graduate transcript (if applicable). Please send those materials to Peter Levine, peter.levine@tufts.edu no later than March 31, 2019

2. Proposals for the Frontiers of Democracy Conference

Frontiers of Democracy is an annual conference hosted by the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life at Tufts University since 2009. It convenes practitioners and researchers who work on strengthening democracy in the US and around the world. The format combines short talks with interactive sessions for smaller groups. This year, it will take place from June 20 (evening) until June 22 (midday) at the downtown Boston campus of Tufts University

In 2019, participants in the Summer Institute of Civic Studies, the APSA Institute for Civically Engaged Research (see below), people involved with the Deliberative Democracy Consortium and Cities of Service, and 40 new fellows of the Lead for America program will attend Frontiers, along with others who register. You can register to hold a spot now. Proposals are also being accepted for individual talks, panels, and other kinds of sessions, such as moderated discussions, workshops, planning meetings, etc. Please submit proposals here by March 31 for best consideration.

3. The first annual American Political Science Association Institute for Civically Engaged Research (ICER)

The APSA Institute for Civically Engaged Research will begin in summer 2019. ICER is intended for advanced graduate students in political science and for political scientists at any stage of their careers who wish to shift to using civically engaged research. (It is not meant for scholars who are already experienced in that approach.)

Approximately twenty participants will meet each day from June 17-20 for intensive discussions. Participants are then expected to attend the Frontiers of Democracy conference from the evening of June 20 until noon on June 22 in downtown Boston.

Tisch College Academic Dean Peter Levine is the organizer. Other confirmed speakers and visitors include: Valeria Sinclair Chapman (Purdue), Archon Fung (Harvard), Taeku Lee (Berkeley), Robert Lieberman (Johns Hopkins), Jamila Michener (Cornell), Amy Cabrera Rasmussen (Cal State-Long Beach), Pearl Robinson (Tufts), and Rogers Smith (Penn).

Thanks to support from the APSA, participation in the Institute and the conference is free, and scholarships are available to defray costs of travel, food, and housing in dormitories on the Tufts campus. Applicants are expected to seek financial support from their home institution, but admission to the Institute for Civically Engaged Research will not be affected by financial need.

To apply, please complete this form.

In addition, applications are due by March 15 for …

4. The European Summer Institute of Civic Studies

Herrsching, near Munich, Germany, from July 14th to July 27th 2019

The fifth annual European Summer Institute of Civic Studies will take place in Herrsching, near Munich, Germany, from July 14th to July 27th 2019. This Institute is open to applicants from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Germany, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Poland, the Russian Federation, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. It is funded by the German Government’s Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), which covers travel, food, and lodging costs. The organizers are Prof. Karol Soltan (University of Maryland) and Prof. Tetyana Kloubert (Catholic University Eichstätt-Ingolstadt); Peter Levine will join for 2-3 days.To apply, send a letter of interest, a curriculum vitae, and an academic transcript (if applicable) to Prof. Kloubert at Tetyana.Kloubert@ku.de by March 15, 2019 for best consideration.

Announcing a Blockbuster March Confab!

Posted on March 5, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

We are pleased to announce an exciting March Confab call happening next week in coordination with Net Impact, National Issues Forums Institute, and the National Conversation Project! On the call, we will learn more about Net Impact’s youth engagement work, their collaboration with NIFI on a new National Debt issue guide, a paid opportunity to host forums with the guide, and how this all plays into the upcoming National Week of Conversation (NWOC). Join us for this dynamic call on Wednesday, March 13th from 3-4 pm Eastern, 12-1 pm Pacific.

This free one-hour webinar will be a great opportunity for anyone passionate about cultivating the next generation of leaders, those interested in learning how to apply for the microgrant, and/or hosting a conversation during NWOC. You won’t want to miss out on this discussion – register today!

On this call, we will be joined by Net Impact’s Program Manager Christy Stanker who will share about Net Impact’s work to nurture youth into emerging leaders, their stand-out program Up to Us, and how to apply for the microgrant to host forums on the national debt.

The issue guide, A Nation in Debt: How Can We Pay the Bills? was published by the National Issues Forums Institute (NIFI) in partnership with Up to Us. Up to Us, an initiative of Net Impact and the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, is a rapidly growing, nonpartisan movement of young people who recognize that when it comes to securing their economic and fiscal future, they have no better advocates than themselves.

Amid high-profile debates over jobs and the economy, social mobility, healthcare, and tax reform, Up to Us is the only nationwide, campus-based campaign focused on building a sustainable economic and fiscal future for America’s next generation. Net Impact’s programs help new leaders broaden their thinking, build their networks, and scale their impact beyond just individual actions.

Net Impact is excited to offer a microgrant of $150 to moderators* who host a forum using the newly updated A Nation in Debt issue guide and NIFI’s Chief Administrative Officer Darla Minnich will join the call to share details on the offer. *Moderators must be affiliated with an accredited US-based college or university to be considered eligible for the microgrant.

This microgrant opportunity also coincides with the upcoming National Week of Conversation, happening April 5-13. Our co-hosts at the National Conversation Project, Jaclyn Inglis, Partnerships Director, and Pearce Godwin, Executive Director, will share more about this upcoming initiative to get people engaged in conversations and how you can get involved. We hope many of you will consider combining the microgrant opportunity and contributing to the National Week of Conversation!

Make sure you register today to secure your spot!

About Our Confab Co-Hosts

Net Impact is a nonprofit that inspires and equips emerging leaders to build a more just and sustainable world. Net Impact’s programs help new leaders broaden their thinking, build their networks, and scale their impact beyond just individual actions.

National Issues Forums Institute (NIFI), is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that serves to promote public deliberation about difficult public issues. Its activities include publishing the issue guides and other materials used by local forum groups, encouraging collaboration among forum sponsors, and sharing information about current activities in the network.

National Conversation Project is an overarching, collaborative platform that aggregates, aligns, and amplifies the efforts of more than 175 partners to mainstream conversations in which we #ListenFirst to understand. NCP promotes National Weeks of Conversation, #ListenFirst Fridays, and any conversation inviting people of all stripes to revitalize America together.

About NCDD’s Confab Calls

NCDD’s Confab Calls are opportunities for members (and potential members) of NCDD to talk with and hear from innovators in our field about the work they’re doing and to connect with fellow members around shared interests. Membership in NCDD is encouraged but not required for participation. Confabs are free and open to all. Register today if you’d like to join us!