Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- out_of_the_box:tools:supporting:commitment [2020/02/27 12:49]
caro created
+++ out_of_the_box:tools:supporting:commitment [2020/04/07 15:36] (current)
ceci
@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
   * Reflecting together on ways we could take action for social change
-===== Scenario: =====
+===== Scenario =====
 **Duration:** 1 hour 35 minutes
@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 ** Step 1 : Collective reading of //Time for outrage//** (10 minutes)
-Start the session with a collective reading of the first chapter of the book **Time for outrage** by Stephane HESSEL.
+Start the session with a **collective reading** of the first chapter of the book **Time for outrage** by Stephane HESSEL.
-** Step 2: Mutual Interview Groups** (55 minutes)
+** Step 2: Mapping what outrages us** (20 minutes)
-Invite the participants to gather by 3 to share about **an action that they would like to do but they don't**, focusing on **Why they do not do it**. \\
+For 5 minutes, invite the participant to write down on post-its "**What outrages them right now in the society?**" (2 post-it max per person to keep it short).
-Give them first 5 minutes for individual reflection: What is the situation? Why do they not take action?\\
-For 10 minutes each, each person will then exposes his/her situation to the 2 others, whose job will be to **seek the limiting beliefs** in his/her story. Ask the "listeners" to take notes of the limiting beliefs they recognize in their partners' speech.\\
-After everyone has spoken, invite the "listeners" to tell each "speaker" the limiting beliefs they identified in his/her speech. The speaker will then say which propositions **match the most his/her case** in his/her opinion.
-** Step 3: Detailed analysis of one limiting belief** (1 hour 30 minutes)
+Gather the participants in circle and ask them to share one after the other their **reasons of indignation**.
+Collect their propositions as they come to create a **mind map** of what outrages them.
-After a break (15 minutes), invite the participants to **choose one limiting belief** among all those they have pointed out previously that they would like to **analyze more deeply**.\\
+Give a break to participants so as gaining time to sort their ideas better.
-Precise that they won't have time to all do the exercise: some of them will dig into their case, some others won't, but they will help the others to dig into theirs which is a nice exercise too.
-In practice, ask the participants to question their limiting belief through the lens of:
+** Step 3: Reflecting n how we could take action to bring a change** (1 hour)
-  * the **science** (what the science says about it: sociology, psychology, ethnology, etc.)
-  * other people's **point of views** (what people think and say about it?)
-  * their contradictions (what is contradictory in it?)
-  * their causes (why it is as it is?)
-  * their consequences.
-One will talk and lead the analysis on his/her case. The 2 others will **ease the process by questioning**, improving thus their ability to **listen actively** and **ask relevant questions**.
+Invite the participants to **choose one issue** among all those that emerged previously on which they would like to work.Create working groups accordingly (ideally 5 to 6 groups). \\
-When the analysis comes to its end, roles switch, allowing another member of the trio to analyze her/his limiting belief.
+Let the participants 45 minutes to reflect on **how they could take action** and **bring a change** on the issue they are working on.\\
+Encourage them to **think practical**. The more practical and precise they will be, the more effective the session will be.
 ===== Material required =====
-  * A video projector (if you introduce the limiting belief through a video)
+  * Post-its
+  * A flipchart (to create the mind map)
+  * 5-6 tables to work on
+  * flipchart papers for each group to take notes.
 {{:frise_rose.jpg?nolink&600 |}}

Out of the box

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools