DELIBERATIVE CIVIC EDUCATION
From the time of the colonies to the present day, educators and civic leaders have developed a variety of programs to create a democratic citizenry.[2] Many of these have used group discussion methods, because face-to-face talk provides direct experience with the deliberative element of the democratic process. Group discussions in America on local, state, national, and international policy issues include those sponsored
Modern examples of these programs include the projects of the Study Circles Resource Center and the National Issues Forums.[5] Established by the Topsfleld Foundation, the Study Circles Resource Center (SCRC) promotes citizen education in the United States and believes that study circles are an ideal method for such education. The number of people who annually participate in SCRC's study circles is not known, and the SCRC's promotional literature is more interested in the widespread use of all varieties of study circles than the use of SCRC materials per se.[6]
By the SCRC's deflnition, a study circle is "a participatory, democratic discussion group that focuses on a social or political issue."[7] Ideally, "individual members take responsibility for the study circle and ultimately control both the content of the discussions and the group process."[8] The SCRC hopes that organizing and participating in study circles will provide individuals with a broad range of skills and values conducive to democratic citizenship.
The SCRC conceives of study circles as a series of three to five small group discussions among five to twenty people focusing on a particular issue. Each session has a discussion leader who (a) ensures broad participation, egalitarian communication styles, mutual respect, and careful listening, (b) keeps the discussion focused and incisive, and (c) maintains a neutral posture in the discussion. Print and audiovisual materials provide a framework for each topic and are designed to spark spontaneous discussion.[9] For example, in 1994, the SCRC joined with ACCESS: A Security Information Service to publish In Harm's Way, a discussion guide on the use of U.S. military forces in international conflicts. The book is divided into four sessions, each of which outlines alternative views and introduces relevant facts and issues.[10]
As for the educational beneflts of participation, the SCRC claims that "the study circle … has a long track record of enhancing individual self-esteem, increasing communication skills, and encouraging selfdirected adult learning." Participation in study circles triggers "feelings of power and the capacity to effect change through education." The
The National Issues Forums (NIF) has much in common with the SCRC's method and mission, but it is more ambitious. The NIF is the flagship of current programs in deliberative civic education, and it has caught the attention of scholars who study political communication. According to an NIF self-study, by 1993 several thousand potential NIF conveners had received training in the NIF method at the annual Summer Public Policy Institute and similar regional institutes. The same study showed that many of these potential conveners had chosen to adopt the NIF approach: during 1993, for example, forums were probably convened by approximately 1,440 adult literacy programs, 2,600 high schools, and 1,360 civic organizations.[12]
Individual organizations and conveners use the NIF system for their own particular educational and institutional purposes, and this diversity is actively encouraged by the Kettering Foundation, which initiated the program in 1982. The foundation prides itself on the diversity of NIF settings and has published different NIF pamphlets for use in the Catholic community, colleges, and high school and adult education programs.[13]
The NIF's basic guidebook, Hard Choices, argues that the NIF serves many of the goals that participants themselves have when they attend forums. Citizens want to "overcome a personal sense of being without voice or power." They seek to play a more direct and effective role in politics by acting on "pressing problems in their communities" and changing the way "local, state, and national governments understand the public interest." Citizens hope to "learn how to make difficult choices" and "increase and improve the quality of public deliberation"
[14]
by making it "more sensible and constructive.
As an educational process, the NIF has two basic aims: to help participants develop more informed and reflective judgments on current policy issues and, more generally, to teach the art of public deliberation. If it is successful, the NIF approach gives citizens the cognitive and social tools they need to build reasoned public policies upon real common ground.[15]
To achieve these educational goals, the NIF uses face-to-face group discussion. The guidelines in NIF manuals leave much room for variation, and the NIF Leadership Handbook openly acknowledges that "there is no one best way to organize a Forum." NIF discussions "can take many forms ranging from community-wide town meetings attended by the general public to small study circles sponsored by individuals or local organizations, such as book clubs or church groups, for their own members." NIF forums come in many shapes and sizes, but the approach may be best suited to a series of study circles with five to twenty people, "especially since we place some stress on encouraging
[16]
participants to ‘work through’ an issue.
No matter what the size of the group, the first step in the NIF process is reading an "issue book" prior to the forum or the first study circle. Each issue book provides relevant factual information, but the most important reason for reading the book is that it frames the issue in terms of three or four contrasting policy choices. For example, the Freedom of Speech issue book outlines three choices: government censorship, private industry self-censorship, and unfettered speech.[17] The book on American foreign policy distinguishes three options: abandoning global leadership to address domestic concerns, focusing on U.S. national security, or promoting democracy and human rights abroad.[18] In practice, not all NIF participants take the time to read the book. For this reason (and to refresh the memories of other participants), moderators often begin forums by reading a brief summary of the issue book or by showing a flfteen-minute videotape that comes with each book.
