Difference between revisions of "National Issues Forum"
From Deliberative Democracy Institiute Wiki
(→Evaluating) |
(→NIF Process (Idit Manosevich version)) |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{en|[[User:WinSysop|Tal Yaron]] 15:45, 11 July 2014 (IDT)}} | ||
[[National Issues Forum]] or NIF, is a method for deliberative democracy in the USA. | [[National Issues Forum]] or NIF, is a method for deliberative democracy in the USA. | ||
| + | ==NIF Process (Idit Manosevich version)== | ||
| + | [[File:National issues forum process.jpg|750px|center]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''1)''' NIF is designed for large masses [[FtF|face-to-face]] [[deliberation]], therfore it is hard to create large diversity of [[option|options]]. To overcome this obstacle, experts are preparing 2-4 options before the start of the deliberation process. The NIF manual does not describe how the deliberation of the experts is done. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''2)''' Participants receive the booklet that the experts prepared and. they may be curious (question mark) about the meeting, and may read it, in order to prepare themselves for the event. I am not sure how many red the booklet and prepare themselves. From what I have seen, most don't read it. Participants that read the booklet may enlarge their [[SON]] on the subject. In this phase, a survy may be taken to check the current [[select|preferences]] of the participants. This survey will be compared to a survey that will be taken at the end of the deliberation and it will be used to measure the effect of the deliberation on the participants. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''3)''' After initial introduction that explain the importance of the subject in hand, a short movie introduce the subject in bit-sound fashion. The movie, if done properly, puzzles the participants and elevate their [[curiosity]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''4)''' This curiosity creates motivation for listening to the experts which introduce the different [[option|options]] to the audience. If the experts explain the subject and the options clearly, the [[SON]] increase and the [[option|options]] will be more clear to most participants. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''5)''' After the introduction, the participants go to predestined groups. The distribution is set to increase heterogeneity. In the way to the group meeting, people tend to naturally gather in small groups of 2-4 members, and try to discuss and understand the options and the subject more clearly. I think it is not an intended outcome, yet it help increase the [[SON]]. This mini-break, also help participants to recover from [[self control|ego Deplition]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''6)''' The deliberation will start in groups of about 10 members. The facilitator will ask the group members to explore the subject, and the different options. She will ask for the participant to [[story telling|tell stories]] they heard or witnessed relating the subject of deliberation. The discussion will be spontaneous, as to generate a more flowing and priming-drive discussion, which will help participants to converge their ideas. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''7)''' The facilitator will then ask the participants to discuss the [[value|values]] of each [[option]] and decide if it is good or bad. Through a primed discussion, participants are getting in to more converged ideas about the different options. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''8)''' At the end of deliberation the participants will be asked to [[select]] one of the options. The voting will help to see the attitude of the participants toward the options, and also, when compared to the survey on step 2, to establish the influence of the deliberation. | ||
==experts knowledge== | ==experts knowledge== | ||
| − | In NIF, | + | In NIF, experts knowledge is introduced (and framed ) by a book which is prepared by the comity or other agency. The book describe 3-4 options to solve an issue<ref>Gastil j. and Levine P., 2002, The deliberative Democracy Hand Book: Strategies foe effective civic engagement in the 21st century, p.43</ref> |
At the begging, a short movie that explain the issue is introduced<ref>ibid, p.45</ref> | At the begging, a short movie that explain the issue is introduced<ref>ibid, p.45</ref> | ||
| Line 18: | Line 37: | ||
People are encouraged to tell a their story in the issue, to get people engage the issue ([[story telling]]). | People are encouraged to tell a their story in the issue, to get people engage the issue ([[story telling]]). | ||
==Evaluating== | ==Evaluating== | ||
| − | Modorators encourage participants to consider each approach fully and fairly, to illustrate each [[option|approach]] with [[story telling|personal stories]] and experiences, and to consider the related [[value|costs]] and [[ | + | Modorators encourage participants to consider each approach fully and fairly, to illustrate each [[option|approach]] with [[story telling|personal stories]] and experiences, and to consider the related [[value|costs]] and [[consequence|consequences]] of each approach. |
==Selection of Common Solution== | ==Selection of Common Solution== | ||
Latest revision as of 06:57, 11 July 2014
 This page was writen by a non-English speeking writer. Please help us improve the quality of the paper.Tal Yaron 15:45, 11 July 2014 (IDT) |
National Issues Forum or NIF, is a method for deliberative democracy in the USA.
Contents
NIF Process (Idit Manosevich version)
1) NIF is designed for large masses face-to-face deliberation, therfore it is hard to create large diversity of options. To overcome this obstacle, experts are preparing 2-4 options before the start of the deliberation process. The NIF manual does not describe how the deliberation of the experts is done.
2) Participants receive the booklet that the experts prepared and. they may be curious (question mark) about the meeting, and may read it, in order to prepare themselves for the event. I am not sure how many red the booklet and prepare themselves. From what I have seen, most don't read it. Participants that read the booklet may enlarge their SON on the subject. In this phase, a survy may be taken to check the current preferences of the participants. This survey will be compared to a survey that will be taken at the end of the deliberation and it will be used to measure the effect of the deliberation on the participants.
3) After initial introduction that explain the importance of the subject in hand, a short movie introduce the subject in bit-sound fashion. The movie, if done properly, puzzles the participants and elevate their curiosity.
4) This curiosity creates motivation for listening to the experts which introduce the different options to the audience. If the experts explain the subject and the options clearly, the SON increase and the options will be more clear to most participants.
5) After the introduction, the participants go to predestined groups. The distribution is set to increase heterogeneity. In the way to the group meeting, people tend to naturally gather in small groups of 2-4 members, and try to discuss and understand the options and the subject more clearly. I think it is not an intended outcome, yet it help increase the SON. This mini-break, also help participants to recover from ego Deplition.
6) The deliberation will start in groups of about 10 members. The facilitator will ask the group members to explore the subject, and the different options. She will ask for the participant to tell stories they heard or witnessed relating the subject of deliberation. The discussion will be spontaneous, as to generate a more flowing and priming-drive discussion, which will help participants to converge their ideas.
7) The facilitator will then ask the participants to discuss the values of each option and decide if it is good or bad. Through a primed discussion, participants are getting in to more converged ideas about the different options.
8) At the end of deliberation the participants will be asked to select one of the options. The voting will help to see the attitude of the participants toward the options, and also, when compared to the survey on step 2, to establish the influence of the deliberation.
experts knowledge
In NIF, experts knowledge is introduced (and framed ) by a book which is prepared by the comity or other agency. The book describe 3-4 options to solve an issue[1]
At the begging, a short movie that explain the issue is introduced[2]
Psychological Settings
facilitators charge participants to listen with respect; to consider all perspectives, including those that different from their own; and to seek common ground.
Participation
They encourage everybody to participate.
modorators encourage people to explain even unpopular epproches.
Learning
People are encouraged to tell a their story in the issue, to get people engage the issue (story telling).
Evaluating
Modorators encourage participants to consider each approach fully and fairly, to illustrate each approach with personal stories and experiences, and to consider the related costs and consequences of each approach.
Selection of Common Solution
At the end, after several hours, participants are asked to describe what is the common ground. what is the real issue, what is unacceptable, and which points remain un solved. they strive to articulate a common story, as a group and to find a common path. if there is a devision, then the decision is recorded.
understanding
the facilitator is accompanied by a recorder, who write the outcome on a white board.