University of Central Oklahoma: Deliberative Polling Initiative

By Guest Bloggers Janelle Grellner and Sara Hill, University of Central Oklahoma

The University of Central Oklahoma  participated in the American Democracy Project’s Deliberative Polling initiative on March 26, 2009, seeking opinions and thoughts from 100 randomly selected, first-year students about their knowledge, attitudes and behaviors related to the services UCO offers.

UCO is one of 15 higher education institutions chosen by ADP through a national application process for this initiative, which was designed to give service providers and administrators valuable insight that can enhance students’ first-year experience, possibly increasing retention.

Deliberative polling is a process that begins with a random sample of people who are polled about a public interest topic, and then break into small groups to form questions and concerns about the poll’s general topic that they will deliberate with their institution’s experts and decision makers.

The method of random sampling provides a great opportunity for students who are not normally involved with student leadership or campus politics to be heard. These students will be able to engage in a process they may feel disenfranchised from.

Through the polling process, UCO student participants were able to directly address their questions and concerns to a panel of service providers (students services, housing, enrollment, public safety, health and wellness, academic support, etc.).  Armed with feedback and the challenges posed by the service providers, the participants reconvened in small groups to identify key issues  related to  their first-year experience on campus which they then posed to a panel of administrators.  The resulting conversation was the first of its kind and benefitted both the student participants and the faculty, staff, and administrators who participated.

The project goals were to benefit multiple stakeholders on our campus:

Benefits for Participants

This initiative provides a transformational learning experience regarding a selected issue.  It also provides an opportunity to become engaged in the democratic process of becoming informed, fostering understanding in others, and making informed decisions that might lead to policy change.  DP provides an opportunity for a random sample of students to serve as ambassadors for the greater good of the sample population and be part of a solution on campus.  It involves the students who otherwise would not be involved in campus politics.

Benefits for Facilitators

DP provides an opportunity to student leaders to practice communication skills in a healthy, non-adversarial manner.  It provides a transformational learning experience in the common democratic process that may be generalized to many other areas of the student’s life.

Benefits for Researchers

DP provides an opportunity for staff, faculty and students to engage iR a new research methodology with measurable outcomes using a repeated measures change design.  It also provides opportunities for presentations and publications in professional conferences and journals.

Benefits for the Campus

This is a unique opportunity to provide an innovative experience on our campus that truly embraces the mission, values, and vision of our university.   The process itself has the potential to guide us in leading edge mechanisms of change. This initiative engages everyone in a truly multidisciplinary project that is broad in scope and contributes to the common good.  It informs students, faculty, and staff across campus about what services and programs are offered.  It will provide essential information to multiple agencies on campus regarding:

1. The needs of students that includes, but go beyond academics (health and mental health, coping, socialization, support, a sense of belongingness).
2. How resources (advisement, counseling, health care, writing lab, violence prevention, wellness center, service learning, international student support, transfer student support, non-traditional student support, campus life activities)  are being utilized and by whom.
3. What process would increase student’s knowledge of and utilization of resources.
4. What contributes to student’s feeling disenfranchised versus a sense of belongingness.
5. What contributes to student’s poor outcomes versus success and retention.

The results from UCO’s deliberative poll were presented by Janelle Grellner and UCO’s ADP coordinator, Dr. Patti Loughlin, at the ADP National Meeting in June, 2009. You can find their PowerPoint presentation on this webpage.The project and analysis also served as a master’s thesis for a graduate student in the Department of Psychology at UCO, Kalen Erikson, who is now completing a Psy.D. at Stanford University.

For more information about UCO’s deliberative polling, contact Grellner at (405) 974-5466 or email her.

Carnegie Mellon Connects Civic Agency and Deliberative Polling

Guest Blogger Robert Cavalier writes about his work with Deliberative Polling and Civic Agency. Carnegie Mellon has been a very important partner with theAmerican Democracy Project, and the findings of this poll support the need for increased opportunities for citizens to deliberate about important issues of the day.

By Robert Cavalier,  Carnegie Mellon University

On September 25^th, 2010 a representative sample of over 180 randomly selected citizens from the Pittsburgh area came to Carnegie Mellon University for a day-long Deliberative Poll ® on county government. The background issues and a report on the results of this deliberative event can be found at this website.

A number of questions on the post-survey form sought input on the participants’ own experience on the deliberative process and the effects that such an experience had on them in terms of civic agency. Here are some relevant highlights:

Feedback on Small-Group Conversations: How helpful did you find the small-group conversation?

“Very” = 66%

“Somewhat” = 28.8%

Feedback on knowledge gained about issues: How much did this day of conversation give you a better understanding of important issues facing your community?

“A great deal” = 60%

“Somewhat” = 30%

Feedback on learning from different points of view: How much did this day of conversation cause you to consider points of view that you had not previously considered?

“A great deal” = 48%

“Somewhat” = 39%

Feedback on Motivation to Act: Will you become more engaged in your community as a result of this deliberative poll? = 90% said “yes”

“Definitely Yes” = 35%

“Probably Yes” = 55%

Feedback on event as a whole: Given what you know now, would you still have participated in the deliberative poll conversation? = rounding the numbers, almost 99% said “yes”

Definitely Yes = 80%

Probably Yes = 19%

(Three individuals said “probably not’; no one said “definitely not.”)

Responses to several of these questions merit special attention, given claims by those both supportive of and critical of the very idea of deliberative democracy. Many who support the idea of a more deliberative democracy need greater empirical evidence to buttress their beliefs. And those critical of deliberative democracy offer data they claim casts doubt about whether American citizens are interested in deliberative forums. Diana Mutz argues that people do not want to engage in discussions with those they don’t agree with while Hibbing and Theiss-Morse uses polls and focus groups to claim that citizens don’t what to be bothered by the details of government. Combing both of these positions, the authors of Stealth Democracy write: “…real-life deliberation can fan emotions unproductively, can exacerbate rather than diminish power differentials among those deliberating, can make people feel frustrated with the system that made them deliberate, is ill-suited to many issues…People dislike political disagreements …People get frustrated by details and many simply tune out of the exchange because they feel uncomfortable or inadequate discussing politics.”

To these critics we can offer empirical evidence that they are wrong in their assertions, and that well-designed and well-structured deliberative forums of the kind we experienced on September 25^th can and do bring out the best in our citizens. In a political season where negative ads and superficial sound bites belie a democracy driven by the aggregation of votes at any cost, we can see a different kind of democracy out there, a more deliberative democracy. Initiatives like this and the ones valued by the American Democracy Project can indeed help foster this kind of democracy and raise the level of civic discourse to that sought after by our Founding Fathers.

The University of Central Oklahoma Deliberates

Follow Lizzie, Timothy and their friends as they become more involved and make a difference through democracy.