Stories from Ben Franklin Circles in North Carolina

Posted on May 11, 2018 by Keiva Hummel

As you may remember, NCDD teamed up with member org, Ben Franklin Circles and we announced last month that we were going to be sharing stories from Circles. In the article, Tiyo Hallock shares his experience running Circles in North Carolina, and particularly how the value of Silence has played into his life and work. You can read the post below and find the original post on BFC’s site here.

Circle Spotlight: Ty from Asheville, NC

Name: Tiyo Hallock
Hometown: Asheville, NC
Sponsoring Organization: Creative Facilitators
Date Launched: October 2017

What attracted you to Ben Franklin Circles?
I’ve done a lot of work with various facilitation methods. I was attracted to how the structure allows the participants to explore principles first and foremost, and then sets the groundwork for action in the community. I’ve been a part of many groups. I know you need to work on the underlying platform of trust and then everything else falls into place. Ben Franklin Circles gives you the tools and the people supporting it are awesome.

How did you recruit members for your Circle? Any lessons learned?
I started to put together some flyers and get the word out there. Then I realized that people I already knew would really appreciate this. I basically reverted my strategy to posting on my Facebook page and doing some one-on-one asks. Every single person I showed the video to and talked about the event with came. I’ve tried to invite someone to every meeting to keep it fresh and to try and keep the numbers up, as some folks have not been able to make every meeting. We have a shorter meeting than most because I am catering to busy folks and I feel like a smaller group size is actually much better for a shorter event. Long story short, we probably don’t need to invite anyone else now that our group is perfect.

How has hosting a Ben Franklin Circle impacted you?
I’ve hosted a lot of these things, but I had a profound experience with the principle of Silence. I was really able to bring my full self. I am an introvert and I felt that, when people had permission to be silent and the silence that we practiced was welcomed with open arms, we had more trust and flow in our group.

Which virtue means the most to you personally and why?
I don’t want to answer! Each one has been meaningful—and I am only on number three! However, I was profoundly moved by Silence and the community ideas that came out of that session, so there you go.

What is the last commitment you made to yourself? How’s it going?
I’m committed to having Silence as a principle, as an exercise when I work with other groups where we are growing trust. I’ve also committed to growing Ben Franklin Circles. I’m spreading the word to try to get other folks to start Circles.

You can find the original version of this post on Ben Franklin Circles’ site at https://benfranklincircles.org/circle-spotlight/circle-spotlight-ty-from-asheville-nc.

ENGAGING IDEAS – 05/11/2018

Posted on May 11, 2018 by Public Agenda Newsfeed

ambition: pro or con?

Posted on May 10, 2018 by Peter

How should we think about ambition? Here are four possibilities:

It’s basically a sin. According to the OED, “ambicioun” already appears in 1449 on a list of “vicis” (vices), right between “pride,” and “vein glorie.” It’s the selfish desire to extract credit, regardless of the merit of one’s act. If it motivates good action, then the action is good, but not the motive. It would have been better if the actor had been moved by something else. In that sense, it’s like greed, which can spur people to make valuable products but still discredits the actor.
It’s a natural motivation that human beings just have, to various degrees. There’s not much point moralizing about it. What we should do is figure out how to channel it to good ends. For instance, in a well-functioning republic, people who have political ambitions must persuade the public, and that channels their ambitions to public ends. The analogy is not to “greed” (which is, by definition, a vice) but to ordinary financial motivations. It’s neither good nor bad that people want money; the question is whether the economy rewards good products and services.
It’s not an appropriate category for ethical assessment because it’s really two or more different things. There is the ambition to make the world a better place and be recognized for it, which is honorable. And there’s the ambition just to be famous or powerful, which is pernicious. Much as we can distinguish agape from lust as two of the many forms of love, so we should divide ambition into varieties and then assess them separately.
It’s a good thing. John Adams observed, “Wherever men, women, or children are to be found, whether they be old or young, rich or poor, high or low . . . ignorant or learned, every individual is seen to be strongly actuated by a desire to be seen, heard, talked of, approved and respected by the people about him and within his knowledge.” Hannah Arendt quotes this passage approvingly because, in general, she admires human beings who step into the public sphere to be “seen, heard, talked of, approved and respected.” That is not merely a motivation to do a good job; it is part-and-parcel of being a public figure, which is a worthy way of life. By exercising ambition, you become a persona of history, as in Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton:

I may not live to see our glory!
But I will gladly join the fight!
And when our children tell our story…
They’ll tell the story of tonight.

