complex information

#MonthlyMyth: Glossy, simple content = informed participants

#MonthlyMyth: Glossy, simple content = informed participants

When you’re preparing information inputs for a community engagement process, organisations can spend a lot of time producing glossy brochures and simplified, summarised content.  It’s easy to get lost in all the posters and paragraphs and lose sight of what’s important - what you’re really saying about the issue or decision at hand.

Getting the balance right can be challenging.  So, in this post we’ll not only address this months myth, we’ll also give you 6 simple tips for providing the right information at the right level of detail.

Enhancing participants' critical thinking capacity - study outcomes

Enhancing participants' critical thinking capacity - study outcomes

A Research and Development Note detailing the process and outcomes of a recent study we worked on with Lyn Carson of Active Democracy and the newDemocracy Foundation has been published. 

The study considers the question - How can we enhance the ability of randomly-selected citizens in mini-publics (such as citizens’’ juries) to understand and evaluate expert evidence?

#MONTHLYMYTH: DISTRUST IS DUE TO A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING

#MONTHLYMYTH: DISTRUST IS DUE TO A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING

Our May #MonthlyMyth focuses on an assumption that is often made about the community by managers, project leads and technical 'experts'.  

Statements like "if only they understood X, Y or Z, they would see we were right!" are an indication of a potentially risky, yet common assumption that community opposition or distrust is based on ignorance or incapacity. 

CRITICAL THINKING STUDY INSIGHTS PART 2: THE FACILITATOR

CRITICAL THINKING STUDY INSIGHTS PART 2: THE FACILITATOR

Recently, we posted an interview with Lyn Carson of Active Democracy and the newDemocracy Foundation, who is working in partnership with MosaicLab to research what happens when critical thinking skills, techniques and concepts are introduced to participants in a deliberative process. 

Today, in Part 2,  we're talking with MosaicLab co-founder Nicole Hunter, an experienced facilitator with extensive experience in deliberative engagement.  Nicole, alongside MosaicLab's other two co-founders Keith Greaves and Kimbra White, has been working to integrate critical theories into real, on-ground processes.  

CRITICAL THINKING STUDY INSIGHTS PART 1: THE RESEARCHER

CRITICAL THINKING STUDY INSIGHTS PART 1: THE RESEARCHER

If you happened to come across our previous post ‘A new venture into critical thinking’, you will know that MosaicLab is currently working on a fascinating research project with Lyn Carson of Active Democracy and the newDemocracy Foundation.   

A final report is now in development, and, excitingly, early indications suggest that introducing critical thinking concepts to participants during deliberative processes  can result in a number of  benefits. 

From increased trust (between both participants themselves and between participants and decision makers) to increased ability for participants to question and understand information (including complex or technical data), the work is highlighting how these skills can enhance and transform both processes and participants.