Tom - thanks for having a copy ready to share.
Here’s at least a starting summary so people can have a bit more information about what the study was about and - per my interests/biases - what I think may apply to brigade leadership
Data, design and civics: An exploratory study of civic tech. K Boehner, C DiSalvo - Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Pages 2970-2981.
Boehner and DiSalvo – at Georgia Tech – School of Literature, Media and Communication
email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org
John Stephens Summary 1/3/19 – Focused on likely interests of brigade leaders and participants
Aim: Seek themes from stakeholders to describe the interplay of data, design and civics. Allows exploration of work, goals, challenges around topics such as big data, open data, community mapping, community sensing and Internet of things. Design focus to “tease out how practitioners poised to shape the use and development of civic tech approach and value design.”
Interviews of 13 people from ten organizations. Three kinds of “voices”:
a) Provider voice –worker or perspective focused on government resources, policies and services and how civic tech can contribute to accountability and responsiveness for public good
b) Volunteer voice – Outside of formal government, altruistic use of skills and interests for a greater cause
c) Connector voice – links community activists with government entities or data; “mediated the intersection of civics as business and as altruism”
Seven provider voices; five volunteer voices; and seven connector voices (six of the interviewees hold two categories). One interviewee from Code for Atlanta - categorized as both connector and volunteer. No interviewees are identified by name, only by organization.
Problems: nuts and bolts of data, design and civics – such as getting information into form readily accessible or keeping databases up to date.
Opportunities: strategic visions guiding near and long-term objectives and resource choices.
Overall: four themes i/ Access; ii/ Fragmentation; iii/ Guiding metaphors; iv/ Literacy
Authors provide quotes and summaries from interviewees to elaborate how the four themes are understood – but not necessarily with agreement among interviewees. Example: “From connectors and volunteers, we heard that hackathons can begin to feel like they are chasing the same problem.” [p. 2974]
Looking Forward – different perspectives (Compatible? Conflicting?)
a) Need to move from hype to reality – navigating this area calls for “getting down to basics”
b) Sticking to basics is not enough for the opportunities of civic tech/data/design
c) Mapping Civic Tech not just about a continuum:
Projects to improve existing services ---- Projects to redefine civics
Need to allow for “curiosity” and “exploration” that may lead toward one end of the spectrum or the other, “but maybe in unexpected or circuitous ways.” [p. 2978]
d) Hackathons – have value beyond any particular project/app completion and use. Value “in the exchanges” such as pushing skill sets in new ways, meeting like-minded folks, learning about municipal functions and problems. [p. 2978]