Here are the 28 resources from Great Handouts. Too many choices? Narrow your results
Showing 1 - 20 of 28?? ? Next Page >>
J. Abelson, P-G. Forest, J. Eyles, P. Smith, E. Martin, F-P Gauvin. Deliberations about Deliberation: Issues in the Design and Evaluation of Public Consultation Processes, McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Research Working Paper 01-04, June, 2001.
This PDF document presents a 5-page matrix of public participation and consultation methods, both deliberative and non-deliberative. Included are Citizens Juries, Citizens Panels, Planning Cells, Consensus Conferences, Deliberative Polling, focus groups, consensus building exercises, surveys, public hearings, open houses, Citizen Advisory Committees, community planning, visioning, and more.
This 2-page document was used as a handout for the workshop entitled "Collaborative Governance in Local Government: Choosing Practice Models and Assessing Experience" given by Terry Amsler, Lisa Blomgren Bingham, and Malka Kopell at the 2006 NCDD Conference. The handout offers suggestions for achieving better representation in public involvement and civic engagement efforts that were compiled by the Institute for Local Government?s Collaborative Governance Initiative.
The Brisbane Declaration drew on numerous definitions and aspirations for community engagement, including IAP2's core values and the Queensland Government's community engagement resources. A draft of the Declaration was reviewed and revised to reflect the feedback from the community of practitioners, academics, policy advisers, government and citizens who responded to a questionnaire. Importantly, there were also a number of deliberative sessions on the Declaration held during the 2005 International Conference on Engaging Communities. Feedback from these sessions was incorporated into the final version of the Declaration.
National League of Cities.
The NLC Democratic Governance Panel developed this one-page chart to explain the differences between traditional citizen involvement (politics as usual) and democratic governance. The chart addresses such questions as "Who is responsible for solving public problems?", "What are the criteria for ?good government??, and "How should governments recruit citizens?"
This chart, which compares dialogue, deliberation and debate in simple terms, is taken from materials for a workshop entitled ?Deliberation forums: a pathway for public participation.? The workshop was given by Zelma Bone, Judith Crockett and Sandra Hodge at the APEN (Australasia Pacific Extension Network) International Conference 2006 on Practice Change for Sustainable Communities in Victoria, Australia.
Creating Meaningful Dialogue at Arts Events: Getting beyond Q & A, testimonial, art critique, or soapbox oratory!
Excerpted from Civic Dialogue, Arts & Culture: Findings from Animating Democracy by Pam Korza, Barbara Schaffer Bacon, and Andrea Assaf. Washington, D.C.: Americans for the Arts, 2005.
This great 2-page handout was created for a workshop at NCDD's 2006 conference called "Inquiring Minds Want to Know: What Do the Arts Have to Do With Dialogue?" Presenters Leah Lamb, Ellen Schneider, and Pam Korza list challenges, offer strategies for effectively engaging audiences in civic dialogue at arts events, provide examples of how dialogue professionals can learn to incorporate art to support their dialogue goals, and more.
This resource from the Choices Program at Brown University's Watson Institute for International Studies provides a great introduction to deliberation. The resource, which is designed for use in high school classrooms but is useful for any group that is unfamiliar with deliberation, provides a jargon-free definition of deliberation, describes how deliberation is different from debate, explains why it is important to know how to deliberate, and lists guidelines and tips for deliberation.
The International Association for Public Participation.
This one-page chart shows how various forms of public participation?have different levels of public involvement.? It categorizes public participation by the level of public impact on the decision-making process, beginning with informing the public, moving on to consulting with the public (taking feedback and ideas into consideration), then involving the public throughout the decision-making process, followed by collaborating with the public?in the development of alternatives and the identification of a perferred solution, and culminating with empowering the public with decision-making power.? The chart lists a few techniques that fall under each category.
International Association for Public Participation.
This 9-page chart introduces nearly 50 "techniques to share information."? The techniques range from websites and newspaper inserts to future search conferences and citizen juries.?Includes brief descriptions, as well as bullet points summarizing things to think through, things that can go right, and things that can go wrong.
Prepared by Joe Goldman and Lars Hasselblad Torres., AmericaSpeaks.