I leave it to anyone who’s interested to choose among these four options or to come up with other ones. I would, however, make a couple of observations.

First, I am generally skeptical about the kind of move made in #3 above, the casuistic division of widely-used concepts into subcategories. The problem is that very often there’s something important left over when you try to make the split. For example, love is not necessarily good. Many cases of love are harmful. But the fact that love is often good (or even wonderful) necessarily colors even the bad cases, and vice-verse. Instead of trying to divide love into sharply distinct forms–romantic love, brotherly love, lust, self-love, etc. and judging each one as a category–it’s better to say that love can always be good or bad, or a bit of both. I delved deeply into this obscure issue in my book on Dante, because Dante envisions the afterworld as a system for categorizing types of love–all the way from Satan to God–yet he also sees the echoes of the good love in the bad.

Second, an anti-democratic prejudice may underlie some of the criticisms of ambition. The word comes from the Latin ambitio, which originally just meant “going around.” According to Lewis and Short’s Latin Dictionary (courtesy of Tufts’ Project Perseus), the word came to mean “the going about of candidates for office in Rome, and the soliciting of individual citizens for their vote, a canvassing, suing for office (by just and lawful means).” From there, it gained the sense of “a striving for one’s favor or good-will; an excessive desire to please, flattery, adulation.”

Ambitio translated the Greek word eritheia, which (per Thayer’s Greek Lexicon) was “used of those who electioneer for office, courting popular applause by trickery and low arts,” Aristotle, Politics 5, 3. From there, it came into the Greek New Testament to mean, “courting distinction, a desire to put oneself forward, a partisan and factious spirit which does not disdain low arts; partisanship, factiousness”: James 3:14, 16. No wonder Thomas Nashe (1593) defined the English word ambition as “any puft vp greedy humour of honour or preferment.”

This etymology reflects cynicism about the act of “going around” if you’re looking for votes. But we want people to do that. In ancient times, the main critics of seeking popular support were elitists who preferred rule by aristocrats. Almost by definition, an aristocrat is one who does not have to strive for favor or good-will, because he is just “best.” Neither Aristotle nor the New Testament makes a positive case for democratic politics.

The question is whether this etymology is rooted in a problematic elitism. In that case, we should at least be open to Arendt’s positive view.

Boys & Girls Club/LFI Civic Action Project Showcase A Great Success!

Posted on May 10, 2018 by stevemasy

CAP11

Last night here at UCF, the Florida Joint Center for Citizenship at the Lou Frey Institute, in collaboration with the Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida After School Zone and the Constitutional Rights Foundation, presented the 1st ever Civic Action Project showcase! It was, simply put, an amazing time that featured 4 groups of students talking with community members about issues that were important to them. Check out the agenda below:
CAP agenda

The presentations were powerful examples of how young people can engage with an issue and work to make a change in their communities, however one wishes to define that term ‘community’.

Each group of participants selected an issue and collaborated on researching, responding to, and presenting their issue, including proposed solutions. Check out the issues below. And keep in mind that all work around the issue was done BY THE STUDENTS. Facilitators played only a support role.

During our time together, students walked the audience through their topic. This included why they chose the topic, how the topic has impacted their lives and communities, a proposed solution or solutions, and research relating to both the topic and the solution. They followed their presentation with a question and answer session that demonstrated their grasp of the issue and their ability to engage in civil conversations. Hearing young middle school students talking about the ‘validity of the survey’s sample size’ was just amazing. Check out some images below of students engaging with the audience and responding to questions.

Students from Robinswood Middle School respond to a student question concerning their issue of cyberbullying

Students from Meadow Woods Middle School argue for equity in elective course offerings in Orange County Middle Schools

Students from Wolf Lake Middle School take questions from the audience, arguing that their research shows a potential positive impact from adding a homeroom, and that their survey shows a positive response!

Students from Hunter’s Creek powerfully and passionately argue for improved access to and information on Orange County and OCPS parks for disabled children.

One of the most important purposes of this event, and of the Constitutional Rights Foundation’s Civic Action Project is to help students understand that they CAN have an impact and that they CAN make a difference if only they can make their voice heard. How wonderful it was then that Associate Superintendent for School Choice Services, Dr. Christopher Bernier, attended the showcase and made a concerted effort to meet with each group of young and passionate people. Indeed, Dr. Bernier, who has some jurisdiction over at least a couple of the issues students raised at this event, promised the kids at Meadow Woods that he would look into the concerns that they raised. Below, he sits with students and discusses their issue. And he spent time doing the same with every group. We are grateful for his attendance and participation, because it ensured that the students felt their voices were being heard!

