Category Archives: Uncategorized

an innovative conference format

At least week’s Frontiers of Democracy II conference, we tried a new format. I don’t think it was perfect, and I welcome feedback, but it does seem promising. According to preliminary evaluations from the conference, 61.8% said the new format was ideal (and zero percent didn’t like it at all), so it obviously had some fans.

We asked three people to speak at the beginning of each session. Each one gave a talk, strictly limited to 10 minutes. We asked them to rehearse and told them we would tape their talks for rebroadcast later. These were not dry, academic presentations, but they varied wonderfully in style as well as content. Some were personal and emotional; others more dispassionate.

They were very loosely clustered, so that the talks that began each session would likely have common resonances and themes; but the sessions did not have headings or official topics. We did not take any time to introduce the speakers or allow any Q&A at the end. All other participants sat at tables of eight and talked as soon as the featured speakers were done. The speakers were encouraged to stay for the whole conference and join table discussions. Tables were given suggested discussion topics (broad ones, like “Is there a global civic awakening?”). At each new session, everyone was asked to sit at a new table.

The idea was to use the prepared talks to inspire conversation and to inject into the discussion some carefully honed arguments, experiences, or ideas–but to take the focus off the featured speakers once their 10 minutes were up. We wanted to avoid bilateral exchanges between speakers and members of the “audience.”

Some people who have completed evaluations so far suggest that we should organize the talks more, so that each session has a clear focus. I’m open to that but I liked the relatively serendipitous connections that emerged in the loosely defined sessions. For example, no one could have predicted that Martha McCoy (Everyday Democracy) and Eric Liu (Guiding Lights Network) would both emphasize organic metaphors in talking about citizenship.

In the very first panel, three speakers who used radically different styles pointed to three totally different kinds of engagement. Kristen Cambell (National Conference on Citizenship) talked about belonging and joining as sources of economic resilience in US communities. Jamila Raqib (Albert Einstein Institution) laid out a strategy for peacefully overturning governments. And Amii Omara Otunnu (UNESCO Human Rights Chair UConn) advocated loving people around the world. If we could somehow combine social capital and community participation with revolutionary disruptions and global agape, we would really have something.

The conference format is available for imitation and improvement: just call it the “Frontiers model.”

Public Work and Democratic Professionalism

I am spending six hours of every day co-teaching the Summer Institute of Civic Studies (syllabus here). The course covers roughly 18 separate topics, and I will blog about half of those. Today, I focus my blog notes on Public Work and Democratic Professionalism. The readings are:

  • Harry C. Boyte, “Constructive Politics as Public Work: Organizing the Literature,” Political Theory, 2011
    Albert Dzur, Democratic Professionalism, pp. 35-51, 105-134, 173-206

Continue reading

Habermas and critical theory (a primer)

I am co-teaching the Summer Institute of Civic Studies and using this blog to share my notes for roughly half of the 18 topics we cover. Yesterday morning’s discussion focused on Jürgen Habermas. The readings for that module were:

Continue reading

basic theories of civic development

I am spending these two weeks co-teaching the Summer Institute of Civic Studies. We will cover 18 separate topics, and I will blog about roughly half of them.

Yesterday afternoon’s discussion focused on children and youth, civic education, and human development, more generally. We had assigned the following readings on those topics:

  • David Elkind, “Erik Erikson’s Eight Ages of Man.” (NY Times article from 1970)
  • Karl Mannheim, “The Problem of Generations” (excerpt)
  • Joel Westheimer and Joseph E. Kahne, “Educating the ‘Good Citizen’: Political Choices and Pedagogical Goals”
  • Hugh McIntosh and James Youniss, “Toward a Political Theory of Political Socialization of Youth.”

Why does youth and education require attention in a course that is about how citizens can improve the world? I would say we need to give special attention to youth because:

  1. What it means to be a “good citizen” depends on how old you are—the answer is different if you are 8 or 80.
  2. People don’t automatically learn to be good citizens; that has to be taught, which raises difficult issues. (Who has a right to decide that they should learn? How should the state relate to parents if they have different goals?)
  3. A fundamental fact about any society is that people are always entering (without memories, skills, and experience), and also exiting when they have reached the maximum of human experience. So designing a good society that engages its people in governance must take into account the life cycle.

In 1999, the great political scientist Sir Bernard Crick lamented that “there is no political Piaget.” He meant that there was no major theorist who provided a framework for understanding children’s development into citizens. Such a theory would help institutions to educate children civically, which, in turn, would strengthen democracy.

Although we don’t have a “political Piaget,” several major thinkers offer valuable theoretical frameworks. Before we turn to a few of those thinkers, I’d like to introduce a distinction that is often used when interpreting data on youth engagement:

  • An historical effect is the consequence of experiencing an event, regardless of your age at the time. For example, we are all experiencing the 2012 presidential campaign right now.
  • An age effect (or life cycle effect) is the result of being at a certain point in one’s life. For example, people who are eight years old at any given moment in history are less interested in sex than people who are 21 at the same moment.
  • A cohort effect (or generation effect) is the lasting consequence of going through an event when one was young. For example, people who experienced World War II have differed from other generations all their lives.

When we observe that only 24% of eligible young people voted in 2o10, we can ask whether that is an historical effect, an age effect, or a cohort effect. The answer will make a lot of difference to how we respond.

For our purposes today, we are not interested in historical effects. For age effects, a classical theorist is the Freudian psychologist Erik Erikson (1902-1994). Generational effects were invented and explored by the sociologist Karl Mannheim (1893-1947).

Continue reading

the Summer Institute of Civic Studies

For the next two weeks, I will be spending six hours of every day co-teaching the Summer Institute of Civic Studies (syllabus here). We will cover roughly 18 separate topics, and I will blog about just a few of those.

Near the beginning of the first session, I always read this quote:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

  • Who recognizes that quote?
  • Who wrote it?
  • Do you have it printed out over your laser printer?

Was Margaret Mead right?

  • Yes, to inspire people to work together
  • Yes, to think about the scale of human action where the minuscule powers of an individual obtain enough leverage to count but are not lost entirely in the mass. Civil society is the world of “we,” but not such a huge or abstract “we” that “I” no longer matters. It is politics at the human scale.
  • But no to suggest that small group action is always successful or always good. It often fails. Sometimes it is bad. Mussolini led a small group of thoughtful and committed citizens.

A cynic might counter: “Never doubt the capacity of large groups of ignorant and selfish people to squelch good ideas and make the world worse.”

We need to ask …

  1. When can “a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens” change the world? Also, how can we get people like that?
  2. How can they be most effective?
  3. What are good means and good ends for these groups?

Citizens need a combination of facts, strategies, and values relevant to their own discretionary action. This combination is rare because …

Continue reading