Citizen Participation in Policy Formation: a Review of Governor Roberts' Conversation with Oregon. INSTITUTION Oregon Univ., Eugene
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 362 429 SO 023 031 AUTHOR Weeks, Edward C.; And Others TITLE Citizen Participation in Policy Formation: A Review of Governor Roberts' Conversation with Oregon. INSTITUTION Oregon Univ., Eugene. Center for Advanced Technology in Education. REPORT NO ISBN-8-87114-179-5 PUB DATE 92 NOTE 92p.; Funding also received from the Northwest Area Foundation. AVAILABLE FROMCenter for Advanced Technology in Education, College of Education, Eugene, OR 97403-1215. PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical,(143) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Citizen Participation; Elementary Secondary Education; Government Role; Higher Education; Interaction; Mass Instruction; Participative Decision Making; *Policy Formation; *Public Opinion; School Taxes; Social Science Research; *State Government; Surveys; *Telecommunications IDENTIFIERS Ed Net; *Oregon; Roberts (Barbara) ABSTRACT This document presents the results of a survey of Oregon voters, polling those who did and those who did not participate in a series of meetings using the state's interactive telecommunications network, Ed-Net. The meetiAgs were part of a project in deliberative democracy called a Conversation with Oregon, launched by Governor Barbara Roberts to address a fiscal crisis in state government. Governor Roberts conducted 32 Ed-Net telecast sessions, reaching 10,000 randomly selected persistent voters in 900 local meetings throughout the state during November and early December. In the Conversation and Ed-Net meetings the Govenor discussed with voters appropriate levels of government services and how to pay for those services. The conversation and especially the Ed-Net meetings were an unprecedented effort to use modern, interactive communications technology to involve large numbers of citizens in the deliberative process of public policy meetings. This report describes the Conversation with Oregon, and documents the extent to which the Ed-Net Meetings succeeded in opening up constructive communication. The voter survey and analysis showed (1) the conversation succeeded in calling together a broad cross section of the state's most persistent voters;(2) the planning and operation of the Ed-Net meetings successfully involved many individuals and organizations in new roles;(3) the meetings significantly increased participants' grasp of basic facts about state finances; (4) persistent voters exhibited a skeptical attitude toward government and politicians that is not changed easily; and (5) though the fiscal crisis remains unresolved, the Conversation succeeded in opening a channel of communication between the governor and voters. (DK) VIr AAA RUEN OF GOVERNOR BER AWN, ItAL'Ak- U S D(PARTMENT Of EDUCATION Offoce or EdurAttonel Rale/00 and improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IERIC) 1his OOCurnant haS been reproduced as reoe,ved from the Person or ovpsnaahon ongmating .1 0 Minor changes have been made to rmptove reproducl,on clushty Pcants Olvieve or oon.ons stated ,n thos doCt.r meat CIO not neCeSsanly represent othcrat OE RI pOsition Or poficy PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS M TERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY e * TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ; INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." ,4''y p rs,, *.: '0.: ,, ,.,..1%.-,,,h..... , .,";i\ 1 kfI',*), ,1 4s 4V: .,........t:f...Sr ,cpe,- ,,*. .T . ei , ,. 111.4. ,t..... ,/1,1,1,, i ePt 4 ,... c.41' %As. f-A,,:, ,.......1'4 ''. \':e,4 't ,ik! )*S'Ir' ....q. ':":- ...-7, t.-.....",:,!,ig ,401 .-!..!ciest.:,i Edward C. Weeks .A V* :. A, ! 7, , rxto..,. ki.,.2; .,... -{:' Margaret Hallock l'..'Cr;t14-!;:i..,..1,60 4, r.-t4.s-4 lc... ....,1 ',pi, ... James B. Lemert i., ,, , k 1 Bruce McKinlay vs sl UNIVERSITY 4,1ST COPY AVAILABLE OF OREGON Eugene, Oregon Citizen Participation in Policy Formation: A REVIEW OF GOVERNOR ROBERTS' CONVERSATION WITH OREGON Edward C. Weeks Margaret Ha flock James B. Lemert Bruce McKinlay UNIVERSITY OF OREGON Eugene, Oregon 1992 3 CI:IZEN PARTICIPATION IN POLICY FORMATION THE RESEARCH TEAM This study was conducted by University of Oregon Bruce McKinlay, associate professor and director, faculty experienced in research, administration, Center for Advanced Technology in Education. and policy making. Members worked as an informal, Developer of computer-based career information interdisciplinary research team. systems and research on information systems in education and social services. M. D. Gall, professor, College of Education. Specialist in instructional methods, research Edward C. Weeks, associate professor, Department design, and program evaluation. of Planning, Public Policy and Management, and director, graduate program in public affairs. Margaret Hal