Participatory Practices Analysis

Through the links on this page we can explore what makes processes tick and how they compare with each other. With such understandings we may be better equipped to use them more successfully and flexibly and to design Multi Approach Programs.

 

  • Exploring some Underlying Dynamics Of Process can help us understand at a deeper level what makes processes do what they do.
  • Exploring Process Design Elements to understand the elements that go into processes, such is Who is invited? What is the purpose? What kind of facilitation is used, if any? What exercises are done, or questions asked, to direct the attention or work of the participants? What is the media exposure? Etc.
  • Exploring Process Functions And Outcomes to help us clarify what we want processes to do
  • Comparing Practices can reveal the strengths, functions, limitations, special uses, cautions, underlying assumptions, etc., about various processes.

As practitioners work toward a useful analysis and rating system for dialogue and deliberation based on the four items mentioned above, the issue of power needs special attention. While we may see ourselves as experts, we are most authentically participants.

 

In most participatory practices, theorists and practitioners are interested in power shifting, away from experts who "facilitate" groups and do "research on" people, toward a more peer to peer practices. Some believe a more just practice of research and group process facilitation arises out of co facilitation and co research by all members. While this is not possible in all cases, the issue of power does need to be included explicitly.

 

Three suggestions for ratings to be included in a tool while help rating how power is dealt with in a method:

 

1. A data collection tool that is broadly used by facilitators and participants.

 

2. Some accounting/rating for the level of expert facilitation and some kind of justification and rating for that choice.

 

This also has implications on the value of outcomes.

 

3. A rating of axiology (function) that expresses the greater purpose of the research (especially as it applies to power dynamics) also needs to be included. Much great learning comes simply from learning how not to do it!

 

 

Table of Contents

 

Help
  • You can open and close cards in place. Just click on ~1383/3259.png or the card name.
  • To get to the page (and web address) for a card, click on ~1709/3792.png.
  • When you're editing, to create links within the website (even to a card that doesn't yet exist), put double square brackets around some text, like this.

To learn more see the Wagn documentation.

 

If you have questions, contact the Process Arts wiki support team. We may also be online live, or you can just ask your question here and someone will answer it shortly:


see http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Facilitation where we are also listing similar practices

  --Michel Bauwens (Not signed in).....Sun Jan 31 00:53:33 -0800 2010


The Bohm Dialogue, especially Collective Reflection has significance for me in terms of artistic critique and dialogue.

If one wanted to connect this to Jungian thought I'd relate to that.

  --Srule Brachman (Not signed in).....Mon May 21 17:09:16 +0000 2012

 

 

 

 

Wheeled by Wagn v. 1.18.1