Re: [UC] The Praxis 100 point game
Glenn moyer wrote: I said that we were being treated like third graders. 3 more forums, on 3 consecutive days -- interesting to compare penn's technique of engagement with temple's: - - - - feb 23: the essence of leadership preceptorials hosted by wharton's michael useem and penn's president gutmann http://tinyurl.com/d5dba8 For part of the session, students were divided into groups and asked to pick a historical or contemporary figure they all agreed was a good leader. Each group then presented its choice along with two to four qualities that defined its chosen leader to the rest of the room. Students presented on leaders as diverse as Mahatma Gandhi, Mohammed Ali, Steve Jobs and Penn's own Ira Harkavy - founder of Penn's Center for Community Partnerships. Perseverance, good communication skills and the ability to lead by example came up frequently in different groups' leadership templates. This exercise demonstrated the inductive way in which the preceptorial was designed to work. Useem told students to take example and experience and extract the underlying principles of leadership. Gutmann said she was impressed by how well the students completed the assignment and by their level of engagement. - - - - - feb 24: seven community forums to get input for citywide mural project, led by ppce's sokoloff and whyy's satullo http://tinyurl.com/aerxy8 Two teams of artists will incorporate the beliefs of participants of all seven forums into proposed murals, and later, residents will pick the mural that most represents the theme. Murals are about what is possible, said Harris Sokoloff, director of the Penn Project for Civic Engagement, which is running the forums with WHYY. And these forums are an opportunity for people to come out and talk about their beliefs and what's possible for the city, rather than focusing on the negatives. Tonight will represent a different kind of civic engagement for Sokoloff We're going to ask people to share a story with someone else, Sokoloff said. People will sit in pairs and interview each other and ask what it's like to live where they live, what it feels like, tastes like, smells like, sounds like, Sokoloff said. Out of that, we will talk about what they believe -- what beliefs or values are implied in that story. - - - - feb 25: temple's spin forum about the local effects and responses to the economic crisis, hosted by temple's student public interest network http://www.temple.edu/law/spin/forum.html The Temple SPIN Forum will address the local effects of, and responses to, the global economic crisis. The global economic crisis has hit Philadelphia hard, impacting the city in a number of ways. The city is faced with an enormous budget deficit. Health centers are closing and access to affordable healthcare is down. Unemployment and foreclosures are rising. The purpose of the forum is to engage with members of the community, politicians, researchers, students, and advocates, to inform the policy debate about how to deal with the economic crisis here in Philadelphia. Panelists will speak about housing, jobs, and healthcare issues, how the budget cuts have affected their work and their clients, and solutions they have devised. - - - - - .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Praxis 100 point game
Glenn moyer wrote: Four categories are set-up to assign the points for the predetermined and outrageous list of cuts, “low hanging fruitâ€� and “No way, no howâ€� are the first two. gut-wrenching and shared pain are the other two buckets. but notice how these 4 buckets evaluate the game-playing itself, and not the items in the budget. http://www.gse.upenn.edu/node/732 In small working groups, citizens reviewed list of budget cuts and revenue options the PPCE [Penn Project for Civic Engagement] constructed from the city’s budget scenarios. Working first as individuals, then as a group, citizens prioritized ways to close the budget gap by placing them into four buckets — Low-Hanging Fruit, No Ways No Hows, Shared Pain, and Gut Wrenchers. “Low-Hanging Fruit” means those options that are immediate winners, that generate a quick consensus. “No Ways No Hows” represent the immediate losers, or those choices citizens believe to be off the table. “The Shared Pain” bucket contains those options that are unpleasant and unpopular, but that they feel would be acceptable. “Gut Wrenchers” are those choices that no one wants to make but they recognize as what needs to be done to help the city as a whole. - - - - there has been feedback about how this process pre-determines outcomes [feedback that doesn't appear on penn's site]: http://whyy.org/blogs/itsourcity/2009/02/18/structure-of-budget-workshop-left-many-frustrated/ Take Northeast resident Jim Curran who started his work session with a friendly grilling of City Councilman Bill GreenBut it wasn’t long before Curran was up and out. “This is all putting us down a cattle shoot - the questions have already been prepared,” he said of the workshop design. “It’s too pat, it’s all too pat. You should put this in the paper or something so we can study ahead of time.” And Curran wasn’t alone. I saw others leave their workshops in similar frustration. One was Stan Strez, 65, of Bridesburg His gripe? “This is ridiculous. Cutting jobs on the police force? There’s gonna be so much crime its ridiculous.” Later he explained a bit more, “They’re not including everything [in the budget scenarios]. And not just that, they’re not addressing what the real problem is coming from.”