Community Development Network

From Social Collaborative Singapore
Revision as of 04:19, 14 October 2019 by Admin (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
Photo: Many different hands placed on a log, by Shane Rounce on Unsplash

This public page is a work in progress and will be updated with information that participants have consensus on. For issues yet to be discussed, they will be in Google Docs that are accessible only to participants.

Request to join our Facebook Group - Community Development Network SG

Request to join our Google Group - Community Development Network SG (for group discussions and collaborations)

Request to contribute to our Collective Blog - for longer form reflections and essays

Look here for our current collective understanding of community development in Singapore - Comm Dev Wiki Page

Look here for our repository of useful articles and information - Google Drive

Purpose

Vision

Insert vision statement

Mission

Insert mission statement

Objectives

Insert objectives

Projects

Getting to Know One Another - to help participants know one another, articulate a vision, dream, values and what we should do together.

Creating a Shared Knowledge Base - to collate and make sense of information about community development (best practices, case studies, research etc) that is relevant to practitioners, organisations and policymakers.

Community Festival / Forum 2019 - to co-organise, co-design a forum about the community, for the community and by the community

(If you want to insert a project here to solicit for inputs or collaboration, please request for a user id and password by sending an email to justin.lee@nus.edu.sg)

Community Fellows - to conduct solutions-focused research together with their communities

General Guiding Principles

Openness sustained by trust, and balanced by integrity

The network should be a safe space for participants to share honest views and constructive feedback. Openness creates vulnerability too, so it should be sustained by trust and integrity among participants, so that new or diverse ways of thinking are not dampened.

Consensus-driven balanced by respect for diverse viewpoints

Through dialogue, participants should aspire to consensus on network matters. Where there is disagreement and collective decisions need to be made, voting can be the less preferred option.

Contributions should be participant-led and strengths-based

Network matters should be defined and led by participants themselves, tapping into their areas of expertise.

Everyone is encouraged to propose and take on projects or activities, and the network should reduce barriers to initiating and mobilising participation where possible.

Fun and informality

The network should be fun because community is built upon informal relationships and we should invest in those relationships.

(Note: These are working principles and will be reviewed and refined as we go along. Possibly new ones will be introduced and old ones removed. They will also be up- or down-voted by participants so that the most relevant ones go to the top, indicating a sense of priority. Guiding principles are only useful to the extent that they are useful reminders to achieve core ideals we tend to forget or overcome key habits we find hard to break; they are less useful when internalise them or already take them as given. They also become more useful when they articulate the relationship to alternative or competing values, providing an indication of how these conflicts might be resolved)

Share unpolished work early

"Waiting too long on “polish” can slow down the process of getting to the best idea. Encouraging the sharing of unfinished work creates a new social norm." If there is a culture where unpolished work is deemed as unprofessional, people will wait to share work until it’s near-perfect. But because it’s so far along, people may provide frivolous platitudes instead of feedback on the core idea. The initial idea keeps steamrolling ahead, irrespective of quality. Much better if you encourage people to share work that’s in progress and a little rough. [paraphrased from this article]

Network Membership Rules

Radical Inclusion, For Now

Currently, we operate on a 'radical inclusion' basis where we accept anyone who is referred by a member. We will post an update for member inputs if we ever come across requests to include people who might create some discomfort. At Meet-Up 3, we agreed that we will continue to do this until it poses a problem of some sort--e.g. if it dilutes the value or fragments the network in some way--then we will review this policy.

Network Events for 2019

Meet-up 6: Ngee Ann Poly


Date - 15 Nov 2019 (Confirmed)

Time - 10am -12pm

Venue - Ngee Ann Polytechnic, School of Humanities & Social Sciences, Blk 53, Level 4, Room 53-04-04 (Staff Lounge)

Address - 535 Clementi Rd, Singapore 599489

Hosted and made possible by Mathew Wong, Head of Programme for Community Development Diploma, Ngee Ann Poly.

