Round Table Discussion
Second Presentation:
Introduction to challenges faced during addressing the issues of civic education, radicalization and Mattia to tell you briefly about the lessons we learned, so some of the critics behind using the civic education in this context, in the context of our project, are based on common values. First, that the common values are the base of civic education are considered to be the views of the majority, they reflect the views of the majorities. Even though common values are included in most of the constitution. the criticism is that they don’t serve as a common foundation for strengthening social cohesion. Another criticism is that they carry cultural biases, so the question is are these common values although in the constitution of most countries as I said are truly universal and common values. There is also the risk of the neutrality and impartiality of teachers or operators, workers that are using this material so the criticism is that in the end they cement or they continue their unidirectional assimilationist at the very end so the risk of the counter indoctrination that we were discussing also these days the replicate forms of paternal paternalism and power relations which is exactly what civic education and citizenship education should overcome. Another criticism is that they are overburdened with high expectations because they are considered to be solutions for all sorts of problems in society from marginalization to political apathy to extremism social unrest and so on. There are another issue that another challenge we had to face was this disconnection between theory and practice, because there is a lack of uniformity and a sort of leading to a sort of double standard and the last problem was the methodology so we had to find develop a methodology that was creative and attractive enough for participants, but easily to be used by social operators of Frontline workers and so on and so forth, so these are the few of the challenges that we faced. Mattia Zeba adds: starting from how we approach the writing of this policy brief also was from different perspectives because we started with a preliminary mapping of all the projects in Europe dealing with the relation between civic education and radicalisation then partly also for the development of the role play we consulted with experts in the field of civic education and also with Scholars involved in previous projects that adopted approach to radicalization to combat violent behaviors both in Italy and outside. Roberta interferes with: I can address what Robin was mentioning that there is no communication among projects. We try precisely to do this by contacting responsible persons of other projects that were similar to ours. Which was sometimes very challenging because. Frankly, also in the realm of radicalization many of the projects were involved psychologists so also let’s say the discussion was not so easy sometimes. But yeah we contacted and they were both in EU projects and national projects. Also, we draw some lessons from the national and synthesis report on these program we select a bit of some problems of this mapping we could face, and then some insight came. Also from the implementation design of the role play when we tested it and so very briefly to what we saw is that civic education can indeed help shape personal efficacy shape personality and Foster therefore the resistance from violent, because they can introduce alternative perspective so it’s really also a matter of introducing a set of the ideology that somebody has we saw that quality top-down initiatives were less effective in doing that because they were. for instance, they were very less flexible in terms of target groups and methodology also I said before they sometimes happen to go into counter interactivities approaches, and therefore interdisciplinary approaches where we’re seeing much more promising in that field. Because they can impose the move to understanding critical thinking skills and so there is, but the participatory approach was also in the sense beyond poor scholarly methodology and it showed co-development and co-evaluation and co-designed by the target group we did this in part with our roleplay. Because we involved social workers working in schools, so we have a feedback project that they implemented already but this was full because we see that it is a way to co-define some contentious let’s say Concepts in the realm of radicalization. And we focus on role play and theater-based activities because they offer an opportunity to fix and reenact everyday situations like a shield of a car you are playing. They also help participants to put themselves into each other shoes so it was really something to prevent people with, who can’t have painful life trajectory to have a shield for their experiences but also to understand different views having also these role plays in specific context help to share space of dialogue and it was clearly important with regard to the challenges because they were also a few of those.
