[Capacity-Building-WG] Policy writing/ public comment course

[ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE]

Dear Maureen,
Thank you for this email. Only yesterday I was thinking of developing such
a course for some group of people AFRALO members who wanted clarification
on the At large public comment process. I think I now understand where some
of the confusions were coming from.

 I think having such a module is important because it would help to improve
participation from a lot of those who don't currently understand the
process. Like you mentioned, when it comes to statement writing I believe
the process we use is open and transparent but I must say it is quite
complicated to understand especially for someone who does not have the time
to attend CPWG or does not understand what CPWG does. Therefore I agree
that an ICANN learn course on this is important. I have to thank Jonathan
for personally taking me through the process a while ago as I must confess,
It took me a while to understand it too and if not for Jonathan I might
still be struggling it with. Having Jonathan to take everyone through it is
impossible and having such module in fine details would help.
 I would be happy to take a lead/work with any other person in putting
together such a module as I believe it is very important.  I would also
take a look at what NCUC has done and see how it can be improved. I would
also discuss with Joanna and Alfredo in the next couple of days on how to
move this forward

Thank you

AK



On Sun, 5 Apr 2020, 06:48 Maureen Hilyard, <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Team
>
> Has anyone looked at the current ICANN Learn Policy writing course which
> was developed by NCUC? It definitely highlighted an approach that was quite
> different from our own. I was quite disappointed because I don't think that
> it is useful in addressing the more inclusive fact-gathering, consensus
> model of developing a statement that we use in At-Large and particularly by
> the CPWG.  This process would be appropriate for a policy or a non-policy
> issue.
>
> But there was a good section that explained the purpose of the Public
> Comment.
>
> From an At-Large point of view, I wondered if our CB team could ensure
> that an At-Large "public comment" course might focus more on the
> methodology that is used by the CPWG where much time is spent on:
>
> * participants from across the array of backgrounds within At-Large
> offering their views after analysing the purpose of the request and the
> resource material around the topic to sort out how a particular policy is
> relevant to our section of ICANN - end-users
>
> * herding the discussions in a way that gathers information while at the
> same time tries to balance the various end-user perspectives into a
> cohesive argument - this is an important task requiring some major skills,
> for example:
>
> 1) great moderation skills which are demonstrated well by Jonathan and
> Olivier  esp keeping participant contributions focused, relevant and
> non-repetitive
>
> 2) seeking views from within the group from people who have the
> appropriate level of knowledge and can articulate their views in such a way
> that others can support or add further perspectives which might capture a
> more directed approach to a statement that fits the enduser point of view
>
> 3)  From among the many articulated views which have been captured by an
> initial penholder or penholders, a small group may start moulding the
> various perspectives  into a logical argument that will form the basis of a
> consensus end-user viewpoint
>
> 4) The draft statement is then presented to the CPWG for further
> discussion and fine-tuning, to create a final statement. Several iterations
> of this process may be required before the statement is complete.
>
> * While developing the course it might be appropriate to offer some
> examples of what each stage might entail, during the process of information
> gathering, putting it into a presentation (or a series of presentations) to
> collate all the different ideas and perspectives, then finalising the
> statement. .
>
> 5) One constraint on this process is the restrictive timeframe given by
> the requestors with regards to the time allowed for this important
> discussion, especially if it is of greater importance to the end-user
> community. This has required single topic sessions on top of the already
> assigned weekly sessions. This is a big commitment for volunteers.
>
> 6) ICANN staff complete the statement document in preparation for its
> delivery to the requestors of the comments, before ratification by the ALAC.
>
> M
> _______________________________________________
> capacity-building-wg mailing list
> capacity-building-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-- 
Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng>, Weekly Bulletin 
<http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal 
<http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> PGPortal 
<https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/capacity-building-wg/attachments/20200406/ce3e11e3/attachment.html>