Agenda

  1. Project developments: Community Festival & Community Fellows
  2. Discuss whether CDN is ready to articulate collective objectives, membership rules and associational norms.(See Chris Teo's post )
  3. Sign up for a Community Trail in Pulau Ubin - hosted by Terence Tan of Artsolute ‪and wife Jodi Thiele (see article the work they have been doing there. #‎ubinartist‬)
  4. Any Other Business

Meet-up 5: "Who is afraid of community development?" (as part of ArtsWok's Greenhouse Sessions)


Date - 12 Oct 2019 (Sat)

Time - 10- 3pm

Venue - Goodman Arts Centre (specific room to be updated)

Address: 90 Goodman Rd, Singapore 439053

Hosted and made possible by - ArtsWok Collaborative, as part of their Greenhouse Series. ArtsWok says they are open to co-facilitation with partners.

Agenda

  1. See https://www.facebook.com/events/2427241927519582/

Meet-up 4: Frank Früchtel on "The Value of Dependency in Community & Community Work"


Date - 6 September 2019 (Friday)

Time - 2-5pm

Venue - Deutsche Bank, Level 17

Address: Deutsche Bank AG, Asia Pacific Head Office, One Raffles Quay, South Tower, 048583 Singapore 

Hosted and made possible by - Beyond Social Services

Agenda

  1. Talk by Frank Früchtel on "The value of dependency in community and community work" (30 to 45 mins) followed by a discussion and interaction. Frank is the Dean for Social and Educational Sciences at the Potsdam University of Applied Sciences.
  2. Any Other Business

"The Value of Dependency in Community and Community Work" by Frank Früchtel

Key Takeaway

People have come to accept as normal, the idea of an independent, self-determining human being that possesses free will to shape their destiny.

Much of modern society upholds this individualism, which means we tend to think of people as individuals, and responsible for themselves and solving their own problems. Singapore is no different, and we are often exhorted to "help others help themselves".

Drawing on the ideas of the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Frank presented how this ethos, a product of history, severed the once upheld connection and relationship between an individual and his/her community.

Notes (Rough-and-Ready)

  • People used to understand each other in relational, reciprocal and communitarian ways, though now, we tend to look at ourselves and others as independent agents with free will, choice and self-determination.
    Frank started by introducing Rousseau - His Contract Sociale and Emile influenced the modern state and education system today. Rousseau believed that Modern man has started to completely withdraw into themselves. In his life, Rousseau once convinced himself that everything he said (to himself) was truth. He banished society from himself, and just listened to himself - and wrote The Reveries of a Solitary Walker. Rousseau influenced the whole period of Enlightenment thinkers, including Immanuel Kant.
  • Rousseau reinforced the notion of the independent human being with free will, who in contrast to nature, is an autonomous being that operate independent of external causes. The birth of the concept of human independence, has fundamentally shaped the concept of the modern person.
  • All these discussions were in a context where 'emancipation' was trendy - people were trying to break away from monarchies and the rule of other authorities. The 'me' as a self-contained entity became a popular idea, as opposed to a 'me' in servitude and connection to others.
  • Rousseau influenced many modern thinkers including Carl Rogers, and manifests in humanistic psychology - the psychology of individualistic growth, based on freedom and self-determination. The ethos of self-discovery and self-optimisation has burgeoned and prevailed.
  • Yet, other conceptualisations of man used to exist, such as individuals as being inextricably linked to and connected with community: Everybody being dependent on others.
  • Read Fraser, N., & Gordon, L. (1993). Contract versus charity: Why is there no social citizenship in the United States?. SOCIALIST REVIEW-SAN FRANCISCO-, 22, 45-45.
  • A more community model of individuals existed in the past: Community as traditionally obligated, time-shifted, non-equivalent, giving, taking and responding. This has changed with the rise of the bourgeoisie. People were relationally defined.
  • Later: Rise of the contract model propagated the idea of people as free, independent, rational thinkers who relate to each other only through mutually-established social contracts. Values of this model include: Individuality (self-interest), independence (all relationships are temporary, voluntary and based on self-interest) and commodification (everyone owns oneself and can sell oneself to freely-chosen purposes).
  • The community model shrunk and what was created was a family model, which depended on strong emotional bonds, but only within this unit called the family, but which also pushed out neighbours and other friends. Only in the family do we accept being dependent on each other.
  • The charity model crept in gradually, involving one-sided giving. Unlike in the family model where children receive freely from parents without expectation, the charity model applies only to outsiders, in which people perform one-sided giving to others, who take/receive at no cost - but this is stigmatised.
  • Rise of the social work model, which is a combination of contract and charity. The state takes money and give you benefit when you need it, but you are expected to become independent as soon as possible. "Helping people to help themselves" then became a core value of social work.
  • Fraser's proposal is this: "The dichotomy between contract and charity, or work and welfare, caused a juxtaposition of independence and dependence, as if they were opposite things. With dependence being the stigma and independence being normal/desirable."
  • Dependency should be the norm - we constantly need other people to deal with the anxiety, pain and loneliness of everyday living. Independence invalidates the quality of people as being needy, and of as people as having needs to be fulfilled by others.
  • "Helping people to help themselves" needs to shift from "helping people to we-help others" - we need to unmask independence as a fiction.
  • Social work has tried to use various ways and technologies to create independence in people, and to solve social problems. But perhaps problems are not deficits, but opportunities which can being us together, nurture compassion and sympathy. Where we originally see needs, they can be opportunities to connect society. We are very used to just ascertaining peoples' needs - the needs are important, but they should be the opportunity/media for connection. Needs are good.