The first challenge we saw was their role difficulty in establishing friendly and transparent connection between facilitators and participants above all if the facilitators are also school teachers what we did was we tested the game in school but will external staff and that helped because students felt more free to express their thought. Also in this matter which is quite contentious and quite you know it’s not difficult topics and life experiences. Another problem constraint was that Testing in schools and with the risk is one thing in presence it main involve a broader approach or it can be seen. I’m talking now also about our deliverable our roleplay can be seen inside that longer process so specific intervention may be less effective in those instances. We also touched upon the problem of defining concepts because sometimes there are over expensive we say radicalization we thought about not putting radicalization in the roleplay because we want to have something quite broad but sometimes you then end up including into radicalization framework dynamics that are not really radicalizing and then the balance between customization so targeting a specific group and not going into stigmatization was also quite difficult to achieve. so if we want to customize something we also to be very aware that we have to avoid target stigmatization so also to have prejudices in regard to the participants to sometimes also find them have a choice. So these briefly were the main points we found. So, lets move, we will just give a very brief overview of what we have done in Work Package 9 and I will start with the cities we were looking at so we moved the whole thing from the country to the city level and we had five very interesting cities: Florence, Pristina, Tbilisi, Vienna and Helsinki and when you look at these cities the interesting thing is or this what makes it very thrilling is they differ enormously in terms of diversity in terms of size some are Capital Cities they all are Capital Cities except Florence some are within the EU some are outside the EU they have different contexts and different histories and in light of that we have to realize that there is not a one size fits so approach to policy recommendation because every has its own history its own context, but still we managed to come up with a policy recommendations uh that fits all of them we applied again this methodology maybe you have heard it yesterday in the presentations for health system in Vienna so in each of these cities the local teams apply the same methodology first starting out by analysing the city context then moving on to public space and then zooming in on one specific public space where they would do their field research using the game cards in interactive workshops. First of all, with stakeholders who are active in this specific public space as residents with activists as social workers as planners and then the second interactive workshop with young people using this specific public space in order to mirror kind of what did the planners really want and what does the youth see does this have any effect in terms of when we look once more at the cities what are the problems or the challenges they’re facing when you think of public space in Florence the first thing that comes to mind is tourism and how the population in the inner city has to cope with this large numbers of tourists when you think about Vienna and Helsinki then we have social welfare settings where much money goes into public space and into dealing with public space public spending on public space when you look at Pristina then you see a post conflict situation which was also mirrored in the public space they were looking at the University of Pristina campus so this is all these settings and all these contexts met up, but still we were able to find some policy recommendations that kind of are important for all of these cities. First of all, there is the notion of keeping public spaces public commercialization so public space in cities is really under Threat by commercialization gentrification segregation all these things are a threat to public space so keep public space public.
The second thing is this comes from the Vienna perspective, but I think it also applies to the other cities. There should be an emphasis when on public space and investing in public space in the densely built-up inner city areas where social economically weak people live sometimes under very crowded housing conditions so this is where the focus should go here should be a good balance of bottom up and top down approaches when it comes to governance on the other hand we have also seen examples where there is a huge public space where there is no governance whatsoever the city space it’s called hippos and people can simply do there what they want to and it works perfectly well without any governance so this bottom up to top-down or no governance or very much governance is always the question in cases like in Vienna we see that the governance or the are governing public space in the city in Vienna for example there are 21 Municipal departments working on public space which makes everything very slow and there is lots of negotiation it takes like forever to plant a tree because there are 50 people who have to sign off on the tree. This is an extreme example but this huge Administration makes think very slow so there could be some done better, also promotion of diversity is highly important where many migrants live so Vienna has moved on from integration policy to diversity policy we heard about yesterday also they look that about they look at diversity within the municipal departments, but still there is much to be done also in public space and you might wonder why we look at public space and how this is connected to deradicalization we view it as this field of primary prevention so keep social cohesion and social space in public space is kind of this primary prevention targeted that everybody who lives in the city in order to avoid Radicalization. just to reiterate some of the points that also I was saying I think it was just coming from Finland this radicalism already radicalized groups are not that prevalent an issue as to say that we realized with Cana that a lot of the deradicalization policy in Finland is actually what we call implicit policy, instead of explicit policy and the welfare state has had an important role in this, unlike in our neighbouring country in Sweden where the cars are burning, it’s kind of a like making reference to our