Some exchange on working with neighborhood groups, FYI

[Doug Schuler]

Some exchange from communet list serv.  FYI

-- Doug


Date:         Sat, 26 Jul 1997 09:56:59 -0400
From: Steve Snow <shsnow at CHARWEB.ORG>
Subject:      Re: Project in low-income housing co-op
To: COMMUNET at list.uvm.edu

Folks,

I apologize, first, for including most of this posting uin my reply.
However, contecxt is very important to this discusssion.
>
> A neighborhood organization in Minneapolis is embarking on a project in a
> 56-unit low-income housing co-op. They will be providing the residents with
> ASCII terminals for the purpose of communicating online. Twin Cities
> Free-Net will be providing what support we can (they'll be dialing into our
> system).
>
> ==========================================================================
>
> I'm a community
> organizer for Elliot Park Neighborhood, Inc., concentrating primarily on
> safety issues. I've been trying for a year and a half to get the residents
> of Chicago Avenue Apartments to organize around a safety-related issue -
> ANY safety-related issue - and have had very little success. There is
> considerable difficulty getting the residents of that complex to A) Stop
> squabbling long enough to cooperate with one another, and B) Stick to
> something long enough to get measurable results.
>
> I hope to launch a new online conference in that complex, specifically to
> address issues of immediate importance to the residents of Chicago Avenue
> Apartments. I want to start it out small (just that complex), and try to
> expand it to serve the needs of the Old Town In Town condominium co-op
> that is right next door, and the senior's high-rise at 1515 Park Avenue,
> just across a parking lot from both co-ops. The primary initial focus
> will be on safety issues, but any community-building topic will be open
> for discussion once the conference opens.
>
> The complex has been identified in our NRP plan as a focus point for
> our neighborhood computer project. We intend to launch a computer training
> project in the complex, and to install several workstations in the
> building for the residents to learn and hone skills that will make them
> more employable in today's job market, and tomorrow's.
>
> One, I hope that this forum will be one in which the residents of
> Chicago Avenue Apartments will feel comfortable working with one another
> over the long haul, for the benefit of their block and the neighborhood
> as a whole. Two, it looks like an opportunity for the Freenet to break
> some ground by pioneering small-scale community conferencing. Three, it
> is an opportunity for the residents of Chicago Avenue to take some
> half-steps between a total lack of computer knowledge and the basic
> familiarity that will be required if they are to take advantage of the
> NRP computer-training project - whenever that gets going, and whatever
> form it takes. Right now, few (if any) know the difference between a
> mouse and a monitor. They will be hard-pressed to stick to any training
> project that requires a basic familiarity that they simply do not have.
>
> I also see the opportunity to work myself into another heart attack.
> This is going to be like driving a herd of cats. I don't *expect* it to
> work anywhere near as well as I *hope* it will, but I do hope to be able
> to adapt to the obstacles as they present themselves. If we can launch
> this, and build a little bit of momentum, we stand a chance of getting
> residents of Old Town In Town and 1515 Park to jump in and help us
> get to critical mass.
>

We have been doing something in Charlotte
(http://www.charweb.org/neighbors/enab/index.html)

Our focus has been on community leaders first because they are already
motivated to make their area better.

Focusing firepower in a single neighborhood can be powerful, if the
project is carefully thought out and there is *massive* follow-through.

There are several things I wonder about with this project.

First, how will the training be phased in? Who has developed the training
material and is it really suited for the users? [We teach a 9-hour course
in basic computer use/telecom and spent a lot of time developing our own
material based on MS Works for DOS. We might have to change it all as we
move to a Win 3.1 environment in '386 machines.]

We felt 9 hours would be about all people could/would give to get up to
speed.

Once people know how to do this, getting them to do it is another matter.
In your setting, peer pressure might or might not help, I don't know. We
*require* that people send e-mail to a central person once a week at
least. That forces people to use the equipment; if they aren't sending
mail, we check in with them and get them back on track. This tech. is
only useful if it is used regularly but for people outside the electronic
culture use is not a normal occurrance. You are creating new habits.

Technical followup is also very important. We have replaced monitors,
CPUs, printers; reset dialing strings -- whatever it takes to help people
stay online. And we answer endless, natural questions. But it comes at a
cost of our time.

We currently have about 30 people in the program and are going to add 10
more before long.

We also get people together for periodic face-to-face sessions about what
is working and what is not. Candid discussions reveal problems that we
can address.

Long-term retention is iffy. We haven't done it more than a year and have
lost some already. People move. They lose interest. They get busy. And
these are people, recall, who *already care* enough about their
neighborhoods to go through a 6-9 month "community leadership" training
course at the local community college.

Finally, I have a challenge to raise: If people will not work together
face to face, why does anyone think they will work better electronically?
The face to face part, to me, is even more important in an electronic
environment, especially for neighborhood groups.

I wonder if focusing on drawing the community together as a tangible
group first might not make more sense (tho more low-tech) and then
introduce computers as a way to enhance or extend conversations? I'm sure
others have thoughts about these things.

Keep repeating this mantra: This is only a tool, this is only a tool,
this is only a tool.

It is not the Holy Grail.

It is important to see telecomm stuff in its rightful place; it can help
drive change but only with tremendous investment in time and energy over
a long term.

If you already believe that it won't be that successful, perhaps it would
be better to get greater clarity first on what you believe *would* be
successful and do that, rather than laying another level of technology on
a group that already is in some disarray?

My thoughts on a Saturday morning as I try to get through e-mail after
vacation.

Steve Snow
Charlotte's Web
shsnow at charweb.org

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
END