"It's not the load that breaks us down - it's that we try to carry it alone." - Frank

Q&A Session

  1. How does your talk help us to do case work better? When doing needs assessment, e.g., child protection - don't just ascertain the child's needs, but also know the child's community. Rally the community to assemble. Persons with disabilities are very well looked after in Germany - but they actually have other wants, e.g., inclusion, sociality. Germany had a 'future festival' - an attendee with disability had a dream to be a policeman. So they assembled a community of policemen to make that dream come true. In a community model, you don't know in the beginning who are the right people, so just assemble first and discover each other together later.
  2. Case worker, familiar with deficit approach - how can I shift my perspective from needs-focused to opportunities-based? Think of what novels are about - they are about big problems, but if we portray them correctly it can be beautiful. Often in case work, clients' problems cannot be solved - the goal here is how to see their needs in a different light and to make them shine, in a way.
  3. What if a community or group is tired of a disruptive/deviant person? Community is not always a comforting thing - they can be exclusive and throw other people out. One way is to rally and look for others who can appreciate the challenges that the disruptive person has, or how that person has/can contribute to the community. Knew someone who was mentally ill and who liked to tell stories of a fantastical nature which people didn't listen to - to change the approach, people started to collect his stories and convert them into fantasy plays!
  4. Fears the professionalisation of community work that's going on in Singapore, in which we may make community work exclusive to professionals. How do we avoid this? Communities are very slow. We should change the ratio of neighbours and professional involvement in community work - have more neighbours, and less professionals doing interventions.
  5. In Singapore we struggle with professionalised community work. How do you balance the need for a contract model (i.e. a paid, professionalised, social service way of solving problems) or community model? Each professional intervention should be questioned: How much of this can be community-based instead of being contract-based, without losing the quality too much (e.g., time - community is very slow unlike professionalised services, which can be faster and more efficient).
  6. The trouble with the community model is that it fuels the state imperative to reduce social spending. Would this model get co-opted by state agencies and expect people to solve their problems, such that the state pulls back on its political responsibilities? (No definitive answer.)

Meet-up 3: Facilitated by Abhishek


Date - 30 August 2019 (Friday)

Time - 10am - 1pm

Venue - Meeting Room, Institute of Policy Studies, 1 C Cluny Road, House 5 S(259599)

Agenda

  1. Facilitation by Abhishek Bajaj on the personal meanings of community & community work to members
  2. Su-Lin on Oct Meet-Up
  3. Sharing by Bee Leng & Hana on MSF's Comm Dev Framework
  4. NVPC to share about 'Community Matters' initiative to map out what makes a good community and develop a framework (Grace, Joel)
  5. Agree on the scope of the Participatory Research Project, timelines, responsibilities and implementation (Hana + Justin)
  6. Opportunity to run experiential workshop for SBFF's 'CSR in Action' (Justin)