Nordic sort of perspectives that in Finland the welfare state has been not themed out to the extent that it as in Sweden. at least some services the areas have not segregated in the way that they have been Sweden, because we didn’t have an influx of migrants in Finland in contrast the Finns were migrating to Sweden in the 60s so setting the basis for the wave of like segregated communities in Sweden so we didn’t have that recently become an issue so what we ended up like working on more is the role of the local government that we have been working with Kanerva before as well in enabling participation citizen initiatives and including larger groups of people that this is kind of the possibility of working locally not just like in terms of the spatial structures and planning but also through co-governance would be a way which we can then have people more included and this is therefore like going back to what we were discussing last night a way of this kind of local citizenship that is actually performed and practiced in a different way so unlike in Vienna. I mean of course in Helsinki as well, as a city established during the Russian Empire like in its capital form here is a lot of bureaucracy but on the local level and considering citizens’ initiatives we have much more flexibility was also talking about this that how migrant groups can be having a lot of easy access to services but also it’s easier for them to suggest something like a workshop that becomes then part of a yearly program of the city for instance so these this kind of, but it requires from the those in power and those in the administration flexibility and change in their thinking to start including people in this way and in NGOs in this way as sort of partners and that could be a way to do it but of course in our case countries they they’re not all of them are like fully like he statehood in Kosovo is not fully developed, so how do you then compare this to Finland and Austria so some of these issues became quite challenging but then issues from Florence could be also Revisited in Vienna and Helsinki, because of the newcomers are actually like often tourists or in the case of course Russian migrants after particularly the full scale invasion in Ukraine what we also want to be highlighting from our work package is these game cards and I feel really bad that we didn’t bring a set of game cards. We would be highlighting these as part of the achievement of the project and I’ve already been planning how we can be using this further on these game cards are in these several languages and they discuss belonging and challenges in those cities so like you are led to start to discussing about the spaces and what makes you feel included excluded and instead of like starting from this like there is the problem of security in our area, you diverted in a different way because in countries as well there are this security walks Etc that already start to securitize the space and start with the problem and profile people who are hanging out in these places; there is this wonderful PhD thesis about this from our University so they already profile particular local groups as problems, so we don’t do that but we like to discuss it through the game cards that if they would something and then we found out that there are actually like places that people find uncomfortable and where they don’t feel included and this can be also important for the Youth who might not be feeling included for several different reasons.
Moderator
I don’t really know who I am to advise anyone in this so now I just want to say thanks for being part of The Advisory Board. I mean asked me and said yes. I like this project and so I was a little bit curious what I could offer here and I still don’t know that really to be completely honest, but I’ve actually learned a lot about the operations of Horizon Project so that’s. I mean it’s a cliche but I really take a lot of stuff with me not only about of contend this but also hopefully some of the next projects we going to go into where I’m not a member but like underground partner. All right so I think I have three sort of questions that based on what you’re presenting now and I also read a few of the reports yesterday and so on, but yeah just a long way to get to these three points, and then because I think I mean listening now to your presentations but also what we’ve been through the last days and so and I think I mean that’s the merit of this whole project that to be mentioned. Because I really admire the sort of comprehensiveness of everything thing I mean from this I mean it many of the sort of tools we intuitively take up I mean we do mapping we do you know and it’s easy to promise such things but here I really like how it actually done I mean I think there’s a super high sensitivity to context as we also just ended I mean about the sort of this local turn and sort of acknowledging what is the sites not only in terms of cities but also local spaces and so on, so I think that’s good I also think the composition of the Consortium is really interesting compared to many of the this European framework where you have the same sort of Usual Suspects and have you know same countries and so but here there it makes a difference. also I mean sort of looking at what happens in the and so I think it’s that’s in itself, actually interesting fact and I think I mean again it’s something everyone sort of departing how structure this position at least strive to do this sort of disturbing the for granted, so on but I think that sort of underpins all these working packs. I mean from the conceptual discussions and Abstract Notions of non-binary, and so on but it gets a life right and it actually it does something to our cap and how we understand concepts and so on. So, I think this works super well then and also I think as we saw the demonstration of the interactive map yesterday, I think that’s super impressive again. it’s really easy on a zoom meeting deciding we should have an interactive with all kind of inputs and so on but other things really to do I mean it’s I think the question is of course how does such something like an interactive? How does it keep being relevant? How does it keep alive after the funding from the EU? And so can it be expanded and all these kind of things to keep being relevant not just another Cemetery of production on the internet I don’t know, I mean yeah we’ll see right, but I think it’s good but also to kids I always when I put in this work package we have to design and so