lock, professor and director, Labor Research director for Eugene City Council's Education and Research Center. Chancellor's Eugene Decisions citizen surveys and research liaison to the Conversation with Oregon for the on social consequences of publicpolicy. State System of Higher Education. David Edwards, Jean Nelson, Akilino Susaia, Carl Hosticka, associate professor, Department of research assistants, Department of Planning, Planning, Public Policy and Management. Public Folicy and Management. Associate vice-president for statewide educa- tional services. Member of the Oregon State Funding for data collection and report publication Legislature. was provided by Office of the Vice-Presidentfor Research at the Universitf of Oregon and by the James B. Lemert, professor and director of graduate Northwest Area Foundation. Data were collected studies, School of Journalism. Author of books by MarStat, Incorporated. on mass media and public opinion and on news media performance in presidential campaigns, The Center for Advanced Technology in Education including pioneering work in the scholarly use provided coordination and project management. of exit polls. A CONVERSATION WITH OREGON iii PREFACE This study was initiated by University of Oregon funds to initiate the pre-Conversation survey of faculty members who recogMzed that the Conversa t ion participants. The Northwest Area Foundation w ith Oregon provided a unique opportunity to examine followed through, on similarly short notice, with two aspects of modem democracy, an expanded role for funding for the post-Conversation survey and the citizens in policy development and the place of crucial survey of nonparticipants. Recognizing the interactive communications technology in strength- potential audience for a report of the Oregon ening public participation. experience, the Northwest Area Foundation also Several, organizations contributed to this project. provided funds for editing and printing this report. First, staff members in the governor's office assisted The Conversation with Oregon obviously raises in obtaining random survey lists of persistent voters; many questions, both political and technical, beyond that technical role, they remained besides those addressed here. The data and other independent of the study. On short notice, the information acquired for this project are available university's vice-president for research provided for further research into those questions. 0 iv CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN POLICY FORMATION CONTENTS The Research Team ii Do Conversation Participants Believe the Preface iii Governor Heard What They Said? 19 Table of Contents iv The Governor's State of the State List of Tables Speech 20 List of Figures vi How Did the Conversation Affect the Participants ? 21 Executive Summary vii What did Participants Learn? 22 Introduction 1 Changes in Opinions about Government Oregon's Tax Limitation (Measure 5) 1 and Politicians 22 Responding to Measure 5 1 Changes in Opinion about Response to The Conversation with Oregon 2 Measure 5 23 Ed-Net Meetings: Overview 2 Civic Activation 23 Ed-Net Meetings: Facilities, Logistics, Postscript 25 and Agenda 3 Reaction to the Governor's Tax Reform 25 The News Environment 5 Reaction to the Special Legislative Events after the Ed-Net Meetings 6 Session 26 Research Methods 8 Assessment of Institutional Performance 26 Instrument Development 8 A Final Observation about the Survey Groups 9 Conversation with Oregon 27 Research Design 9 Observations and Conclusions 23 Data Collection and Sample Sizes 10 The Participants 28 Results 11 The Ed-Net Meetings 29 Who Attended Conversation Increasing Knowledge 30 Ed-Net Meetings? 11 Attitudes and Policy Developments 30 Demographic Characteristics 11 A Communication Channel 31 Attitudes toward Government and Appendices Politicians 13 Appendix AA Conversation with Oregon Expectations of the Conversation with (Overview) 33 Oregon 14 Appendix BAbout Ed-Net 37 Support for and Knowledge about Appendix CEd-Net Meeting Information Measure 5 15 Materials 39 How Did Participants Evaluate Ed-Net Appendix DReport Forms and Participant Meetings? 15 Questionnaires 49 Logistical Arrangements 16 Appendix EConversation Questionnaire Facilitators 16 Summary 53 Contribution of Other Participants 17 Appendix FGovernor's State of the State Content of Ed-Net Meetings 17 Address 63 What Approaches Would Participants Take Appendix GTelephone Interview to Measure 5? 18 Questionnaires 71 6 A CONVERSATION WITH OREGON LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Newspaper Articles that Describe the Table 9 Knowledge before Ed-Net Meetings Conversation in Positive or Negative about the Portion of State Budget Terms, by Type of Article 5 Going to Public Schools under Measure 5 (75 percent), and Use Table 2 Articles in Metropolitan and of Lottery and Highway Money to Nonmetropolitan Newspapers that Deal with Measure 5 (No) 15 Describe the Conversation