Page 44 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6

belonging to a group, with the accompanying cognitive, emotional, and behavioral consequences.

The second, the macro level, pertains to the notion of collective identity that denotes the shared

awareness by constituents of a society of being members of a collective (reflecting positive selves).

Although generally most conversation-centered civic engagement practices include a

structured process and promote civility and equal voice among participants, the opportunity for

self-reflection is constant and often resolving (Burnes & Cook, 2013). Encountering (dealing with)

issues and disagreement remains priori as deductive for relating to each other. I am curious about

how self-perception gets translated through dialogue when someone wants to make a valuable

point or needs to appear ‘right’. What gets derived for the individual reasoning together as a group?

What self-realization or new learning comes from that experience? Participants do not enter the

dialogue as a blank slate, they take with them the complexity of their social status based on

economic standing, education, race, gender, age perceptions (self and peer) among other markers

of their cultural heritage and life experiences to date. This increases the potential for miscues,

conflict as well as the need to find acceptable ways to address and process through disagreement.

The process of Community Conversation can be purposefully intentional, possessing

qualities that should allow participants to partake in a deep dialogue of thoughts, concerns, and

perspectives, despite the tendency to disagree and find tensions stifling. As a result, it may lead

participants to change beliefs and judgments (Cavalier, 2011; Yankelovich, 2001; Young, 2002).

In order to explore the phenomenon of working through potential conflict this research is further

structured around the questions: What are the ways in which Community Conversation participants

in dialogue respond to and experience comments and perspectives that enlighten the exchange,

producing introspection or burdensome thought? What about positions that lead to disagreement?

These questions imply that the topics Community Conversations discuss are not the primary

25