Page 329 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6

characteristics. As a facilitator, I tried to reinforce some of the ideas that were brought up

around deliberative dialogue and safety.” (F01MAA)

“The group members got to participate in co-constructing the safety among the group.”

(F02FW)

“I think the exercise about safety and how we were there for one another and to provide

for one another helped to establish that this was a collective process.” (F02FW)

“Before we begin dialogue and before we begin interacting, we discussed how we wanted

to interact. We also talked about the importance of having a constructive environment for

conversation and interaction.” (F01MAA)

“The great thing about the dialogue was that everyone really paid attention to what we set

up as a group in terms of caring for each other, keeping the dialogue open where we all

have an opportunity to speak and be heard.” (F02FW)

Creating safety allowed participants the opportunity to speak about deeply held, hurtful

issues and occurrences. The concept of safe space also fostered an environment for processing

tensions that surfaced.

Assuming a dual role. The dialogue facilitators described their role as having a dual

purpose. They assumed a formal role carried out, in part, through orienting participants to the style

of deliberative dialogue and by setting the environment for the interaction to occur.

Facilitator respondents described their role this way:

“I think my role kind of fluctuated. I think that the first week was definitely a blending, but

I think that because folks didn’t know us and we were coming from Columbus and

310