Tiny House
More About The National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation • Join Now!
Community News

Posts with the Tag “ncdd2004”

Reflective Panel

NCDD has run “Reflective Panels” at most of our national conferences. The Reflective Panel is the closest we come to a “keynote speech” at NCDD conferences, enabling conference participants to hear from figureheads in our field without enduring long speeches with no dialogic quality to them. Unlike traditional “talking head” panel presentations, conversation in this space flows among the panelists without long monologues.  The format is designed to build collective intelligence while honoring and modeling the spirit and power of dialogue. (continue)

Report on the 2004 National Conference on Dialogue Deliberation

In October 2004, over 300 people came together at Regis University in Denver, Colorado for the second National Conference on Dialogue & Deliberation. The main purpose of the gathering was to encourage conference attendees and planners, together, to continue developing this important, growing field of practice. Networking, experiencing different methods, sharing learnings, hearing from leaders in the field, exploring key issues facing the field - all of these are field-building activities, and all were given a place at the 2004 NCDD Conference. (continue)

Results of Needs Assessment for 2004 National Conference on Dialogue & Deliberation

As we did for the first NCDD conference, we conducted an online needs assessment to determine what people wanted to see and experience at the 2004 conference, which was held in October in Denver, Colorado. About 120 people from throughout the dialogue and deliberation community honored us by completing the survey, and the results are both interesting and informative. (continue)

Summary of Playback Theatre Session at the 2004 NCDD Conference

On the morning of the third and final day of the 2004 NCDD conference in Denver, Colorado, we began the day with an interactive performance of National Playback Theatre, which turned out to be the most highly-rated and most talked-about feature of the 2004 conference. Playback Theatre is an innovative example of how the arts can foster and enhance dialogue. We utilized this improvisational form of theatre to reflect on our learnings and experiences over the weekend, encourage unresolved conflicts to emerge, and rejuvenate us for the trip home. Here is a summary of what took place... (continue)

Evaluating Public Engagement: Deliberative Democracy and the Science Museum

This 7-page paper reviews evaluation tools and methodologies in the dialogue and deliberation field and reflects upon how these strategies can be applied to the museum context. Can the museum be an effective space for dialogue and deliberation? (continue)

Kick Socrates Out of the Classroom! Developing A More Deliberative Classroom Discourse

A new theory of democratic education and a rethinking of its philosophical foundations are needed. This need derives from the inadequacies of the deferred model of education, which suspends deliberation from the classroom, treating students as not yet qualified for and the learning process as not requiring their serious input. This false and destructive notion is rooted in guardianship theory, a popular alternative to democracy that rejects the fact that democracy is itself a developmental and educational process, one ideally suited to the purposes of the classroom. Classroom talk in this model is rooted in the Socratic method, that prevents students from thoughtfully examining a range of issues for and between themselves. (continue)

Dialogue and Systems Thinking: Building a bridge for the practitioner

Systems thinking is a way of mapping diverse opinions and exploring that territory. The tools of systemic thinking provide the breadcrumb trail that mark the dialogical practitioner's journey. This journey is a process that happens within a complex self-organizing system that enables people's multi-modal engagement, in multiple ways on multiple levels. (continue)

The Contexts of Dialogue: Reflections on the Power and Limitations of Dialogue

It is clear that dialogue can be distinguished from more one-sided or contentious activities like lecturing or interrogating, and still further from contentious activities like debate or courtroom proceedings. Those distinctions made, however, there yet remains a huge variety of verbal exchanges regarded as laudable (perhaps simply because they involve some seriousness and some good will) that are frequently regarded as dialogue by at least one of the involved parties but which disappointingly fail to produce any of the expected outcomes of dialogue. Aside from understanding the perhaps inescapable slippage back into debate or monologue that frequently occurs under the strain of dialogue, an enormous number of factors need to be taken into consideration before we ought to say that a dialogue was likely or possible, and/or that it succeeded or failed. This presentation attempts to catalogue the variety of such factors... (continue)

Innovative Techniques to Engage the Community

This phenomenal 36-page handout was distributed at Janette Hartz-Karp's workshop ("Breakthrough Initiatives in Governing with the People: The Australian Experience") at the 2004 NCDD Conference in Denver, Colorado. It provides detailed information about a variety of community engagement techniques, including citizens jury, consensus conference, future search, charrette, consensus forum, multi criteria analysis conference, local area forum, people's panel, deliberative poll/survey, televote/telesurvey, and e-democracy. Under each method are details about why, when and how they are used, as well as a useful how-to flowchart. (continue)

Guidebook for the 2004 National Conference on Dialogue & Deliberation

The 2004 conference guidebook is available for download in PDF format. It includes a complete schedule of events, lists all the conference sessions, workshops and post-conference trainings, along with information about the location and arts programming at the conference. The guidebook provides an excellent look at the structure of the conference. (continue)