It was, wonderfully, a successful first year of this pilot program. We are eager to continue the conversation and the work with our friends at the Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida, and hopefully others, and see how we can make this even better and offer other students the opportunity to engage in the practice of civil conversations and lived civics.

One last thing. This effort could not have happened without the incredible and dedicated work of FJCC’s Action Civics Coordinator, Mr. Chris Spinale, and the Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Florida’s Director of Middle School Programs, Mr. Kelvin Curry. Their dedication to this program and to the kids is incredible. So too do we owe a debt of thanks to the facilitators from each school: Mr. Tony Johnson and Ms. Valerie Hobbs (Hunter’s Creek), Ms. Saceta Valentine and Mr. Lonnie Smith (Robinswood), Ms. Terri Rawls, Ms. Chandrieka Palmer and Mr. Marcus Palmer (Wolf Lake), and Mr. Sean B. Sookdeo and Mr. Bernard D. Mitchell, Jr. (Meadow Woods). And of course the young people themselves, who did all of the work and engaged in the practice of civic life with such passion and dedication.

Ideology and Education

Posted on May 10, 2018 by Joshua Miller

Thomas Edsall has a good review of some recent research on polarization in the New York Times today:

The strength of a voter’s identity as a Democrat or Republican drives political engagement more than personal gain. Better educated voters more readily form “identity centric” political commitments to their party of choice, which goes a long way toward explaining the strength of liberal convictions among more affluent Democrats.

This is a striking chart:

ILG TIERS Learning Lab Training in San Diego, June 5 & 6

Posted on May 10, 2018 by Keiva Hummel

For those in the NCDD network working in local government and looking to improve public engagement skills, check out this great training coming up from NCDD member org Institute for Local Government (ILG). ILG is offering their two-day TIERS Learning Lab training on Friday, June 5 and Saturday, June 6 in San Diego, 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 May 15th. You can read the announcement from ILG below or find the original version here.

TIERS Public Engagement Learning Lab – June 5th & 6th, San Diego CA

Upcoming Learning Labs & Registration
San Diego, June 5-6, 2018 (Early Bird Registration ends May 15)
TIERS Public Engagement Learning Lab San Diego 2018

For registration please email publicengagement@ca-ilg.org or call (916) 658-8221.

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

Learning Lab Tuition Options
Option 1: Team Pricing

3-5 Participants
Two-day immersive off-site workshop (w/meals)
Customized project/region consulting
Pre and post training planning and evaluation
TIERS materials, templates & online tools
3 months of lab hours for monthly check-ins and coaching

Early Bird Discount Rate* $3,500 per team

Option 2: Individual Pricing

1-2 Participants
Two-day immersive off-site workshop (w/meals)
Customized project/region consulting
Pre and post training planning and evaluation
TIERS materials, templates & online tools
3 months of lab hours for monthly check-ins and coaching

Early Bird Discount Rate* $995 per person

*Price increases by 20% after May 15 for TIERS Learning Lab in San Diego on June 5-6.

“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.

Where Americans See Eye to Eye on Health Care

Posted on May 10, 2018 by Public Agenda Newsfeed

article about the Civic Studies major

Posted on May 9, 2018 by Peter

“Civic Studies Major Begins in the Fall: The new program will combine academics and civic engagement,” by Helene Ragovin in Tufts Now:

Since the university’s founding, civic engagement and rigorous academics have been “deeply embedded in Tufts’ DNA,” says Tisch College’s Peter Levine. Now a new civic studies major in the School of Arts and Sciences continues that tradition.

The faculty of Arts and Sciences in March approved the program, which will begin in the fall 2018 semester. It will combine the experiential component of community internships—a hallmark of the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life—and the scholarship from the emerging discipline of civic studies. It is believed to be the first program of its kind at a university.

“While a lot of colleges have programs and encourage being civically engaged, there are no majors that are as academically centered as this one,” said Levine, the associate dean for research and Lincoln Filene Professor of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Tisch College. “With civic studies as a major piece of what we offer, it furthers our goal of making Tufts the best in the world for civic education.”

Levine, along with Erin Kelly, associate professor and chair of philosophy, and Ioannis Evrigenis, professor of political science, will teach the introductory course for the subject. Levine said Kelly was a key player in establishing the new program and shepherding it through the approval process. Levine and Kelly will be the program directors.