on there needs to be to like what kind of, but then I’m looking at your two and make a lot of sense, I found this the road it’s super impressive, and perhaps that’s one of the questions I mean then sort of take out we can discuss and so you can discuss everyone can discuss how there’s so many good resources now so many good examples of how we can do this but how do we actually scale it out and expand it, so it doesn’t end here right that we all take home one of these nice thingies and then that’s it so there’s this thing how do we move from the project to actually getting out to work and so on, because I think these time is deserve to sort of get a life also after today and that leads me to a sort of second thing that can be discussed, like in your comments today now was like we talk about the progressiveness of the initiatives and so on and what we can do and so on but we also have political realities where populations and especially the environmental level we see politicians calling for more restrictive measures they’re not calling for super progressive liberalized ways to handle these problems so how can we actually convince anyone that this is the way to go instead of the other way and like living in Denmark you probably heard about our legislation. We have the vulnerable areas where people if they committing a crime that can be sentenced twice the amount of prison to as you commit the crime outside these are it’s that’s what get voters it’s not the opposite if somebody said no you should do road games I mean there was no this is not working so this I mean how I work on cities myself work on so city sanctuary policies all that kind of stuff right and so I like that but I also sometimes have a feeling I’m sing a little bit on dependent that I look for thing that confirm how I would like the world to look like and not necessarily what it looks like in reality again so how I mean how do we take this into actually policy work one and then last comment is and I don’t know if that’s now just this just my impression from the last days but there’s been lots of focus on especially Islamist radicalization and so on and perhaps also right from what I could hear from stuff but how I think right now you look across Europe one of the biggest mobilizing forces right now is actually the Israel conflict where we see new antagonisms of people being support of Palestinian course the opposite and so on, so it’s really in Denmark it’s super polarized on all scales I mean from within the parliament to the population right and we could easily imagine this also could lead to sort of new forms of radicalization of different forms not only Muslim Islamist radicalization but also like militant Jewish and what have are seeing a little bit in the German context so I mean how would what you have offered the world with do that sort of be able to also adapt to new for radicalization and so on and perhaps be able to sort of let go perhaps of mainly looking at and more like the Muslim terrorist kind of stereotype right and if again if you go to the context that’s basically the only thing when we talk about radicalization there’s no sort of imagination that radicalization could be some something else. I remember some 10 years ago I was doing some work on policy research dialogues and at that time the first Danish like what call action plan against radicalization was being discussed in a task force in the ministry of integration at the time and they had this think tanks with academics and so on, but it was so given from the beginning what the result was to be you know there was this which you’re challenging all of you in your in the project this linear kind of from starting to blow your beard and then one day blowing right just more like when are you at which stage and even though it was disputed and refuted and what have you this was what they ended up with so it’s so difficult at least again from what I know from the context to imagine that could be other kind conversation so lot of scattered thoughts a few questions and yeah don’t know if that’s.
Ursula
At least something to discuss just briefly on what also Miriam presented yesterday this square that we have been focusing on there is a lot of illegalized young people there who are still Asylum Seekers, because their Asylum applications have been pending for years and I’m coming to the question of what can the city actually really do for example they are not allowed to work in Austrian forces. Asylum seekers to be unemployed this is kind of quite unique in Europe so they have no money they get shelter they get a little bit of money for food and that’s about it but they don’t have any means to go to the cinema or I don’t know so this is and they are very visible in public space because this is the only space where they can spend their time for free. when we talk about radicalization yes there has been a lot of discussion of Muslim about radicalization in Austria and in Vienna, but and this is these are the pictures the Miriam showed yesterday there is about a lot of right-wing politicians appearing at the square and saying things like this district is ours so we come back also to this question of belonging so there’s a clear articulation they don’t belong here we don’t want them here so then we come back to the question of whose space is this really and then we have the city of Vienna the city is a Social Democratic Island in a very conservative right-wing country, and they on the other hand really refuse to really talk about these things it’s a like it’s not that bad it works quite well so you have these kind of different levels on the one hand what can city really do they cannot when they could try to employ asylum seekers, but this is national law then you find the right wing. I mean there has been an incident at where even the identitarian movement showed up during a pro migrant protest hanging a banner there so the identitarian movement in Austria is this far right wing of this is the further we get so there is a lot of contestation going on there yeah and lots of different angles then again the area around ran plats is a minority majority area which means there are 60 to 70% of people living there have a migrant backgrounds so I think most of them have a sense of belonging there, because this is where they are living and the right wing is kind of playing to their base saying this is still Vienna and this has to be Vienna and this is our space so there’s really this contestation of whose place is this and closing the eyes and saying everything is just fine. Miriam mentioned some incidents with knives and one should be open and talk about things and not say no everything is just fine, this is the wrong approach I urge should on the dissemination. This is one of the main problem of most Horizon projects I guess because in three years you are very busy with developing your own tools and crossing the boxes of things of your task but then what to do and from the experience from other projects the real work if you want of dissemination starts at the very end of the project it’s something that you cannot do before because you really too busy with developing your work, so from again experience from other projects we have different ways of keeping alive these tools first for us our researchers in the academic circles obviously so other colleagues who have been involved or are thinking of being involving in this topic presenting the material at publishing this is one of the main issue for us publishing articles and papers on these material because just this booklet is not enough obviously so after when we leave is to write a paper an academic paper what we’ve done with other projects to write it together with other colleagues from other disciplines particular pedagogy so that they can or sociology because they can for example help us in doing also some qualitative work because one of the issue that was discussed in our panel yesterday was how to measure how to evaluate that these material is useful is beneficial, so we’ve done some question during that but is more sort of qualitative and I have also to thank all those who were involved in developing our material as Stephan, Roman, Jasmin. Stevan, Volodymyr… and by the way especially because in these academic circles and many conferences more current and future conference will be more and more interdisciplinary so it’s always going to be growing more difficult to find pure for example legal conferences now the most scholars understood that interdisciplinarity is a is the is a key you have to find solutions to complex problems by interacting by being able to talk with other colleagues and Mattia was mentioning how difficult is it’s not obviously easy we develop this material with people coming from the other context obviously they had other language other methodologies and where to be able to discuss with them and find common solutions and so we already pair and work together with the faculty of pedagogy in Bolzano where they train future teachers and future social workers so they’ve been using already this material to give us a feedback then obviously another Circle. let’s say is the practitioners from schools or prisons and we already are in contact yesterday we heard the presentation of a colleague from Spain we’ve been able to enter in jail to collect interviews, we reckon that it’s going to be very difficult so we imagine to work more rather than in prison because in Italy at least it’s very difficult but for with those in probation or in community service this sort of environment then obviously associations NGOs are so that because many of them many of these association they need material like this one in the context of broader programs they already have they are really in need of this type of material because sometimes they lack tools and then also the European or international level so we all know that there is the run the radicalization awareness network and we’ve been trying to get in contact with them and obviously I mean whoever has other contacts welcome but in July there will be this large conference in of the Council of European Studies in Lyon precisely on radicalization and extremism and there we expect to disseminate the material and try to get in contact with people from the run because I think that’s for us a perfect environment perfect network to use our material.
Discussion Part:
(Comment from Mattia) but then I mean I just wanted to then you never know basically the we saw it’s a line of research that we are developing from 10 years at least I think and we saw that this material gets alive on his own we developed five years ago I was mentioning that to Robin I think yesterday we developed a board game for Asylum Seekers and now it is used in schools for majority language speakers in the context of civic education and citizenship so you never know how this is going to be used but it’s I mean it’s there then can be used in fields. (Comment by Martin) I think something you said earlier as well I mean I think it’s super important this yeah almost like main streaming it’s not only about it’s super in going to be able to go to the prom admire that kind of but it’s also equally important to be able a different kind of language.
(Comment from Roberta) No, we were very careful not to, also the language we use not to use too many times radicalization because this can be also scaring for teachers they don’t want to perhaps use this material in class because it’s can be scaring so we try to avoid that
(Comment by Maggie) The organizations we were looking at what package were not deradicalization initiatives they were initiatives that were mainly geared towards social inclusion challenging social disadvantage all of those things and so we deliberately didn’t use those terms we were looking at and challenging the risks that may lead to Collation, but I also think it’s important to take some of the finding back to the organizations you know for example the organization we work with in Glasgow taking our findings back to them and talk to them about it, I think that’s important that you know because people give up their time for you it’s important that you share that knowledge with them I think that’s really important. I also wanted to say that maybe I missed from when I was doing the slideshow that what we found was quite often although there was a cause that brought them people to the initiatives that’s not what kept them there what kept them there was the relationships that they built. When I spoke about them felt like a lot and felt like family this were like a family here that’s what kept them there it wasn’t so much the football it was that’s what brought them there that’s what enticed them in the first place or some of them actually said were tricked into going by they might had a worker you know a drug support worker them there and then stayed they enjoy the football they enjoyed the games but they stayed because of the relationships built and I think that that’s really important that’s why we need the project.