... Like Jack Morley, 46, of South Philadelphia. “They defined the format and the structure on how the public was giving input, and that hamstrung us,” he said of his group, which only made it half way to its goal [online post by Jeannine]: There may also be serious consequences for cutting instead of taking deeper consideration of alternatives. Putting a mostly same-old, same-old, cut-til-it-bleeds scenario to a largely naive but motivated public felt like a bloody disservice to us all. etc. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Praxis 100 point game
but notice how these 4 buckets evaluate the game-playing itself, and not the items in the budget. The moderators focus the group on the game-playing and not any serious discussion. If citizens engage in any discussion, they get a very low point total and prove that budget decisions and priorities must be determined by highly paid consultants and experts. As WHYY reported from the first night, group 7 only got 26 points, and so those citizens let the city go bankrupt. To get a higher point total, citizens must focus on dumbed down emotional sound bites. Individuals need to deliver a zinger and then the trained moderators call a vote. To score points, 75% of the group must vote to put the points in a bucket. So the data for individual service cuts and regressive taxes gained from this game, measures the effectivness of excited game players and popular sound bites. (Praxis provided only frightening choices for common citizens, as the only possible options. Corporate welfare, of course, is to be increased during this financial crisis.) It is a disgraceful condescending exercise to put serious citizens through when they show up in good faith! WHYY broadcast part of my interview. I said that we were being treated like third graders. We were supposed to make those noices, oh-oh, when we wanted the moderator to call on us for a sound bite zinger. Penn/Nutter need to be shamed for engaging this game to silence the massive public dissent of their grab for power using crisis capitalism! How low has the graduate school of education sunk to allow this charade of civic engagement to be done in their name? Glenn, a citizen -Original Message- From: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN laserb...@speedymail.org Sent: Feb 21, 2009 10:48 AM To: univcity Univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] The Praxis 100 point game Glenn moyer wrote: Four categories are set-up to assign the points for the predetermined and outrageous list of cuts, “low hanging fruitâ€� and “No way, no howâ€� are the first two. gut-wrenching and shared pain are the other two buckets. but notice how these 4 buckets evaluate the game-playing itself, and not the items in the budget. http://www.gse.upenn.edu/node/732 In small working groups, citizens reviewed list of budget cuts and revenue options the PPCE [Penn Project for Civic Engagement] constructed from the city’s budget scenarios. Working first as individuals, then as a group, citizens prioritized ways to close the budget gap by placing them into four buckets — Low-Hanging Fruit, No Ways No Hows, Shared Pain, and Gut Wrenchers. “Low-Hanging Fruit” means those options that are immediate winners, that generate a quick consensus. “No Ways No Hows” represent the immediate losers, or those choices citizens believe to be off the table. “The Shared Pain” bucket contains those options that are unpleasant and unpopular, but that they feel would be acceptable. “Gut Wrenchers” are those choices that no one wants to make but they recognize as what needs to be done to help the city as a whole. - - - - there has been feedback about how this process pre-determines outcomes [feedback that doesn't appear on penn's site]: http://whyy.org/blogs/itsourcity/2009/02/18/structure-of-budget-workshop-left-many-frustrated/ Take Northeast resident Jim Curran who started his work session with a friendly grilling of City Councilman Bill GreenBut it wasn’t long before Curran was up and out. “This is all putting us down a cattle shoot - the questions have already been prepared,” he said of the workshop design. “It’s too pat, it’s all too pat. You should put this in the paper or something so we can study ahead of time.” And Curran wasn’t alone. I saw others leave their workshops in similar frustration. One was Stan Strez, 65, of Bridesburg His gripe? “This is ridiculous. Cutting jobs on the police force? There’s gonna be so much crime its ridiculous.” Later he explained a bit more, “They’re not including everything [in the budget scenarios]. And not just that, they’re not addressing what the real problem is coming from.”... Like Jack Morley, 46, of South Philadelphia. “They defined the format and the structure on how the public was giving input, and that hamstrung us,” he said of his group, which only made it half way to its goal [online post by Jeannine]: There may also be serious consequences for cutting instead of taking deeper consideration of alternatives. Putting a mostly same-old, same-old, cut-til-it-bleeds scenario to a largely naive but motivated public felt like a bloody disservice to us all. etc. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you
[UC] The Praxis 100 point game
Neighbors, I want to give you details of the Penn Praxis budget game designed as a pretense for civic engagement. Tonight and tomorrow, Praxis will hold two more of these games to cover-up the Mayor’s big business budget agenda and increase of corporate welfare. No crisis should ever be wasted in crisis capitalism. Phase 1: Either Chris Satullo or Tom Ferrick asks the panel of Deputy Mayor’s carefully rehearsed questions.Expert graphs and pie charts have been placed on all the children’s seats. These are frightening graphs without proper information, and the experts refer to them during the pretend questions to insure confusion and fear among the class. Phase 2 breaks the assembled kids into small groups. Pupils are assigned groups when they arrive. A long list of predetermined and onerous service cuts and regressive tax proposals are also provided on the seats with various point values associated with each. Each small group is focused on the same game. Children are told to focus on scoring a total of 100 points. Four categories are set-up to assign the points for the predetermined and outrageous list of cuts, “low hanging fruit” and “No way, no how” are the first two. The game is designed so that children never get to level 3 and 4 of the game. “Low hanging fruit” gets the argument going. For example, some kids say “close the libraries because the police must not be cut.” For “no way, no how” other kids shout out that “no way can the fire stations be cut.” Moderators pretend that the game is an exercise in democracy, as they ask for a vote each time and need 75% to award the points. Moderators keep children focused on the points of the game. By setting up an impossible goal, Praxis moderators achieve assistance from the game design in two main ways. From the beginning, all children have a visceral awareness that they must focus on various well known sound bites. Moderators keep them moving to get to the impossible 100 points, which is the primary goal. They can end any attempt to discuss important policies by indicating that the group must keep “working” toward the point total. If children stick to sound bites, they have a greater chance of getting quick points. If a child suggests that these are not the appropriate policy questions or priorities, he is seen as a troubled child holding the group’s point total down. For example, if someone wants to discuss ending the tax abatement, which is not included, he is keeping the other children from getting points. In any group where children indicate a desire to actually deal with real budget priorities and policies, the group will finish with an abysmal total. For example, WHYY reported that group 7 only received 26 points at the first game. The conclusion is that Philadelphia children are so disruptive and scatter brained that they would make the city bankrupt. I observed the larger group which received 60 points under the control of Sokoloff and Satullo. Some children would divisively and emotionally shout out that “police must not be cut” and others that “the need for homeless services would increase.” At the end, some children appear angry and most appear exhausted. There is no conclusion of the class as exhausted children simply start leaving. Some “journalists” are observed joking around with city officials. The Penn conclusion is that city budget decisions must be made secretively by Penn experts. No group of Philadelphia children are able to score 100 points and keep the city from collapsing. But Praxis is highly successful because children need an opportunity to shout at each other and blow off steam. Children are exhausted by the 100 point game and are to stop bellowing at the Penn experts who need to make the important city decisions. Penn believes that the children are now in awe of the difficulty faced by Penn budget experts, and they expect the angry exhausted kids to go home helpless and frightened and refocused on their play stations. That is an overview of what will occur tonight in Germantown and tomorrow in South Philly. If consumer children plan to attend, practice your sound bites so that you can break the 60 point record! Sincerely, Glenn, a citizen PS: If you check the literature on civic engagement and deliberative democracy, you will see that this Praxis game design is an almost perfect design against citizenshp and participatory democracy. Well done Praxis! You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
