The Common Ground Network for Life and Choice Manual

More documents

Recommendations

Info

says who they are, why they chose to attend the workshop, and what role they will play, e.g. pro-choice participant, pro-life participant, facilitator, planning group member. The lead facilitator then explains what is meant by the common ground approach (reviewing the concepts outlined in Chapter One), and reviews the ground rules. This presentation is very important. In our view providing participants with a framework of concepts underlying the process is key to enabling them to not only participate effectively in the workshop but also to leave the workshop with new understandings and new conflict management skills. Participants can be given Appendix 1.1 as a handout. The Facilitator Schedule, which is Appendix 4.2 in Chapter Four, gives directions on leading this and other full group sessions. Opinion Survey Participants are asked to complete a two-part Opinion Survey in the last ten minutes of the opening session. The Common Ground Opinion Survey (Appendix 3.8) is a tool for examining agreements, disagreements and misperceptions. It helps to dispel stereotypes and erroneous assumptions as well as clarify areas of genuine difference. It points to where further exploration of overlapping values and interests could be fruitful. In Part 1 of the Survey, respondents indicate their personal responses to the questions. In Part 2 (the comparison survey), they answer the questions as they think participants in the dialogue workshop who are on the other side of the issue would answer. The Opinion Surveys are collected and tabulated during the morning dialogue. Results are written on large newsprint papers for review during the first afternoon session (large group after lunch). Detailed instructions on using this instrument are in Appendix 3.7. A results chart is in Appendix 3.9. This is for use in the tabulation. The score columns on this form are what get presented on the newsprint. When a copier is available this form can be reproduced for participants. We have learned that participants enjoy having the results given to them in written form. This frees up the people who feel a need to copy everything on the newsprint to fully participate in the discussion.
First Small Group Dialogue After the opening large group session, participants break into small groups that contain equal numbers of participants on both sides of the issue and a facilitator (or cofacilitators). During this first small group dialogue, participants are asked to share the personal experiences that brought them to their current views on abortion and to explore what they might learn from each other's stories. A detailed Facilitation Guide for this session is Appendix 4.3 in Chapter Four. Second Full Group Session – Debriefing the Dialogue The full group reconvenes for 30 minutes before the lunch break. Participants are asked to share their insights and discoveries and to describe their experiences of dialogue. People like getting a sense of what happened in the other groups. Third Full Group Session - Reviewing the Opinion Survey Results In the front of the room are posted newsprint sheets with the Opinion Survey results. After participants have had a chance to read the results, the facilitator asks them to identify, in turn, the points of agreement, disagreement, and misperception (i.e. where the actual answer and predicted answer are different.) Past participants have found the information both fascinating and revealing. Appendix 3.8 provides detailed instructions on leading this session. Second Small Group Dialogue The same small groups reconvene with the goal of taking the dialogue to another level. The basic design calls for inviting participants to pose to one another the questions they have really wanted to have answered by the “other side.” This is an opportunity for
Page 1 and 2: The Common Ground Network for Life
Page 3 and 4: Common Ground Concepts Appendix 1.1
Page 5 and 6: over abortion. The Network came int
Page 7 and 8: together out of a mutual commitment
Page 9: About the Authors Mary Jacksteit wa
Page 12 and 13: others are “wrong.” Debate tend
Page 14 and 15: other people with the same label, d
Page 16 and 17: etween people related to one anothe
Page 18 and 19: Appendix 1.1 THE COMMON GROUND DIAL
Page 20 and 21: • Dialogue questions, not “topi
Page 22 and 23: Appendix 1.3 The Search for Common
Page 25 and 26: CHAPTER TWO: GETTING STARTED People
Page 27 and 28: eferred interested people to the lo
Page 29 and 30: 4. Offer and accept views without a
Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER THREE: PLANNING FOR DIALOGU
Page 33 and 34: Another type of workshop might have
Page 35 and 36: Dialogue Workshop. Based on experie
Page 37: hour training session for workshop
Page 41 and 42: may be particularly concerned that
Page 43 and 44: Appendix 3.1 WORKSHOP PLANNING MEET
Page 45 and 46: Appendix 3.2 Dialogue Workshop Mate
Page 47: 9:00 am Check-in, Welcome, Large gr
Page 51 and 52: Appendix 3.4 Sample letter to small
Page 53 and 54: Appendix 3.6 COMMON GROUND DIALOGUE
Page 55 and 56: Session Time: 30 minutes.
Page 57 and 58: (5 meaning strongest agreement and
Page 59 and 60: COMPARISON OPINION SURVEY If you ar
Page 61 and 62: 5 4 3 2 1 (5 meaning strongest agre
Page 63 and 64: Appendix 3.9 OPINION SURVEY RESULTS
Page 65 and 66: Appendix 3.10 Exploring Stereotypes
Page 67: COMMON GROUND WORKSHOP Evaluation Q
Page 70 and 71: language, insuring understanding be
Page 72 and 73: address another aspect of structuri
Page 74 and 75: also to: (1) find out how others fe
Page 76 and 77: The dialogue design presented in th
Page 78 and 79: f) Encouraging people to use "I" me
Page 80 and 81: 12:15-1:00: LUNCH. This is not a "w
Page 82 and 83: [5 min] -Communicate care for the s
Page 84 and 85: someone has said earlier. It might
Page 86 and 87: Appendix 4.4 WORKSHOP FACILITATOR T
Page 88 and 89:
the Part A or Part B sheets. Partic
Page 90 and 91:
3) How can you not care that poor w
Page 92 and 93:
1) We [Feminists for Life] think we
Page 95 and 96:
CHAPTER FIVE: “WHAT NEXT?” Freq
Page 97 and 98:
dialogues: • Reducing the rate of
Page 99 and 100:
direct involvement with teen pregna
Page 101 and 102:
very happy to find a fresh and posi
Page 103:
• Periodically sponsoring a day-l
Page 106 and 107:
leaders in the nearby town of Amher
Page 108 and 109:
• Working together to remove the
Page 110 and 111:
Cohen and another group member to j
Page 112 and 113:
Appendix 5.4 A Structured Community
Page 114 and 115:
to the prevention of teen pregnancy
Page 116:
Before starting, tell the group tha
Page 119 and 120:
Structuring an email dialogue Organ
Page 121 and 122:
it is important to stress the signi
Page 123 and 124:
listserve and, possibly, the facili
Page 125 and 126:
would be attending at their own exp
Page 127 and 128:
impartial. To the extent possible,
Page 129 and 130:
Engaging one's adversaries in a pos
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix 6.1 On-Line Dialogue Dear
Page 133 and 134:
Time frame. In order to give the gr
Page 135 and 136:
CHAPTER SEVEN: ADAPTING THE DIALOGU
Page 137 and 138:
undermine the genuineness of the di
Page 139 and 140:
Discussion in small groups follows
Page 141 and 142:
Afternoon Small Group Session [This
Page 143:
Appendix 7.1 A Day of Dialogue on G
Page 146 and 147:
otherwise. Another problem is that
Page 148 and 149:
Appendix 8.1 COMMON GROUND CONFEREN
Page 150 and 151:
ealize," agrees Frederica Mathewes-
Page 154 and 155:
CHAPTER NINE: RESOURCES There are c
Page 156:
PO Box 203, 697 Pomfret St. Pomfret
show all

The Common Ground Network for Life and Choice Manual

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?