This chart introduces 10 approaches to deliberative forms of citizen engagement that have evolved in the United States over the last 25 years. The approaches included are 21st Century Town Meeting, Deliberative Poll, Large-Scale Online Dialogue, Citizen Jury, Dynamic Planning Charrette, National Issues Forum, Constructive Conversations, Community-Wide Study Circles, ChoiceWork Dialogue, and online Small Group Dialogue. Includes distinguishing characteristics and notable examples of each method.
Chris Kelley. Kettering Foundation, 2002.
The Kettering Foundation long ago identified a disconnect between the public and politics. People in communities all over the country felt estranged from their elected representatives, from their public institutions, and most importantly, from each other. A significant portion of this disconnect focused on how issues in communities got named and framed. Kettering surmised, correctly, that if a public issue was named in such a way that the public could not identify with it, then the public would have a difficult time supporting it. However, if the public could identify a public problem together (naming) and then discuss choices on how to solve the particular problem (framing), then the likelihood of greater community action increased ten-fold.
Let's Talk America, 2004.
This "mini-manual" that gives an introduction to Let's Talk America, as well as the Process and Agreements. It's a great model of a simple, tiny handout that explains a dialogue process in a friendly, accessible way.
Martin Carcasson. Colorado State University, Center for Public Deliberation.
Carcasson, the director of the Center for Public Deliberation at Colorado State University, has created a series of two diagrams that depict the relationship between (1) Deliberation & Communication Studies and other areas of study (public administration, law, journalism, education, etc.) and (2) Deliberation & Collaborative Governance and other areas of study (communication, philosophy, urban planning, sociology, etc.).
Sandy Heierbacher and other members of the D&D community.
NCDD?s Engagement Streams Framework helps people decide which dialogue and deliberation method(s) are most appropriate for their circumstance. The framework is a series of two charts that categorize the D&D field into four streams based on intention or purpose (Exploration, Conflict Transformation, Decision Making, and Collaborative Action), and show which of the most well-known methods have proven themselves effective in which streams. The second chart also outlines 20 dialogue and deliberation methods, and includes information such as size of the group and how participants are selected.
Marie Ström. Institute for Democracy in South Africa, 2006.
This one-page chart outlines the different answers to questions such as "What is the definition of democracy?", "Who?s in control?", "Who initiates?", "What is the aim?", and "What is pattern of interaction between citizens and government?" when looked at through the lens of "public participation" versus the lens of "citizen agency."
With literally thousands of pages, NCDD?s website can be overwhelming to new visitors. This one-page "quick guide" is meant to help, and makes a great resource handout for those presenting workshops or informational sessions on dialogue and deliberation.
Facilitators of dialogic and deliberative processes often develop their own standard set of ground rules which they suggest groups adopt or modify to meet their needs. Here are some samples of ground rules from organizations which represent various streams of online and face-to-face D&D practice. Use this list to get new ideas for ground rules or to show a variety of sets of ground rules to facilitators you are training.
Prepared by Information Renaissance for the Deliberative Democracy Consortium.
This one-page resource was developed as part of a study in progress: National Research Council Panel on Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making, Workshop February 3-5, 2005.
Institute for Local Government.
This 2-page document was used as a handout for the workshop entitled "Collaborative Governance in Local Government: Choosing Practice Models and Assessing Experience" given by Terry Amsler, Lisa Blomgren Bingham, and Malka Kopell at the 2006 NCDD Conference. While most public involvement strategies offer positive results for all, some efforts are not as effective as sponsors and participants would like. Outlined in this two-page document are a few of the 'hot spots' where extra attention may mean the difference between success and failure.
Jonathan Kuttab. Conflict Resolution Center International Newsletter, January 1998, pp 25-26, 1998.
This article, written by a Palestinian attorney with many years of dialogue experience, describes some common problems with intergroup dialogue and suggests some basic solutions. Kuttab says at the end of the article, "I have written some harsh words about dialogue and its pitfalls; yet I am still a firm believer in it. Peace, justice and reconciliation can be advanced tremendously by an open dialogue between members of the oppressed group and those who are willing among the oppressor society."
Narrow your results by selecting one of the topics below: