Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
utsfl:classroom:seminars:pbs200y [2016/10/09 02:38] – balleyneutsfl:classroom:seminars:pbs200y [2023/06/29 18:01] (current) – mmccann
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== PBS200Y: Towards a Theory of Change ====== ====== PBS200Y: Towards a Theory of Change ======
-http://media.trtl.ca/abortion/strategy.html +FIXME post updated version of presentation?
 ===== Introduction: A Forest Fire ===== ===== Introduction: A Forest Fire =====
 {{:utsfl:classroom:seminars:deerfire_high_res_edit.jpg?300|}} {{:utsfl:classroom:seminars:deerfire_high_res_edit.jpg?300|}}
Line 12: Line 11:
  
 ===== A Goal ===== ===== A Goal =====
-When facing a forest fire, what's the goal? To put out the fire, and keep everyone you can safe in the meantime. Not to build a memorial while the fire is still raging. Not to raise awareness about the need to fight forest fires. Not to hold a fire-fighting volleyball tournament. Or to make the presence of the firefighters known, so people know there are some of us that fight fires. The goal should be to put the fire out.+When facing a forest fire, what's the goal? To put out the fire, and keep everyone you can safe in the meantime. Not to build a memorial while the fire is still raging. Not to raise awareness about the need to fight forest fires. Not to raise awareness about the harmful effects of smoke inhalation. Not to hold a fire-fighting volleyball tournament. Or to make the presence of the firefighters known, so people know there are some of us that fight fires. 
 + 
 +The goal should be to put the fire out. And to save anyone who's in danger in the meantime.
  
   * http://www.probikersforlife.us/about_us.html   * http://www.probikersforlife.us/about_us.html
Line 22: Line 23:
 ===== Theory of Action vs Theory of Change ===== ===== Theory of Action vs Theory of Change =====
 ==== Theory of Action ==== ==== Theory of Action ====
-Our pro-life efforts too often have a theory of action. We look around us and think, what can we do to accomplish our goals? What can we do that could abolish abortion? Let’s recriminalize abortion, just change the law back. Write your MP, write a blog post, go on social media, march, hold a sign, hand out some pamphlets, hold a conference, host a speaker, put some posters or ads up. These are all actions we can do as we look around us. Some of these actions might reach people and change their minds, or even save lives. None of these scattered actions will fundamentally change anything.+// Video that explains theory of change and uses the analogy of building a wardrobe without a manual: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJDN0cpxJv4 // 
 + 
 + 
 +Our pro-life efforts too often have a theory of action. We look around us and think, what //actions// can we do to accomplish our goals? What can we do that could abolish abortion? Let’s recriminalize abortion, just change the law back. Write your MP, write a blog post, go on social media, march, hold a sign, hand out some pamphlets, hold a conference, host a speaker, put some posters or ads up. These are all actions we can do as we look around us. Some of these actions might reach people and change their minds, or even save lives. None of these scattered actions will fundamentally change anything. 
 + 
 +=== Problems ===
  
 :?: **Question:** What's wrong with this approach? Doesn't it make sense to do what you can? What do you think? :?: **Question:** What's wrong with this approach? Doesn't it make sense to do what you can? What do you think?
 +
 +A theory of action works forwards, to pick from immediate actions available to see if you can move forward to the goal, but without tracing a clear path to the goal:
 +{{youtube>3zc4bGkU05o}}
 +
 +FIXME //why// is a theory of action insufficient?
 +  * no clear path to goal
 +  * no solid way of evaluating where our actions fit into the vision
 +
 +> By having a clear plan, pro-life organizations are vision-driven instead of crisis-driven. By having a clear plan, prolifers can frame the debate and map out a winning strategy to make abortion unthinkable. By having a clear plan, pro-life organizations are able to properly evaluate how certain activities fit into that bigger picture((CCBR Handbook p. 17))
 +
 +FIXME transition 
  
 Well, that’s because we’re outnumbered, you might say. Or that’s because it won’t happen overnight, it’ll take a long time, but we just have to keep at it! Well, that’s because we’re outnumbered, you might say. Or that’s because it won’t happen overnight, it’ll take a long time, but we just have to keep at it!
Line 39: Line 56:
 A theory of change works //backwards// from the goal, identifying the preconditions to get there -- what thing //needs// to happen before the goal can be realized? What //needs// to happen before that thing can happen? And backwards, in concrete steps, until you get to specific actions you can take on a path back to the goal. A theory of change works //backwards// from the goal, identifying the preconditions to get there -- what thing //needs// to happen before the goal can be realized? What //needs// to happen before that thing can happen? And backwards, in concrete steps, until you get to specific actions you can take on a path back to the goal.
  
