Hi, I'm Youth Monitor Joshua here to explain
What is E.A.9.11?
So by now you've probably figured out that E.A.9.11 stands for "Everything After: a 9.11 Youth Circle." Okay, so what does that mean? The short answer is that it's an online dialogue for high-school students to talk about - you guessed it - any and all issues that have come up since September 11th.
It's been six months since the attacks, and in some ways life has gone back to normal. But "normal" feels different than it used to - teens around the United States have been traumatized by the after effects: stuff like the anthrax scare, the war in Afghanistan, racial intolerance at home. Young people need a space to set their own agenda and talk about the emotional impact of this new climate, and explore how these events continue to affect their lives.
That's where the "Youth Circle" part comes in - this discussion is only for high school students between the ages of 14 and 19. And it's not just your usual run-of-the-mill online discussion either. It's based on the idea of a Small Group Dialogue. How is it different from a regular message board or chat room? Read on.
What is Small Group Dialogue (SGD)?
SGD is an online discussion technique designed to create an intimate space for high-quality conversations online. It was developed over a period of years by a company called Web Lab.
It's a no-brainer that the Web can be a powerful tool to bring people from different backgrounds and perspectives together to discuss and explore issues. When there's a real exchange of ideas, everyone emerges with a deeper understanding of themselves and the world. That's always a good thing, right?
But the truth is that high quality online conversations don't happen very often. Most Web-based bulletin boards have so many people dropping by that messages get lost in the shuffle. Usually posters are anonymous and don't feel any sense of responsibility to the discussion. The way message boards are structured makes it hard to have anything but a bunch of "drive-by" postings as opposed to the give and take of a real, in-person conversation.
Taking that into account, WebLab structured SGD specifically to avoid these problems in a number of ways.
Limited group size.
Unlike large bulletin boards, with hundreds or thousands of people posting at random but never really talking to each other, SGD assigns people to smaller groups, each with a limited number of members (between 25-45 active participants). Despite the fact that they begin as strangers, participants get to know and trust each other, making for a better conversation.
Discussions unfold over time.
Unlike chat, where everyone must be online at the same time, SGD is an "asynchronous" dialogue, which means that every posting is available for reading at any time, and members can take as long as they need to write a response.
Limited life span
Participants in a Dialogue Group start together and come to closure together, generally after 3-4 weeks, unless members vote to extend the life of the group.
The limited time frame makes for a more lively discussion -- members are more likely to go ahead and post instead of "lurking" around for weeks. It's also just a more intense group experience - there are no latecomers, so you don't have to rehash the same discussion.
Less anonymity
By limiting group size, using member biographies, and beginning each group with self-introductions, SGDs lower the level of anonymity to raise the level of accountability, while still preserving the safety and privacy that you get when you use a screen name. Every member matters - you'll be will be missed if you drop out, and your comments are less likely to be taken out of context.
People are often more willing to say what they think or feel online than they are in person.
Instead of dialogues with moderators or facilitators deciding and defining what's appropriate for discussion, SGDs put you, the group members, in the driver's seat. Groups take ownership of their own conversations instead of being led by administrators. Groups are allowed to explore topics that are most meaningful to their members, and are self-moderated.
Outstanding discussions are highlighted.
All of us have seen too many examples of flame wars, disruptions and people who think they have all the answers.
But what does an in-depth exchange between people who respect each other's perspectives look like?
Well, we'll show you! SGD provides a model for what in-depth, intelligent exchanges can be. To see what we mean, visit the Featured Discussions area and see some sample exchanges that participants chose to highlight.
History
Web Lab first tried this approach in the summer of 1998, when they created the P.O.V. Salon to encourage discussions about the independent films shown on P.O. V., a public TV series. Active participants were so enthusiastic and the discussions went so well, it gave the folks at Web Lab all kinds of inspiration about the possibilities of online dialogue and how meaningful they can be, in the right setting.
A few months later, in the fall of 1998, they refined the process with "Reality Check," a set of dialogues about the impeachment of President Clinton. They followed that with dialogues about interracial relationships in America.
The results were amazing:
Members with conflicting opinions communicated across their differences and often came to respect those with whom they disagreed.
Personal attacks were rare, constructive criticism and appreciation abounded, and members generally treated each other exceptionally well and with a thoughtful frankness.
When conflicts did erupt, the group dynamics were usually strong enough that the members accepted responsibility and apologized, but learned something in the process, without Web Lab's intervention.
Some members reported the experience changed the way they communicated both on and off line, whether developing improved listening skills or strengthening their ability to speak their mind and defend their beliefs.
Active members grew remarkably loyal and the site became, as they say in marketing, very "sticky."
Members developed enough trust to share deeply personal aspects of their lives and looked to one another for advice and support.
As members grew to know each other, each group identified topics of common interest and took their dialogue in directions different from the other groups.
There are many questions still to be answered - for instance, what will a totally teen-run Youth Circle based on SGD be like? But this model has already shown such remarkable results, we can't wait to see what happens next!
To read more about Web Lab and the Small Group Dialogue technique, go to www.weblab.org.
| 
