Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

EF FCP presentation - Amsterdam meeting

171 views

Published on

This document has been drafted within the framework of the European project Talking about taboos.The project has been funded with support from the European Commission. The document reflects the view only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

EF FCP presentation - Amsterdam meeting

  1. 1. THE POLISH AND DUTCH TESTS TESTED GOOD PRACTICES THE AMSTERDAM MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2014 FUNDACJA CITIZEN PROJECT/ EZZEV FOUNDATION
  2. 2. GOOD PRACTICE 1 Promoting individuals saying: • Sometimes I make mistakes • Sometimes my motivation is egoistic • I am part of the problem
  3. 3. TESTED IN NL AND PL • In writing online (NL): only offline reactions • In video online (NL): only offline reactions • On air (national radio in PL): great discussion • Live in groups (Conference Gdansk for trainers; in workshops Gdynia with trainers, senior citizens; at school Gdansk with teacher and students) • Shame, laughter • Reflection • Great discussions with instructors, among themselves • Informal one-on-one contact with trainers, marketers (NL): great dialogues • With football hooligans (NL): Shame, laughter
  4. 4. ALTERNATIVE SENTENCES - PL (1)  Sometimes I make mistakes • Everyone makes mistakes but the key is to fix them • I'm not perfect. I'm only human • It's not like I make everything perfectly, but I try to get better • I often makes mistakes • Experience tells me I rarely make mistakes
  5. 5. ALTERNATIVE SENTENCES - PL (2)  Sometimes my motivation is egoistic • Everyone has to be satisfied, even me • It's also in my best interest, but we can both benefit • Often, in actions, I think only about myself • Sometimes I notice that my motivation is egoistic • I take care of others but I also take care of myself
  6. 6. ALTERNATIVE SENTENCES - PL (3)  I am part of the problem - I'm not perfect - I know that I've done mischief - My habits are part of the problem with interpersonal relations
  7. 7. CONCLUSIONS This good practice rather works in live contact and is ineffective online
  8. 8. GOOD PRACTICE 2 C2C/ citizen to citizen – dialogue training • First 90 seconds silence to feel the duration • 2 people sit opposite each other • One asks the other answers – fate decides who has which role • Rules of behavior are established: listening, good will, honesty, respect, patience, being interested • Goal: establish what the two have in common and on what they differ on a given theme (social exclusion) • Duration: 90 seconds • Evaluation by a trainer afterwards
  9. 9. TESTED • In workshops (Gdynia) with trainers and 2 groups of seniors: - Lively dialogues - Intense listening, intense searching for the right words - The hardest for professionals: they lapse into techniques - Hard for individuals who are in a hierarchical relationship
  10. 10. CONCLUSION This good practice is great to let individuals in a non-hierarchical relationship exchange opinions. Professionals tend to hide behind what they’ve learned before.
  11. 11. GOOD PRACTICE 3 • Intervention in online discussions - Providing moderate alternatives - Providing doubt - Asking for more time, more reflection (proposing “slow dialogue”)
  12. 12. TESTED • Online in the Dutch Zwarte Pieten-discussie - Great distrust – accusations of trolling - Great aggression – you’re a hypocrite afraid to have a clear opinion
  13. 13. CONCLUSION Slow dialogue does not work online.
  14. 14. GOOD PRACTICE 4 • Publishing essays • Publishing questionnaires
  15. 15. TESTED • Publication of articles online – on Slideshare - on the Zwarte Pieten discussion: - [essay] 2 weeks ago: 207 views - [essay] 4 months ago: 141 views - [press release] 4 months ago: 401 views - [PPT essay] 4 months ago: 355 views - [good practices & literature overview] 4 months ago: 194 - No discussion • Questionnaire published (Surveymonkey - distribution by well-connected members in the network): - Participants: 110 in PL; 472 in NL - Results published (NL): 536 views - Discussion with the distributors not with the authors
  16. 16. QUESTIONNAIRE PL • Questionnaire published (Surveymonkey - distribution by well-connected members in the network) - Participants: 34 • Questionnaire handed out during workshops and conference: • Conference Gdansk for trainers – Participants: 53 • workshops Gdynia with trainers, senior citizens – Participants: 23 • Total number of participants: 110 • Age: 20 – 70+ • Mostly with higher education
  17. 17. QUESTIONNAIRE PL (2) - Many respondents wrote that they either are not interested in the subject or there are more important issues not being discussed - They describe it as a work of art, symbol of freedom, tolerance, equality - They see proponents & opponents as normal people fighting for their rights and believes - They think that the discussion should stop – it would be bether for everyone and there are more urging matters than rainbow - There were few radical responses against the rainbow, that „zoophiles, murderers, thieves will be trying to make a monument for themselves”
  18. 18. CONCLUSION An online questionnaire about a real taboo subject does not work but about an explosive subject does work. Articles on an explosive subject are read but not discussed – or maybe that’s the effect I [Onno] have. In 6 years of being a journalist I got 2 reactions, 1 by my cousin in Australia who found me for private reasons.
  19. 19. ANNEX – PL RESULTS
  20. 20. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (2)
  21. 21. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (3)
  22. 22. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (4)
  23. 23. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (5)
  24. 24. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (6)
  25. 25. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (7)
  26. 26. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (8)
  27. 27. ANNEX – PL RESULTS (9)

×