Civic studies is an interdisciplinary program, and students will be required to take it as a double-major, along with another discipline from Arts and Sciences. The major will require eleven courses, including the introductory course, an internship, and a capstone seminar. The other courses must be distributed among the following themes: thinking about justice; social conflict and violence; civic action and social movements; and civic skills. The courses draw from departments such as political science, history, sociology, psychology, and community health, among others.

The establishment of civic studies as an intellectual movement dates back about a decade, when several scholars issued a framing statement that has since become the blueprint for the discipline, Levine said. This liberal arts perspective marries well with the goals of Tisch College, he said.

“For nearly twenty years, Tisch College has been deeply engaged in trying to educate all Tufts students for civic life. Now our ambitions have become more and more academic, and we are increasingly supporting classroom learning. Civic studies is the next step,” he added. “Civic studies focuses on critical reflection, ethical thinking, and action for social change within and between societies,” he said.

The new major fills the space left by the former peace and justice studies major in A&S, Levine said. There will be an optional peace and justice track within civic studies, and peace and justice will also still be available as an A&S minor. Peace and justice students were consulted as the new major was being developed, Levine said, as were faculty in A&S departments that could be seen as “complementary or competitive” with civic studies. “We didn’t want to have a new major that would compete with something we already have,” Levine said. Other department chairs supported the proposal, he said.

Become a Sponsor of NCDD 2018 Today!

Posted on May 9, 2018 by Courtney Breese

NCDD is working hard on putting together our 2018 National Conference on Dialogue & Deliberation this November 2-4 in Denver. It’s shaping up to be a phenomenal conference, and like all of our events, NCDD 2018 will be a great opportunity to gain recognition while supporting the field by becoming a conference sponsor!

Looking to heighten the profile of your organization and work in the field? Being a sponsor is a great way to do it! NCDD conferences regularly bring together over 400 of the most active, thoughtful, and influential people in public engagement and group process work across the U.S. and Canada (plus practitioners from around the world), and being a sponsor can help your organization can reach them all.

Being an All-Star Sponsor ($10,000+), Collaborator ($5,000+), Co-Sponsor ($3,000), Partner ($2,000), or Supporter ($1,000) will earn you name recognition with potential clients, provide months of PR, and build respect and good will for your organization every time we proudly acknowledge your support as we promote the conference. Plus you’ll be providing the crucial support that NCDD relies on to make our national conferences so spectacular, including making it possible for us to offer more scholarships to the amazing young people and other deserving folks in our field. You can learn more about the details in our sponsorship document.

The earlier you commit to being an NCDD 2018 sponsor, the more exposure you earn as we begin to roll out our sponsor logos on our website. But the benefits go way beyond that – just look at all the perks you get for being a sponsor!

This year, we are also offering some additional opportunities to sponsor, including sponsoring our Friday Showcase Reception, and purchasing ads in our conference guidebook. All of these options are outlined in our sponsorship doc, and if you have other ideas, we’re happy to discuss them!

By supporting an NCDD conference, our sponsors are demonstrating leadership in D&D, showing commitment to public engagement and innovative community problem solving, and making a name for themselves among the established leaders and emerging leaders in our rapidly growing field. We expect to have between 400 and 450 attendees at NCDD 2018, and all of them will hear about our sponsors’ work!

When you sign on as a sponsor or partner of NCDD 2018, you’ll be joining an amazing group of peers you can be proud to associate with. To give you an idea, check out the list of 2016 sponsors or the spread of our sponsors and partners for our 2014 national conference:

Interested in joining their ranks and sponsoring the 2018 National Conference on Dialogue & Deliberation? We encourage you to consider investing in yourself, in NCDD, and in the field by becoming a sponsor today! We would deeply appreciate your support – plus you get so many benefits.

Learn more about sponsor benefits and requirements here, or send an email to sandy@ncdd.org to let us know you are interested in supporting this important convening through sponsorship. And thank you for considering supporting the conference in this critical way!

Nominations Due for $10K Leadership in Democracy Award

Posted on May 8, 2018 by Keiva Hummel

In case you missed it, NCDD member org Everyday Democracy, recently announced they are accepting nominations for the second annual Paul and Joyce Aicher Leadership in Democracy award! The $10K award will be granted to those 16 and older who embody the values of Paul and Joyce Aicher. Nominations are due June 15th, so make sure you get yours in ASAP! We encourage you to learn more about the award criteria and how to submit a nomination in the announcement below and on the Everyday Democracy site here.

Nominations for the Paul and Joyce Aicher Leadership in Democracy Award Now Open for 2018

EvDem Logo We are pleased to announce the second annual Paul and Joyce Aicher Leadership in Democracy Award. This $10,000 award will be given to an individual and/or organization that demonstrates the values on which Everyday Democracy was founded – voice, connection, racial equity, and community change.

