Comments for DCCE Civic Thursday - Let's Keep Talking

Comment on February by Scott Phillips

Scott Phillips — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:02:30 +0000

The interest group effect on citizen contact with Congress

Thomas T. Holyoke tholyoke@csufresno.edu
California State University, USA

Abstract

To what extent is citizen political participation, such as electronic or personal contact with members of Congress, stimulated by membership in organized interest groups? I use data from a nationwide survey conducted by Zogby in 2007 to assess the extent to which Americans contact congressional offices, and whether membership in more activist-oriented groups, such as citizen groups, stimulates greater rates of contact than membership in professional associations or no group membership at all. I also examine whether this group ‘effect’ on participation breaks down by the method used, low-effort electronic contact (mail, email, web-based contact pages, on-line petitions) versus high-effort contact such as personal meetings with lawmakers. I find that the role played by interest groups in facilitating communication can be substantial. In the case of members from lower socio-economic backgrounds in particular, membership in a citizen group helps compensate for lack of knowledge and resources regarding how to contact Congress.

Comment on February by Anamika Goyal

Anamika Goyal — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:50:29 +0000

A very interesting and relevant TED talk:
In politics, it seems counterintuitive to engage in dialogue with violent groups,
with radicals and terrorists, and with the states that support them. But Jonas
Gahr Støre, the foreign minister of Norway, makes a compelling case for open
discussion, even when values diverge, in an attempt to build greater security for
all. Jonas Gahr Støre is the Norwegian Foreign Minister, charged with working
for Norway’s interests internationally.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/jonas_gahr_store_in_defense_of_dialogue.html

Comment on November by Ming Jiu Li

Ming Jiu Li — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 03:15:04 +0000

“Would the individuals who are exploring technological solutions to issues across the globe, benefit from training in community engagement and community development theories and practices? If so, when would they have time for workshops/ learning sessions?” – In my opinion, absolutely. If we want to truly create sustainable models of change owned by the local communities, instead of short-term projects that cannot be sustained following the departure of external aid, individuals involved in this field of work need to make time. Not just for workshops/learning sessions, but thinking critically about how to incorporate a general civic-mindedness in their daily work/studies.

I was on an EWB trip myself two summers ago, to Bolivia assessing the possibility of an irrigation project. It was incredibly frustrating for me, the emphasis of technology and surveying over actually connecting with the local community, and feeling unsupported whenever I bring up my concerns certainly did not help. As such, in response to your second question, inclusion of this ‘community engagement student’ (whatever that means) seems token to me – wouldn’t it be better if all students can work effectively with communities? If that’s not the case now, then maybe it’s time to go back to the drawing board and figure out how to restructure existing curricula.

Comment on November by Scott Phillips

Scott Phillips — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:01:05 +0000

An interesting Article to follow on from my comment.
Does user participation lead to sense of ownership for rural water systems? Evidence from Kenya
S Marks and J Davis
https://jennadavis.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Marks_Davis-%20participation%20and%20sense%20of%20ownership_June2011_v3.pdf

Scott

Comment on November by Scott Phillips

Scott Phillips — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:47:43 +0000

I really appreciated the discussion. There were a great number of good points which set me thinking about a number of issues, but one area in particular was of central importance to me.

I would like to know: Would the individuals who are exploring technological solutions to issues across the globe, benefit from training in community engagement and community development theories and practices? If so, when would they have time for workshops/ learning sessions?

Related to that, do you feel that inclusion of a community engagement student on the teams (EWB, DEID for example) would be useful to projects?

Comment on October by Jesse Huddleston

Jesse Huddleston — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:33:10 +0000

I’d like to comment on the initial question posed by DCCE, about my opinions on the appropriate mindset. At Civic Thursdays, I commented that it can be challenging to accept that there will be overlap among community organizations providing similar programs and services to people. For me, it is similarly challenging to negotiate a proper balance of responding to identified and perceived needs in the community [task-focused] and just building relationships and being engaged in the community [people-focused]. That being said, I think the appropriate mindset seeks to hold both values, of tasks/outcomes and of people/relationships, in high regard, disregarding neither.

I think that there is consensus that simply making things better is valuable. Being able to quantify the results [as Liz mentioned], the ways in which Duke has done something well not only looks great but is great, wherever it is. And though Duke hasn’t always done the right things, there are moments worth highlighting as successes. Related to this, I think, is the value of relationships. I have found that my time immersed in community engagement has been most substantive and meaningful when it was not solely about what got done or how much was achieved, but also about being with people, getting to really know them and be known over time, building rapport and trust.

Sure, there will be times when results really matter, and this should be recognized. However, I honor those who can see the value in simply knowing the stories of people in community, of just being with people. This perspective seeks to cultivate civic engagement experiences beyond “us here volunteering and serving them over there” towards more integrated and redeeming occasions, like “us being connected, us being together.” It may sound trite or utopian, but I’ve experienced moments where both of these values are fulfilled working in the Duke-Durham Neighborhood Partnership. And man, it’s great to see and feel; it’s really refreshing and undeniably real. I think that kind of mindset is an asset to civic engagement anywhere.

Jesse Huddleston– Senior Resident Community Engagement Fellow, Duke-Durham Neighborhood Partnership [Trinity 2010]

Comment on October by Anamika Goyal

Anamika Goyal — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:04:14 +0000

I think that in a lot of ways, putting together some sort of deliverable, whatever it might be, would force one to reflect on their experience – identify successes, challenges, etc. I’d say this reflection is crucial. It’s true that many would take the time to think about these things on their own, but some may not. What are the pros/cons of making this sort of thing a requirement?

Anamika Goyal, Administrative Fellow, DCCE | Duke Class of 2011

Comment on October by Elizabeth Linzer

Elizabeth Linzer — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:51:05 +0000

Great conversation and many thanks to the DCCE for hosting! I have a question that I left wanting to ask the group:
How important are RESULTS to student development through civic engagement? I’m referring to results as not just ‘community impact’, but moreso completed deliverables (a research paper, a series of focus groups, a new program or initiative adopted by the community partner, a final something…). Do students experience personal development solely through participating in “Civic Engagement” activity?
Liz Linzer – Program Manager, Hart Leadership Program’s Enterprising Leadership Initiative (Duke ’09)