(Comments by Emilia) just about this project actually was back in the day was about project is also addressing the tools that the local associations in Helsinki were developing for interaction and for like local democracy and these tools ended up like somehow sitting somewhere being lost while a new set of tools was developed being developed in a new project and when we joined this project it was kind of obvious that we would want to be continuing some of the work that we were doing before and joining the project I realise that yes there small power there are all these other projects of Umut that are behind this project so it’s not just three years and now we’re moving on to the next phase where a lot of people have different then the question is kind of on one hand can we be bring these same kind of tools to the next projects and would that give them the tools a second life in a in a way I’m not worried about the academics and projects like having academic continuity because that would be somehow there maybe not all of us want to be doing radicalism research in the future about maybe something else that is related but then what I am thinking about like who would be so besides the tools that might be unused and these are really great ideas we should be actually bringing them to these communities if they want to take them because they did not plan them themselves and it’s great to hear that that’s being used in school, but I’m worried about like the groups that we involved for three years or I don’t know six months or whatever we involve them and then we kind of abandon them and that’s I think is an issue that we should be looking into also when planning the new next projects that Som especially when it’s research and you’re there for a length of time and you build relationships you know to an extent with the participants and then you disappear I think it’s important to go back and talk about for is a very big issue and that’s why they don’t want to do they don’t want to work with. They think you feel that they’ve been using we always hurt from any angel that they for any kind Project. But Miriam yesterday we were talking last night she was having this great point about like maybe we should have the NGOs quite in the same country as the research team would be and also or like in longer term interaction maybe from the same place and then working with kind of the same top Topic in a more sustained work way so we don’t have to be finding some NGOs for some interaction activity but they would be already there or that this activity would be like more in build already from the beginning in this or somehow like with Yasmin we could be involving youth centres and this from Finland working with your sort of youth centres and seeing the difference so we would be bringing the NGOs actors to meet the NGOs and municipal bodies in this project and not just meet with us the academics because that might be a bit boring from the social aspects of it.
(Comment from Maggie) it was a very useful experience to be part of this project and the project now but because especially this tool but we are the organization that are like peace building organization we have a lot of young people in our Network working for 10-6 is we trained ourselves for example to use this tool you need to know how to deal with the emotions that will arise it’s a powerful tool it’s not tool, like it’s really bring emotions on the table people get like two three days after they can call say I’m still kind of attached like what will really happen if did you do… we are kind of equipped to deal with that so not every NGO have to agree with the issue but we need people who are willingly like to learn like to. because I learn every meeting and every conference whatever every presentation is something new for me which is good that’s your job to invent new things and our thing is to take something, which can be done in practical way so I think it’s a beneficial both for you and for civil society organization but not all because for example football associations this dance clubs I don’t know they are not equipped with this human interaction in of developing personal or whatever preventing them because they focused on their aim to become the best football player or dancer you know they have they are shouting because I was in sport so I know that they are not very friendly to you in the youth field you like encouraging what how do you feel what do you so it’s not as you said one size at all.
(Comment by Roberta) I fully agree with because we had this problem in Bolzano with a class that came to our institute to do and they booked because this is something that we offer in our institute these activities with classes and they had booked because there is a list of possible activities this particular game but few days before we found out that this class was really problematic and then we decide it was just me and Mattia because as you said we were we are not equipped to deal with this to switch to another activity because this one as you said is a very powerful. we really feared that we were not ready to deal with certain problems and emotions that could arise and so we decided to ask for a social worker who is experienced in that to deal with that to use this material with that class no it’s a can be very dangerous the organization.
(Comments from Maggie) We were with the football organization it wasn’t a football club, were the coaches had all come through they were either alcohol abuse and they been part of the justice system homelessness all of these things so people were coming to drop in. it was a drop in place to play football but it wasn’t a football club but the coaches were all trained CBD training you know they were very skilled it wasn’t actually a club it was just they had teams they played for the homeless World Cup. There’s a homeless World Cup where homeless people are they have a World Cup that’s based everywhere I think Scotland had won it a few years ago. so it’s actually a drop in football session very interesting.
(Comment from another participant) you were earlier referring to differences of violence I just wanted to clarify you meant right wing radicals only in Israel right? sorry you talk about militant Jews you meant right wing radicals in Israel? Not other movements?