What Was Discussed

  • Abhishek facilitated a dialogue session to elicit views about the meanings and values of community work and how that intersects with individual identity and experiences.
  • ArtsWok agreed to Host Meet-Up 5 (Oct 12) as art of their Greenhouse session.
  • Su-Lin also said that MOH Transformation Team (something like an innovation unit) would like to join CDN. They care about healthy living and community development and would like to come and see if there are any synergies with the groups here. Explore the relationship between the Health and Social sectors. She wanted to see what the network felt about including them.
  • [Network rule] Currently, we operate on a 'radical inclusion' basis where we accept anyone who is referred by a member. We will post an update for member inputs if we ever come across requests to include people who might create some discomfort.We agreed that we will continue to do this until it poses a problem of some sort--e.g. if it dilutes the value or fragments the network in some way--then we will revisit this policy.
  • Ng Bee Leng and Hana shared about their roles and experience in MSF’s ongoing consultation for developing guide on community work for FSCs. See summary here. Request: The committee is looking for people to be part of this consultation process, through cluster conversations, or even step up as facilitators of that process. Contact Ng Bee Leng (AMKFSC) if interested.
  • NVPC shared the objectives and process of the Community Matters Series - 5 sessions of dialogue / research will run from 25 Sep - 16 Jan 2020. Broadly speaking, the goal is to arrive at insights about community development for community developers. Request: Participation or as co-facilitators. Contact Grace at 96345511 or graceannchua@nvpc.org.sg
  • [IMMEDIATE – by December] Hana’s $4k faculty development fund. Offer: you can use this to collect data from community developers in Singapore (by December) – refreshments, vouchers & transportation cost (can defray costs for others interested to do research).
  • [Future plan] To write a white paper on community development, define it, map out landscape, understand needs and challenges in Singapore, present collective positions where there is consensus and make policy recommendations.
  • SBBF's CSR in Action: Various organisations that expressed interest will be connected to SBBF.

(Members in Google Group at this time = 90)

Meet-up 2: Let's Get to Know One Another First + Organise a Community Festival?


Date - 30 July 2019 (Tuesday)

Time - 2.00 pm - 5.00 pm

Venue - Meeting Room, Institute of Policy Studies, 1 C Cluny Road, House 5 S(259599)

Agenda

  1. Getting to Know One Another - 20 mins
  2. Co-Design and Collaborate on Community Festival / Forum (so far: IPS & Beyond Social Services) - 1 hour
  3. Community Fellows: Invitation for inputs and partnerships (IPS) - 30 mins
  4. Contributing to MSF's / MCCY Community Development Framework - 30 mins


Other possible agenda:

  • clarify the definition of community & community development

What Was Discussed

Meet-up 1: On the Design of the Network


Date - Friday, 31 May 2019

Time - 10.00 am - 12.00 pm

Venue - Credit Suisse

Agenda

  • What are our objectives? What value can we get out of it?
  • Who will co-organise and participate, and in what way?
  • Are there other existing networks already relevant to community work?
  • Based on objectives and existing circumstances, how should we structure the network, and decision-making?

What Was Discussed

Link to the consolidated inputs from participants about the objectives and design of the network

Link to Ijlal's fieldnotes on the meeting.

This is meant to be a collective document so please add points or reflections to this document. You can comments within [brackets] and also identify yourself.

Key points

  • Background to the meeting:
  • Participants agreed to meet monthly
  • We can take our time to get to know one another better--through play--before deciding how to run the network
  • Those who have ideas and want to do something can already start forming groups and starting discussions. Please create project pages or documents and post links to the 'Projects' header above, or start a discussion at the Google Group - Community Development Network SG 

Resources

NCDD’s Engagement Streams Framework - to help navigate the range of dialogue and deliberation approaches available. How are Citizens Juries are different from Deliberative Polling?  When should you use World Cafe, rather than Open Space? 

Citizen Lab's guide to inclusive participation on a digital platforms

Retrieved from ‘http://wiki.socialcollab.sg/index.php?title=Community_Development_Network&oldid=369125’