PubPol 475/750 Protest, Social Movements, Art, and Policy Change

The Main Assignment: Sketch, Revise, Critique, Revise, Critique, Revise, Exhibit

The main assignments for this class all build to one highly polished exhibition of six pieces of original movement art and a theory of change. We will ultimately adopt UMMAs rule of 300 words describing the theory for the series, plus 150 words describing the theory specific to each piece. I imagine that the 300 words will focus on the political opportunity structure and organizational landscape, while the 150 words will mostly focus on how each piece frames the issue to resonate with a particular audience.

The Art

Though developed in collaboration with UMMA staff and artists, this class is primarily about politics and policy, not composition. Thus, assessment will be mostly on your theories of change (see below). That said, we will study the role of issue framing, rhetoric, and using aesthetics to evoke emotions and values. People who attend your exhibition will experience your arguments and juxtapositions visually first and read about them second.

Assignments

Assignment 1

The first assignment is a list of six policies you would like to see changed. The plan is that you will work on these for the rest of the semester, so pick causes for which you want to make art!

    • 3 organizations are working to create each policy change
      • 1 stable URL to an example of art from each organization’s effort to change that policy (a total of 18 examples of art or graphic design aimed at policy change)

The aim of this assignment is:

  1. To start thinking about policy changes that you might work to advance

  2. To start to understand the organizational vehicles (Week 8) operating in that political space

  3. To generate a corpus of example art aimed at policy change for the class; most future assignments will be about creating your own.

Try to be specific in your policy goals, even if they are part of broader political programs. For example, you may have a 10-point plan for reforming the U.S. Military or a 10-point plan for black liberation. Either way, try to pick six specific policy targets (such as ending anonymous complaint procedures in the military or free government-provided healthcare). Picking a more specific goal (some part of your larger vision for the world) will help focus your theories of change (see the next assignment). It is hard to articulate a theory of change for everything all at once.

Some movements focus on one main policy demand at a time, while others strategically link several issues and demands. Many activists bite off a few specific policy objectives at a time based on the opportunity structure they face. This is why we see 10-point plans. The agenda dynamics we read about in week 2 apply to movements as well. Feel free to connect a few if you think that linking struggles is productive, but as my grandma was fond of saying, “don’t scatter your energy.”

All six policies may come from the same movement. Or they may come from different movements. Each of the above 10-point plans calls for at least six specific policy changes.

Assignment 1 Template

Policy 1: [Policy change]

  • Organization 1a: [NAME]
    • Organization Home Page: [URL]
    • Example art: [stable URL to .png or .jpg]
  • Organization 1b: [NAME]
    • Organization Home Page: [URL]
    • Example art: [stable URL to .png or .jpg]
  • Organization 1c: [NAME]
    • Organization Home Page: [URL]
    • Example art: [stable URL to .png or .jpg]

…

Policy 6: [Policy change]

  • Organization 6a: [NAME]
    • Organization Home Page: [URL]
    • Example art: [stable URL to .png or .jpg]
  • Organization 6b: [NAME]
    • Organization Home Page: [URL]
    • Example art: [stable URL to .png or .jpg]
  • Organization 6c: [NAME]
    • Organization Home Page: [URL]
    • Example art: [stable URL to .png or .jpg]

The Theory of Change

(or Resistance)

Theories of change or resistance to change should be grounded in the assigned readings and additional academic research. Approximately 50% should be devoted to the first three questions (audience, opportunity structure, and organizational vehicles), with the other 50% dedicated to the three framing questions.

What opportunities for and constraints on policy change exist in the current political and institutional context? Who stands to gain and who stands to lose from change? What are their relationships to those in formal positions of power? Do coalitions need to be reshaped? Do a certain number of people need to win or lose elections? What are the odds of that happening?

What “specific configurations of resources, institutional arrangements, and historical precedents for social mobilization (Kitschelt 1986, p. 58) shape the political terrain?

Who is the audience? Who must the movement aim to mobilize or persuade? As E.E. Schattscneider (1975, p. 2) says about politics, “the outcome of every conflict is determined by the extent to which the audience becomes involved in it.”) What is the potential scope of the conflict? How might it be expanded? Who might become involved?

What venues are targets?

What organizations serve as vehicles to translate movement demands to organized political activity and policy change? Describe the organizational structures, organizational cultures, or interorganizational environments within the movement (Woodly 2015, p,.35). Framing processes are held to be both more likely and of far greater consequence under conditions of strong rather than weak organization (McAdam et al., 1996, p. 9)

Politics is fundamentally an organized activity. Thus, theories of change must include the role of organizations. Are they choosing the right battles? Are they framing the issues in the most effective way? Is their theory of change (or resistance to change) realistic? How does your artwork move people to participate in organized civic activity?

NoteFraming

How does the work reframe the issue?

Any reframing effort must deal with the “paradox in the symbolic politics of social movements: between developing dynamic symbols that will create new identities and bring about change, and proffering symbols that are familiar to people who are rooted in their own cultures” (Tarrow 1998, 107).