 +
 +FIXME theory of action says "what can I do?" whereas theory of change says "what do I need to do?"
 Some rough skeletal (simplifying, skipping many steps) examples: Some rough skeletal (simplifying, skipping many steps) examples:
   * Goal: An abortion-free Canada   * Goal: An abortion-free Canada
Line 64: Line 83:
               * find legislators who might be willing               * find legislators who might be willing
                 * __action:__ talking to legislators                 * __action:__ talking to legislators
-          * **Right Now**: pro-life politicians need to be elected+          * **Right Now**: pro-life politicians need to be elected FIXME https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/more_pro_life_mpps_than_liberals_yes_please
             * nominate pro-life politicians             * nominate pro-life politicians
               * join local riding association boards               * join local riding association boards
Line 83: Line 102:
 FIXME ETK plan summary FIXME ETK plan summary
 FIXME post-CLC pro-life politics summary FIXME post-CLC pro-life politics summary
 +
 +FIXME http://www.macleans.ca/society/why-social-activists-should-think-like-venture-capitalists/ 
 +  * importance of balance between a clear, structured vision/mission and the flexibility needed to handle ongoing change
 +  * or 300-level strategy seminar? ("this is not a charitable cause")
 +
  
 ===== An Analysis of Pro-life Responses ===== ===== An Analysis of Pro-life Responses =====
Line 116: Line 140:
       * decriminalized > regulated > illegal((WNAL Direction Matters))       * decriminalized > regulated > illegal((WNAL Direction Matters))
     * broad political coalitions, less idea bundling     * broad political coalitions, less idea bundling
-    * e.g. compare Right Now and WNAL to CLC and AFLO +    * new political efforts, e.g. Right Now and WNAL
-  * Could do a whole critical analysis of the political problems, e.g. epic 1 million signatures with no names saved for database, but that'd be another seminar +
-    * Instead, take a look at what WNAL or Right Now are doing, and specifically what they're doing differently than Campaign Life+
  
 ==== The Prophetic Approach ==== ==== The Prophetic Approach ====
Line 160: Line 182:
     * Plus, we need to be focused on those who are persuadable -- often times reactive moves are targeted about abortion advocates, who are far less likely to be persuaded anyways, versus pro-actively targeted the mushy middle or mobilizing latent pro-lifers     * Plus, we need to be focused on those who are persuadable -- often times reactive moves are targeted about abortion advocates, who are far less likely to be persuaded anyways, versus pro-actively targeted the mushy middle or mobilizing latent pro-lifers
     * FIXME Students for Choice Dec 2015 or Sept 2016 RSU examples of reactive versus proactive action     * FIXME Students for Choice Dec 2015 or Sept 2016 RSU examples of reactive versus proactive action
 +    * FIXME Briarpatch article(( "...with anti-choicers setting the terms of debate, how can pro-choice activists respond in a way that best advances women’s struggles for reproductive autonomy?... Pro-choice groups and networks have formed or expanded at a number of universities in response to the activities of anti-choice groups, particularly where more extreme organizations like the CCBR have been active. The danger, however, is that pro-choice activists have sometimes been drawn into, and consumed by, reactionary struggles, focused more on blocking anti-choice groups than on building an analysis rooted in women’s bodily autonomy. While supporting women who have had abortions and protecting women from harassment are the primary goals of the pro-choice response to anti-choice groups on campus, the defensive stance taken by pro-choice students has limited them in taking a more proactive approach to building support for the issues at hand. Anti-choice groups are using the free speech argument to win the public relations battle, leaving some to wonder if groups like the CCBR are deliberately luring pro-choice activists into an unwinnable war." https://briarpatchmagazine.com/articles/view/freedom-of-hate-speech))
   - __Cost-Effectiveness:__ Is our work cost-effective?   - __Cost-Effectiveness:__ Is our work cost-effective?
     * e.g. RTL newsletters, often contain reprinted news items, multi-page printouts that get mailed out     * e.g. RTL newsletters, often contain reprinted news items, multi-page printouts that get mailed out
Line 178: Line 201:
     * {{:utsfl:classroom:seminars:prolife_ads.pdf|}}     * {{:utsfl:classroom:seminars:prolife_ads.pdf|}}
     * {{:utsfl:classroom:seminars:lrtl-061616_1_.pdf|}}     * {{:utsfl:classroom:seminars:lrtl-061616_1_.pdf|}}
 +  * Pro-Life Postcards
 +    * Guelph Right to Life: http://www.guelphforlife.com/blog/?p=304
 +      * Ultrasound but no AVP; mostly irrelevant born children
 +      * Weak argument
 +      * Addressed to Prime Minister... (to change the law all at once?)
 +    * CCBR
 +      * AVP, before/after cognitive dissonance
 +      * human rights
 +      * delivered to homes across the country (to change public opinion)
   * Outreach Activities   * Outreach Activities
-    * Life Chain+    * Life Chain / "Choice" Chain / Show the Truth / QA Project
     * 40 Days for Life     * 40 Days for Life
-    * QA Project 
-    * "Choice" Chain 
     * Postcarding     * Postcarding
 +FIXME "**If (insert activity) saves even 1 life, isn't it worth it?**"
 +  * We're all in agreement that the saving of a child's life is a great good, since every child is immeasurably valuable. But does that answer the Q of whether the activity itself is one we should continue to do?
 +  * Blaise (re: HUSH but applies to other activities): "We're up against the forest fire of abortion. Sure, a [seminar on the negative health effects of smoke inhalation given by someone who still thinks arson is okay] might save a few lives, though I doubt it. But is that really a **responsible way to be spending money, time or energy** while the fire is still raging? Maybe we could save lives by evacuating the neighbourhood by giving people bicycles. **Wouldn't it be irresponsible to do that if we could bring in buses or helicopters instead**?
 +
 +  * That any given action has the potential to save a life doesn't answer the question of whether or not it's worthwhile to do. Life Chain might save lives. Creating a pro-life anthem and choreographing and filming a music video for it might save a life. That doesn't automatically mean it's a responsible use of money, time or energy."
 +
 +FIXME "What makes a protest effective?" https://comment.org/protest-and-persuasion-productive-or-pointless/