Philanthropy and the Renewal of Democracy: Is it Time to Step Up Our Game?

When Philanthropy Northwest and the Kettering Foundation published the first edition of this booklet in April 2014, the wounds and diseases afflicting our body politic were already causing concern among growing numbers of citizens, including many philanthropists. Our question about whether we in philanthropy should be stepping up our game in our efforts to strengthen democratic institutions and practices was already being answered in the affirmative by a growing number of philanthropists. That response has intensified as the challenges facing democracy have multiplied in the intervening months. As more of Philanthropy Northwest's members ask how they can contribute to strengthening democracy, we have responded by creating a discussion platform called "Democracy Northwest" and, in cooperation with the Kettering Foundation, revising and updating this monograph.In the Fall 2016 edition of this monograph, Daniel Kemmis explores the sometimes-fraught relationship between philanthropy and democracy. Beginning with a wide-ranging stroll through the shared history of philanthropy and democracy, Kemmis examines the current post-Citizens United landscape and asks whether philanthropy can and should do more to strengthen the infrastructure and practices of democracy.The 2016 edition features new graphics and other updates reflecting changes in philanthropy and democracy since 2014, as well as a new foreword by Remy Trupin, Philanthropy Northwest's Advocacy Catalyst Fellow

Designing for Irrelevance

My job title is ‘designer’ but I’m reluctant to describe myself as a designer for a number of reasons: first, because the practice has a lot to answer for; and second, because I don’t do a whole lot of design. I help groups of people to collaborate and converse their way through problems towards solutions—activating a latent capability for design in people as they think and work differently, together. The sense of agency that accompanies this is intoxicating. This work can produce strategies, systems, and services, as well as spaces, objects, and graphics. The awareness that design can shape both our (intangible) experiences and our (tangible) environments—and that, as a mode of thinking, it can be accessible, inclusive, and participatory—shifts it from a practice to a stance. In this sense, is design a choice that we make to perceive and move through the world in a contextual and intentional way? What does this mean for the practice of design?I respod to these question by reflecting on my experience of participating in the Indonesia Australia Design Futures project

Collaboration and the Ecology of Democracy

This Kettering Foundation report explores the features and implications of citizen-driven, multi-party collaboration. Kettering has called the spaces and opportunities where this type of collaboration takes place the "political wetlands." Kemmis and McKinney embrace this ecological metaphor, seeing the emergence of democracy as similar to the self-organizing phenomena that arise in the natural realm. As democracy has evolved and matured over the millennia, it has become more bureaucratic and structured. Toward the end of the 20th century, citizens' desire for a more authentically engaged and constructive kind of involvement has produced new, less structured forms of deliberative and collaborative democracy.Several case studies of collaboration revolving around natural resources and governing public land are provided. In Idaho, for example, the Henry's Fork Watershed Council brings together competing interests -- farmers, ranchers, anglers, outfitters, guides, and environmentalists -- and provides a forum where they can address challenges that arise along the watershed. For nearly two decades, this group of people, who often stand on opposite sides of the political divide, has resolved problems by tapping into the collective intelligence of its members.The authors suggest that such place-based, collaborative initiatives may evolve into new forms of democratic governance

The psychological contract in apprenticeships and traineeships : differing perceptions

As with any contract of employment, the mutual expectations of the employer and the apprentice/trainee are very important. Apprenticeships and traineeships have greater expectations than other employment contracts of employment because of the training component of the contract. This paper reports on some of the findings of a major NCVER-funded national project examining mutual expectations in apprenticeships and traineeships through the concept of the psychological contract. The paper focuses on the differences between employers and apprentices/trainees, in the expectations each party has of the other and in the extent to which the expectations are perceived to have been met.<br /

A cross‐faculty simulation model for authentic learning

This paper proposes a cross‐faculty simulation model for authentic learning that bridges the gap between short group‐based simulations within the classroom and longer individual placements in professional working contexts. Dissemination of the model is expected to widen the use of authentic learning approaches in higher education (HE). The model is based on a cross‐faculty project in which UK HE students acted as professional developers to produce prototype educational games for academic clients from other subject areas. Perceptions about the project were obtained from interviews with project participants. The stakeholders believed the cross‐faculty simulation to be a motivating learning experience, whilst identifying possible improvements. To evaluate whether the authenticity of the student–client relationship could be improved, the interview data were compared to four themes for authentic learning described by Rule in 2006. The data supported Rule’s themes, whilst highlighting the added value gained from meta‐awareness of the simulation as a learning opportunity

Understanding the psychological contract in apprenticeships and traineeships to improve retention

Attrition in apprenticeships and traineeships is an ongoing concern for employers and government alike, with completion standing at around 50% on average. One possible explanation for this high attrition rate that there is mismatch between the respective expectations of apprentices/trainees and employers. This research use the concept of psychological contract, that is, the perceived mutual obligations betweens employers and employees of themselves and each other, to test this explanation