(response by the panellist) No, I don’t know.
(Clarification from Mattia) Yeah it has been recorded this clarification so to I follow the comment but the question was at the end what are the scope condition that would make a primary for us I mean we discussed also yesterday, first I think that instead of looking for Civic pre prevention that works on or aim to sameness so common values that are all the same for us we should change a sort of Paradigm and opt for togetherness sounds love and peace slogan but it is from sameness to togetherness trying to work on what put us together what we have in common. Second element of common values should be discussed in their limitations contradictions imperfections this not reduce their values, there is a bit fear that if you present civic education or common values as with their limitations then this is an attempt to the value or themselves focusing on understanding and knowledge of the common values rather than focusing on the assessing, there are even countries where they assess the willingness to believe which is very scary it’s really entering the ideology of a person which is a sort of approach, so instilling the doubt is already a lot that we can obtain from this type of material, critical thinking is perhaps too much, is really the result of education should be at least so for our material is still the doubt it’s already something and another guideline if you want another lesson is to link these values to everyday life. So they should because a problem of common values is they are perceived as rhetoric slogans, human rights, minority rights are slogans and so try to link them to everyday life something that participants students also can see as working as valuable as relevant in their lives and then the methodology so in all of these interventions programs the methodology. So co-participation creative Active Learning is a key, is too important we cannot really think of passing or transmitting or presenting these talking about these values with traditional boring me methods you have to find creative methods and it takes time, the time allocated for these types of methodologies needs to be longer, needs to be greater because they take you need a program. So it’s not enough, obvious it is, our material is just a little drop-in the ocean of a broad program, we’re not so ambitious to think that this is enough I can add something on the methodology precisely also the approach is not to infuse people with because I’m confusing people not with Concepts with methodology as well. So giving people this as a methodology to understand the world to put them into doubts, offer them alternative views so that’s we did that.
(Comments from Maggie) but what with poetry workshop, with the footballers and it’s also about speaking to people in a language that they understand in a way that they understand and not using academic terms but everyday language that’s embedded in in their lives, but the Poetry Workshop was really useful because we did it as a collaborative exercise with the mental health worker at the organization and with the participants and just offering people a different way or a way of expressing themselves in their own terms in their own time you know their own words, and I think that’s really important, because it kind of breaks down that gap between the kind of academic situation in the community it narrows that gap too.
(Comment from Emlia) I guess just to add on this is of horizontality increasing horizontal connections between different groups and this is what we tried that’s why urban space. so interesting and important because you have the co-presence of a lot of things but what we found as, and that’s one of the policy recommendations that we should have like more of the public and also more of the social work taking place in this on-site context what we have been emphasizing for a long time from Helsinki group is this missioning the gap between the authorities and the citizens, so that the citizens are always being uttered like any types of citizens then you have particular groups that are being uttered even more so they are like the particular vulnerable groups and also like when you have the participation of the citizens they are usually not the right citizens because they are not including everything that the concept of Citizen should be including, so you are always a wrong citizen and so you are always being uttered as incomplete not quite there and then some groups are being littered even more so this this gap should be lowered and lot of the people from the NGOs to the public authorities they should realize that they are also citizens, so togetherness is a very really great concept that would be also putting people on equal footing so the voices from the people using this space should be equal whatever their background and their performative role in that context.
(Comments from Maggie) and I think also there’s a lot of invisible groups out there that are not being considered quite often with a lot, but even with Horizon projects, it’s youth 18 – 30 there’s lots of use what about the 30 to 50 year olds, there’s a whole other age groups that are being overlooked it invisible.
(Comment from Emilia) I think all the imaginings of togetherness should always recognize this failure and address that as like with the best abilities.
(Comment from Roberta) just remark again it’s really up to us we cannot expect European commission or the social media or the internet that by chance someone Entering. it’s up to us, we have to really work on the dissemination of materials unfortunately or fortunately. (Comment from Maggie) GCU are trying to include the wider outputs from D.Rad, this new publish platform that GCU are building and that includes bringing the websites from both. because the websites will run out, they’re time-limited but if you can bring them over to the GCU platform, so that’s what I’m also trying to do is bring this repository of work working with some of the archivers at GCU and to do that too when have time.
Thanks