Resources for engaging and assessing students with clickers
14 Apr
As I mentioned in yesterday’s post, I’ve been thinking about some of the ways that teaching with clickers taps into the participatory culture many of us now live in. I’ve blogged in the past about ways clickers have been used in non-academic settings, particularly in community meetings, to identify areas of consensus and foster understanding of others. Here’s another use to add to that collection, from the blog of the UK division of the audience response system Qwizdom:
London. 30th March 2010. The people of Tower Hamlets have been using Qwizdom’s Audience Response System to vote interactively on how to best allocate council resources.
In a series of eight public meetings, members of this community voted on how to spend £2.4 million in the “You Decide!” participatory budget process. Results of the votes were displayed on-screen for meeting participants for added transparency and community building.
Residents voted for more police officers, handyperson services for older people, youth projects, street lights, park improvements and many other items.
I’m impressed with this initiative, particularly in the amount of funds allocated through this process. It also removes the “representative” from “representative democracy” in a helpful way, I think. I would imagine this was a success with community residents. They were given the opportunity to very directly express their opinions on how funds are to be spent. I would guess that those residents who weren’t happy with the final decisions would leave the meetings with a greater understanding of their neighbors’ interests and opinions, which is likely to be helpful in the long run.
I wonder how small-group and meeting-wide discussion was handled at these meetings. Asking community members (or students) for their opinions via clicker questions is usually most effective as a way to foster, not replace, discussion. It’s also unclear if residents were limited to selecting one use each for the community funds or if they were encouraged to rank multiple uses. The former voting method can be problematic at times, while the latter yields richer data on community interests.
For my non-UK readers: The title of the Qwizdom blog post is “Strictly Come… Democracy,” which is a play on the UK television series Strictly Come Dancing. That’s the series that spawned the American show Dancing with the Stars, in case you were wondering. Also, when composing in WordPress, click on the icon with the capital letter omega on it to insert a £ in your post!
Image: “VOTE” by Flickr user Theresa Thompson / Creative Commons licensed
4 Responses for "Clickers and Participatory Democracy"
Just picking up on the point about ‘i imagine it was a success with community residents’
Here’s the feedback we got from Glen Ocsko, Consultation and Involvement Team Leader at Tower Hamlets Council, London.
The handsets made a real difference to how people saw their engagement; seeing the results come in live and displayed on a big screen before their eyes ensured they left knowing exactly what was purchased. The system really helped promote trust in the process.”
Hi,
As the project manager of Tower Hamlets’ You Decide! I thought I’d drop a quick reply and let you know how we managed the clicker vs discussion aspect of the event.
The event was structured into six sections. Each section was based on one of the key Cabinet Priorities for the Borough for that year and contained between 6 and 10 projects or services that could be provided in the local area to help meet that priority.
These items were presented to the audience who were then invited to spend the next 10 minutes or so discussing them with their fellow residents. During the discussion experts on the services were on offer to answer any questions and a facilitator helped ensure everyone had a say.
After this a vote was held with a run off between the top two items to decide which item was purchased.
This was done six times and then the remaining money was distributed using the same voting system but with all the items available. The idea of the six sections was to give residents a real chance to consider each option before the voting and to do so after discussing it with other members of their community.
If anyone wants any more information please do drop me a line at my e-mail address above
Thanks, Eddie and Gareth, for stopping by and commenting. It sounds like the community discussion and ranking questions I raised were addressed very well. I’m glad the events were so successful, and that the use of clickers helped promote “trust in the process.”
[...] to Community Engagement Initiatives, Qwizdom has been used and is being used to empower communities. Tower Hamlets used Qwizdom’s Audience Response Systems to enable 800 residents to decide what they wanted to spend council money [...]
Leave a reply