Framing Issues for Public Deliberation Notes

Dr. Day

EDUC 198 a/b

Framing Issues for Public Deliberation notes

Kettering Foundation

ABOUT THE KETTERING FOUNDATION

The Kettering Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan research organization rooted in the American tradition of cooperative research. Everything Kettering research relates to one central question: what does it take for democracy to work as it should? Or put another way: What does it take for citizens to shape their collective future?

National Issues Forums Institute

Deliberative learning is an approach to education that emphasizes dialogue, inquiry, and choice making. Deliberative learners explore complex topics in-depth, consider diverse perspectives on these topics, identify and work through tensions inherent to those views, and attempt to arrive at reasoned judgment. When used to support students' development as citizens, deliberative learning takes on a public dimension: students grapple with issues of public significance in order to arrive at a shared decision.

Public deliberation- deciding together what to do about an issue we face together

Weigh pros and cons together.

Answer is not technical- answer is of broad concern to the community

Diagnosis of the problem is in dispute

In order to make progress, different kinds of people will have to act

They are problems that turn on VALUES not just facts

No clear ‘right’ answer

“wicked problems”

moral and political questions

Examples: How do we reduce poverty? How can we make sure all children can learn well? What do we do about our energy problems? What should go on the Internet? How can we pay for healthcare? How should be reduce violence in the lives of children? How should we reduce national debt?

Renegotiate them all the time, every few years. Approach changes as contexts change.

Frame an issue we are naming an issue and framing an issue.

FIRST STEP

Naming an issue= what is the question we need to answer together? What words should we use to talk about it?

How we talk about an issue determines what we talk about. Most issues are not named in public terms--don’t reflect how ordinary people think about it.

Often framed in expert terms or inside jargon terms, or in competitive terms.

Poorly named issue= achievement gap. Not how most people think about education. Most people name the issue something like: How do we make sure everyone is learning enough?

The naming of an issue reflects people’s concerns about the issue not experts’ preferred solutions.

There will be a solution war. We want to weigh pros and cons of various options.

How do you name an issue?

Starts with research. Gather data. Understand BASICS of the issue and the important facts.

Start by identifying people’s concerns on your general topic and probing what they might do. TALK TO PEOPLE.

Ask people in the grocery store, friends, community organizations, local leaders, coffee houses.

Ask these questions:

1. WHEN you think about this issue, what bothers you personally?? What are your concerns?

DON’T ask how should we frame the issue or what do you think about this issue?

These problems turn on values, what people truly value deeply.

2. What concerns do you hear friends and family members talking about when it comes to this issue?

3. How do you think other people might feel about this issue? What would they say to these questions? How about people who are unlike yourself?

Gather in as many voices as possible. Can even imagine what some people might say. Talk to enough people to get a wide range.

Get together with core team and write it down results on big pieces of paper. Do we have everything? Are there any kinds of people we didn’t get to talk to? Are there any concerns that haven’t been voiced?

Then you will see ‘clusters’ of similar concerns begin to appear. Start putting these clusters together. Honesty/integrity etc. words may differ but idea will be the same

What is the deeply held principle or belief behind this concern?

What do you think was really bothering this person who said this?

Keep doing this and shoot for 3 or 4 clusters instead of 7 or 8.

Each might have up to 50 specific concerns in it.

To go from 8 down to 4 ask your self:

Are they truly different from one another?

Could any be combined?

What might bring them together?

Now for each cluster, make them come alive.

Write down one or two sentences that capture what this is about.

What is really behind all of these over concerns?

What does in imply about how this problem should be addressed?

Check back at the topic. What is the question that these concerns are all aiming at? It may be close to where you started when you were doing your initial research, it might be different.

Write down that question. That’s what most people want to talk about.

Internet example. 3 clusters of concerns.

That’s naming an issue.

NEXT STEP

FRAME an issue=what are the main options to address the problem? What actions could we take, and what are the drawbacks of those actions?

Once we have the main options that people cluster around we need to flush them out.

Each of the main clusters filled with tensions because the way we have named the issue so far centers on people’s core concerns and values, there will be tensions. These are the ‘wicked problems’ after all- if the solution were easy we would have done it.

Each solution will have downsides and drawbacks and we talk through them. Weigh them against each other. Talk about trade-offs. Which are you willing to let go of, which not?

Build a tool that makes these downsides clear so we can consider them.

Start with each concern cluster and a series of actions that would go along with that.

Someone who could do that action is key. Range of actors- individual people, community organizations, businesses, government and more.

IF that’s your concern, what would do you do address it? You want to generate a series of actions that are responsive to that solution. Those should have drawbacks. We need to ask ourselves, if we went with that solution what would we have to live with? These are consequences of doing the action. Drawbacks aren’t arguments against doing it they are the COSTS of implementing the solution or action.

Intrinsic drawback (“it’s too expensive etc.” not a good drawback because it’s extrinsic)

Lay it out in a grid

Example: What should we do about the national debt?

Options, actions and drawbacks for each option

Characteristics of an effective FRAMING

• The things people consider valuable are reflected in the options for action.
• Actions need to logically follow from values and people’s concerns.
• Tensions between advantages and disadvantages have to be clear.
• This process does not lend itself to selecting ‘all of the above’
• Consequences are described in terms of their effects on the things people hold dear, not just in practical terms like costs.
• Range of actors, including citizens and the work they must do together or collectively (not just as individuals)
• Recognizes government, businesses role etc.
• Recognizes unpopular points of view
• Each option is presented best foot forward. Negative consequences are described with equal fairness.
• The pros of one are not the cons of another.
• Disrupts old patterns and opens new conversations. Should not replicate the prevailing academic, professional or partisan framework.
• Start where people are. Reflects where citizens are thinking about an issue. It should start where people start. (That’s the naming segment)
• Often at the end of a deliberation people are stewing because they are more aware of the undesirable effects of the options they like most.