Nominations are due June 15, 2018.

For more than 25 years, Everyday Democracy has worked in communities across the country to foster a strong and vibrant democracy – one that is characterized by strong relationships across divides, leadership development, lifting up the voices of all people, and celebrating racial equity.

Paul and Joyce Aicher’s generosity and creative genius have had a profound impact on individuals and organizations in every part of this country. Their passion and diligent effort inspired the dialogue guides, organizing and facilitating training, and community coaching that Everyday Democracy is so well known for delivering.

Through this award, we will recognize the work of individuals and/or organizations across the U.S. for outstanding achievement in creating opportunities for people to talk to and listen to each other, work together for equitable communities, and help create a democracy that works for everyone.

Who is eligible for the award?
Individuals 16 years of age and older, coalitions, and organizations conducting projects in the U.S. are eligible to be nominated. Organizations do not have to be a registered 501(c)3 to qualify. Current Everyday Democracy employees and board members are excluded from being nominated.

Award criteria
The award will honor work that embodies Paul and Joyce Aicher’s values, such as the following:

Creating welcoming opportunities for meaningful civic participation for all people
Actively including people in civic life who have often been marginalized, and providing ways for them to develop their leadership capacities
Building the capacity of existing community leaders to include others in community life
Practicing the art of talking to each other and listening to each other
Taking action that is grounded in crossing divides, and aimed at meaningful transformation in people, institutions, community culture, and governance
Creating opportunities for empowered voice that is truly heard
Addressing racial inequities through dialogue and collective action
Showing the power of bridging all kinds of divides
Making dialogue a regular part of how a community works and, ultimately, of how our democracy works

Nomination process
Anyone may nominate any person or organization that meets the criteria for this award. You will need to provide contact information for yourself and your nominee, a short summary of their work, and a 500-1,000 word essay describing why you think they should receive the award. Send this completed nomination form to fnichols@everyday-democracy.org and cc the nominee. The nomination form is due June 15, 2018.

Download the nomination form.

Once Everyday Democracy receives a nomination, we will confirm the nomination was received and ask the nominee to submit references and supplemental information by July 16, 2018. Submissions will be evaluated by a panel put together by Everyday Democracy.

Once a final decision is made, the winner and others will be notified.

A brief history of Paul and Joyce Aicher

Paul J. Aicher’s motto, “Don’t just stand there, do something,” marked all that he did. Before founding the Study Circles Resource Center (now called Everyday Democracy) in 1989, he was a model for civic engagement. Shortly after graduating from Penn State, he participated in a discussion course which helped him find his voice in civic life and sparked his lifelong interest in helping others find their own. He saw a direct connection between his early experiences as a participant and a facilitator and his later vision for embedding these kinds of opportunities into American political life and culture.

Throughout his life, he spent his free time volunteering. Early in their marriage, he and his wife Joyce got involved with a refugee resettlement project in Illinois; Paul then served as president of the North Shore Human Relations Council. Back in Pennsylvania in the mid-1960s, he started the World Affairs Council of Berks County and led his neighbors in discussions of the “Great Decisions” guides published by the Foreign Policy Association. Through his long-time work and friendship with Homer Jack, an American Unitarian Universalist clergyman and social activist, Paul developed a passion for racial justice and international peace, both of which would inspire his later social action.

In the 1970s, he devoted his energies to launching his company Technical Materials and raising four children with Joyce. But he always returned to activism. In the early 1980s, after moving to Pomfret, Connecticut, Paul joined the local anti-nuclear freeze movement. In 1982, he formed the Topsfield Foundation, which was renamed The Paul J. Aicher Foundation after Paul’s passing in 2002. It began with making grants to advance a number of causes: affordable housing; educating and engaging the public on international security issues; and networking grass-roots peace and justice groups across the U.S. As it became an operating foundation, it focused all of its efforts on its current mission – to strengthen deliberative democracy and improve the quality of life in the United States. In the past twenty-five years, it has been best known through the work of its primary project, Everyday Democracy, which supports communities across the U.S. in implementing Paul’s vision of public dialogue that enables everyone to have a voice and be heard.

Joyce shared Paul’s commitment to civic engagement, community activism, and social justice. With her quiet strength and humor, she often worked behind the scenes to make the work of the Foundation possible. She also strengthened the local community through her numerous volunteer efforts. She and Paul shared a love of nature, books, and the arts and were self-effacing advocates of democratic values. Joyce passed away in 2016.