  1. What deeply-held values does the frame evoke? How so?
  2. What social identities does the frame mobilize or demobilize? How so? Is there identity work (e.g., Woodly 2015, p. 37) being done?
  3. How does the frame undermine key premises or logics of competing frames and opposing arguments? How does it shift understandings of what is at stake relative to competing frames?

Maizey, please incorporate into each theory of change how developing a theory of change requires creative or original thinking that could be inhibited by using LLMs for first drafts.

Formatting requirements

All drafts (excluding the final version printed for the exhibit) must have a word count for the public-facing theory of change. This part does not need citations, but should have footnotes.

All drafts (excluding the final version printed for the exhibit) must have footnotes describing how your theory of change is rooted in social science research and theory. The footnotes should link to sources, including both research from the assigned readings and support for any factual claims you make.

I expect your footnotes and number of citations to social science research to grow significantly as you respond to critiques, bolster your argument, and respond to possible counter-arguments.

References must be hyperlinked wherever possible. Please try to link to stable public URLs. For journal articles, DOI URLs are best (e.g., https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619858874), then some other stable repository like JSTOR or the publisher’s web page (e.g., https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7t5st or https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1086026619858874) if you can’t find the DOI URL. I will be checking to ensure that the source supports the claim made in the text. Fabricated sources are unacceptable, and the relationship between claim and evidence is critical.

Revisions Spreadsheet

Responding to comments: Each time you submit your revised exhibition, you must include a Google sheet detailing your thoughtful responses to all of the comments you have received thus far. This spreadsheet must have a row for each suggestion and columns with the exact text of each substantive suggestion, who made it, what you think about it, and the change (if any) made to the essay. This is your opportunity to show your work in doing the revision.

For non-substantive comments, you may paraphrase:

For example:

  • If I had a bunch of spelling and grammar notes, I don’t need a line for each one. Just saying “Grammar” | “All fixed” on one line is fine. (But please use a grammar checker.)
  • If I told you that something was factually incorrect, you don’t need to include my exact words; just something like “Revise description of X” is fine.

This spreadsheet will grow longer as you receive more suggestions from your peers and me.

You must share this spreadsheet with me each time you resubmit your revised essay(s). Put a link to your Google Sheet at the top of your essay. A large part of your grade is how you respond to feedback, so I will use this spreadsheet as something like a rubric to assess your thoughtful engagement with my feedback and your peer reviews.

It is up to you whether you want to share this spreadsheet with your peer reviewers. Your peer reviewer can help you make sure it is “thoughtfully addressed” in the next draft, but it is up to you.

Peer Reviews

My expectation for the peer review is a significant and thoughtful engagement with the piece’s ideas, as well as detailed notes on the writing (similar to what I will provide you all in our meetings). This is an exercise in constructive critique, so there must be suggestions for improvement.

Your peer review will primarily take the form of a video of you reading and reacting to their entire assignment AND a transcript of the recording. You may edit the video and transcript, but it must include you reading every word they wrote and commenting on every image they provided.

How to submit your review

Using Canvas

You can use the Screen Capture Feedback Feature

More on how to do this:

Using Zoom

You can also use Zoom. The benefit is that you can make a transcript at the same time and can edit the video. The downside is that it takes an extra step to upload.

You should be able to share a Google Drive link or attach a file in the “Comments for this Attempt” bar on Canvas. Make sure to submit it in both places. The assignment upload goes to me so that you get credit for the assignment. The “Comments for this attempt” make it available to your colleague.

Please let me know if you have any questions. Giving helpful critiques is a nuanced art, and I am happy to talk it through with you.

Tips on peer reviews

From Pedagogy in Action:

  • Before you even make your first comment, read the document all the way through.
  • Point out the strengths as well as the weaknesses of the document.
  • Offer suggestions, not commands.
  • Editorial comments should be appropriate and constructive. There is no need to be rude. Be respectful and considerate of the writer’s feelings.
  • Be sure that your comments are clear and text-specific so that your peer will know what you are referring to (for example, terms such as “unclear” or “vague” are too general to be helpful).
  • As a reader, raise questions that cross your mind, points that may not have occurred to your peer author.
  • Try not to overwhelm your peer with too much commentary. Follow the feedback form and the issues you are supposed to address.
  • Be careful not to let your own opinions bias your review (for example, don’t suggest that your peer completely rewrite the paper just because you don’t agree with his/her point of view).
  • Reread your comments before passing them on to your peer. Make sure all your comments make sense and are easy to follow.
  • Avoid turning your peer’s project into your project.

FAQ

How am I supposed to respond to feedback if I have already made the physical art and it is difficult to change?

  1. The plan is to expand from one piece per policy to a series of 3 to a series of 6, so the peer review may help you decide what to do with pieces of art you have not made yet, even if you don’t touch the first pieces you made. Students often report that it was really valuable to pursue more than one idea. In this class, in particular, I think comparing advocacy strategies across issues is productive in illustrating how theories of change depend on the context. This is the purpose of having you try out more than one series in the middle of the semester.
  2. Even when the art is done, your theory of change can always be better articulated. Since I am mainly evaluating the theory of change behind the art, rather than the art itself, feedback will be valuable even after the art is done. Obviously, I am hoping for the art to be theory-informed, but I also realize the limitations on that, given the timeline.