AbstractWhat does Jane Addams's approach to social change offer to publicly engaged scholars and activists today? This essay explores several dimensions of Addams's work that have been misinterpreted and overlooked, putting these aspects of her work into conversation with research on endeavors to move higher education toward civic democratic engagement. The goal is to visualize opportunities and strategies for more inclusive and democratic engagement with issues across local, regional, and global communities. In particular, this essay explores how Addams's place-based, boundary-spanning methods of engagement provide strategies for more inclusive and collaborative philosophical activism, including (1) fostering and sustaining relationships across difference, (2) engaging with soft systems mapping, and (3) using synthetic imagination in crafting transdisciplinary engaged narratives. In conjunction with research on social change and creative innovation, Addams's work highlights the potential value of collaborative and democratic endeavors across difference as a means toward more radical imaginaries and relational revolution.
Key to teaching democratic thinking is actively engaging in the practice; and this, the article contends, is best facilitated by an experiential learning model where students are actively using, testing, and transforming not only the materials of the course, but also their own theories and experiences. Educators hoping to inspire democratic virtues and actions should also create and foster opportunities for community-building within the classroom by having students take more ownership for the class. This experiential process of learning disrupts the hierarchical theory-to-practice model traditionally implemented, reinforcing the value of an experiential and iterative practice of reflective engagement. In addition, such classes cannot neglect critical reflection and discussion of issues of power and oppression since democratic deliberation is at its core about engaging with others. To the extent that the traditional philosophic model limits the ways in which we come to understand one another's positionality, we must seek to open valuable spaces for not simply thinking democratically, but also feeling and acting through a democratic spirit. Key Words: democratic deliberation, diversity, dialogue, integration, experiential learning, community.
ThisHypatiacluster aims to create space for sharing stories and tools designed to support situated, embodied, and dialogical philosophical activism. It emerges from a new generation of pragmatist feminists, illustrating how the field has evolved. These pieces locate pragmatist feminism in place- and issue-based philosophical activism. As an activist and pragmatically grounded philosophy, this approach values the embodied and relational nature of social change as well as the need to create multiple pathways of engagement situated in and across communities.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to highlight the benefits and challenges of immersive, design thinking and community-engaged pedagogies for supporting social innovation within higher education; assess the impact of such approaches across stakeholder groups through long-term retrospective analysis of transdisciplinary and cross-stakeholder work; offer an approach to ecosystems design and analysis that accounts for complex system dynamics in higher education partnerships.
Design/methodology/approach This study uses constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz and Belgrave, 2012) to create a long-term systemic analysis of university innovation efforts. Researchers analysed 37 semi-structured interviews across key stakeholders involved in the design and implementation of the Design Thinking Studio in Social Innovation. Interview subjects include alumni (students), faculty, community partners and administrators. Interviews were coded using constant comparative coding (Mills et al., 2006) to develop and analyse themes. This study includes situated perspectives from the authors who offer their subjective relationship to the Studio's development.
Findings This paper assesses the outcomes and design of a transdisciplinary cross-stakeholder social innovation program and extends prior research on the potential and challenges of design thinking and immersive pedagogies for supporting service-learning and community engagement (SLCE) practices within higher education. Qualitative interview results reveal how time, resources and other structural and systemic factors operate across stakeholder groups. The findings address a gap in SLCE and social innovation literature by situating community learning within pedagogical interventions constructed not only for the benefit of students but for community members. The authors conclude that the research on social innovation in higher education could benefit from a more intentional examination of longitudinal effects of innovative pedagogical environments across a broad range of stakeholder perspectives and contexts.
Social implications This paper identifies how innovative higher education programs are forced to navigate structural, epistemological and ethical quandaries when engaging in community-involved work. Sustainable innovation requires such programs to work within institutional structures while simultaneously disrupting entrenched structures, practices, and processes within the system.
Originality/value Social innovation in higher education could benefit from harnessing lessons from collective impact and ecosystem design frameworks. In addition, the authors argue higher education institutions should commit to studying longitudinal effects of innovative pedagogical environments across multiple stakeholder perspectives and contexts. This study closes these gaps by advancing an ecosystems model for long-term and longitudinal assessment that captures the impact of such approaches across stakeholder groups and developing an approach to designing and assessing community-involved collaborative learning ecosystems (CiCLE).
Much literature on deliberation is derived from ideal theory. However, deliberations are inevitably non-ideal in two ways: (1) many deliberative ideals are in tension with each other; and 2) intended balancing of ideals cannot be attained perfectly amidst the messiness of real-world recruitment and conversation. This essay explores both kinds of non-ideality in respect to a case study: the 2011 community deliberative processes on a state public health "biobank," the Michigan BioTrust for Health. We follow two recommendations from major contemporary theorists of deliberation: to be transparent about how competing deliberative goals are negotiated in deliberative design; and to publicize case studies that report associated struggles and results. We present our "hybrid design" that sought to negotiate tensions within three families of deliberative goals: goals of representation and inclusion; goals of discourse-framing; and goals of political impact. We offer deliberative facilitators tentative suggestions based on this case study, concluding deliberations need not be "ideal" to be transformative.
Much literature on deliberation is derived from ideal theory. However, deliberations are inevitably non-ideal in two ways: (1) many deliberative ideals are in tension with each other; and 2) intended balancing of ideals cannot be attained perfectly amidst the messiness of real-world recruitment and conversation. This essay explores both kinds of non-ideality in respect to a case study: the 2011 community deliberative processes on a state public health "biobank," the Michigan BioTrust for Health. We follow two recommendations from major contemporary theorists of deliberation: to be transparent about how competing deliberative goals are negotiated in deliberative design; and to publicize case studies that report associated struggles and results. We present our "hybrid design" that sought to negotiate tensions within three families of deliberative goals: goals of representation and inclusion; goals of discourse-framing; and goals of political impact. We offer deliberative facilitators tentative suggestions based on this case study, concluding deliberations need not be "ideal" to be transformative.
From cultural figures such as Benjamin Franklin and Wendell Berry to philosophers such as Jane Addams and William James, this collection explores the usefulness of theoretical work in American philosophy and pragmatism to resilience practices in ecology, community, rurality, and psychology.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