Next, the moderator establishes ground rules and explains the deliberative process to participants. The ideal NIF moderator will "explain the expectation that all those present will be both active listeners and active participants—it is their program."[19] This is crucial, because, as one NIF convener has lamented, "Citizens always come to forums expecting to vote on something…. They always want solutions—it's hard for them to accept the idea of just discussing the issue."[20] The NIF Institute provides a variety of wall posters outlining the NIF process, but moderators also can remind participants that after the forum, everyone should be able to:
(1) identify the range of realistic alternatives and move toward a choice; (2) make a good case for those positions one dislikes as well as the position one likes, and consider choices one has not considered before; (3) understand others have reasons for their choices and that their reasons are very interesting—not dumb, unreasonable, or immoral; (4) realize that one's knowledge
Some moderators then move participants through one more introductory stage before discussing the policy choices. These moderators encourage participants to identify their personal stake in the issue by asking questions such as, "Is this an important issue to you?" Or, "How does the issue affect people?" Questions such as these draw participants into the discussion and make abstract issues more concrete. For example, forum participants discussing the U.S. economy might tell brief stories about their own flnancial straits or the economic injustices they have witnessed in their communities.[22]
Moderators then lead the group into deliberation. During this phase, the moderator remains neutral, guiding but not directing the direction of discussion. Moderators encourage participants to connect choices with values, illustrate their ideas with stories or examples, consider hypothetical dilemmas, and explore the consequences of actions for different people. The discussion moves through each of the choices outlined in the NIF issue book, and participants weigh the pros and cons of each policy option.
After the moderator guides the group through one to three hours of deliberation, the forum or final study circle comes to the last stage. At this point, the moderator encourages participants to identify any common ground that they have discovered on the discussion topic. In the lingo of the NIF, this process is "harvesting a public voice." The NIF Leadership Handbook asks moderators to think of harvesting, "not as concluding, but as giving meaning to what you are doing. Participants describe the experience they just had, not report results." Moderators might ask participants, "What trade-offs are people willing to make to get what they want?" Or, "What makes this issue so difficult to decide? What is really at issue? … Is there enough common ground for action? What is unresolved?"
NIF moderators and conveners attribute a wide range of effects to the NIF process. They believe that the forums have the potential to change the way people view particular issues, as well as the way they view politics and their role as citizens. Open-ended and informal research on the NIF suggests that participation in deliberative forums can
(1) change participants' political opinions, (2) increase participants' political self-efficacy and their sense of community identity, (3) widen and
More systematic research has followed up on some of these claims about the NIF's educational impact. A questionnaire survey of 51 NIF participants in forums on public education found evidence of some of the self-reported cognitive effects identifled in earlier qualitative studies. Fifty-seven percent of respondents said that their "interest in education issues" increased after the forum, and 49 percent said that the discussion increased their "understanding" of those issues. With regard to opinion change, the modal responses were that respondents "changed their mind" about an aspect of education policy "once or twice" (51 percent) or had "second thoughts about a policy option" once or twice (61 percent). Forty-seven percent of respondents, however, said that they did not change their mind on the education issue. Overall, this study suggests that between one-third and one-half of forum participants do not perceive changes in their political opinions as a result of participating in NIF forums, and it also shows evidence of an increased interest in learning more about the discussion topic after the forum.[24]
The 1990–91 "research forums" sponsored by the NIF also found evidence of a cognitive impact. The research forums used three discussion issues—economic competitiveness, racial inequality, and abortion. A comparison of participants' pre- and post-forum responses to questionnaire items showed three patterns: an increase in knowledge about the issue, a greater willingness to compromise, and movement toward a more "moderate" policy choice.[25]
Further evidence of changes in participants' political opinions is provided by a study of the standard NIF questionnaires administered before and after many forums. This study reviewed the pre- and postforum ballots completed by several hundred NIF participants for seven different issues. The authors found that the NIF process had a signiflcant influence on the sophistication of participants' political opinions: after forums, participants' views were more reflned and internally consistent, and they exhibited less attitudinal uncertainty.[26]
A fourth study measured the behavioral and psychological impact of NIF participation by examining a sample of 149 adult literacy students,
Taken together, these studies show that the actual effects of NIF participation are not as far-reaching as the qualitative studies might have suggested. The NIF process does generally increase the sophistication of participants' political views, and it has other anticipated effects on political communication and some political attitudes. In addition, the studies suggest that NIF participation may inadvertently turn some people away from group-based political involvement.
Because the more "educational" forms of deliberation often remain disconnected from official policy debates and elections, they risk disconnecting participants even further from the workings of government. In the case of the NIF, some forum conveners have started to work with elected officials, and the Kettering Foundation, which originated the NIF program, has begun to examine how NIF conveners make those connections.[28] The SCRC has also begun to make a direct connection between study circles and government through its "community-wide programs" and congressional exchange initiative.[29] The civic educational orientation may have great value, but sponsors of both the NIF and study circles recognize that full deliberation requires a more direct connection between public discussion and public policies.