LLP Grundtvig learning partnership project

LLP Grundtvig learning partnership project 3rd project partner meeting 6-9 February 2013, Dublin ACT! Active & Responsible Citizen= Flourishing Future Society

Presentation on the feedback of the civic actions in Lithuania Soros International House Civic actions carried out in Lithuania 1. ‘Why do you (not) vote?’ 2. ‘Smile collectors’ 3. ‘The five freedoms’ 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’ Date and time: 2012-10-07, 12:00-14:00 Number of participants: 100 • Place of a civic action: Odminiu square It was chosen, since the square is in the heart of the city. It is a busy place, popular among people of all ages. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’: brief summary • Since it was run exactly a week before the Parliament election in Lithuania, the topic of voting was more relevant than ever. The number of citizens that actually vote in national elections has decreased dramatically over the past decades, therefore the purpose of this civic action was to remind people of the significance of being active and expressing their opinion about upcoming elections. We targeted all citizens who have the voting right (18+), especially the ones who are not active in elections. Passersby were asked to ‘vote’: to express their individual choice if they are going to vote in the elections or not. In addition, several discussions about the importance of being responsible and voting were instigated. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’: methods • Invisible Theatre to imitate the process of voting and make it seem as natural as possible • Forum Theatre to put arguments forward, initiate discussion and attract attention 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’: evidence • Photos • Videos • Participants: evaluation questionnaires (18 in total) • Audience: • questionnaires prepared in advance (7 in total) • some of the opinions were recorded using audio recorder (20 recordings) 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’: feedback from the participants’ point of view • Most of the participants declared that the goals of the action were reached: people took part both in voting and discussions (evaluation 8/10). • Success: this civic action tackled an important issueof voting, pinpointed to the importance of elections and encouraged people to be responsible and vote. • Problems: the main issue was the reluctance of passersby to participate in voting and debates. It took a lot of effort to convince them. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’: feedback from the audience’s point of view • In general, audience reacted rather positively. A number of people mentioned that they were attracted to participate since the form of the civic action was playful and entertaining or took part simply because they were asked nicely. • Best aspects: it was acknowledged that the topic of elections and voting is extremely important and thus such civic actions are relevant. • Improvements: more detailed information about the goals of the civic action. • Impact:the ‘voting’ encouraged passersby to think through civic responsibilities and define for themselves why they vote. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Why do you (not) vote?’: reflections on thefeedback • Reflectionsand conclusions: • The goal of reminding people of the importance of voting in elections has been reached. • The chosen methods of invisible theatre (the voting process) and forum theatre (the debates) made the action attractive to the audience and at the same time enabled the participants to make their point of view clear. • The topic itself was very relevant and met with approval. • Suggestions: • Even though invisible theatre is meant to be as realistic as possible, some more detailed information could be prepared in advance in a form of posters, flyers etc. It helps in communicating the main idea more clearly. • A topic of a civic action has to be relevant as it engages both participants and audience. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’ Date and time: 2012-10-31, 13:00-15:00 Number of participants: 200 Place of a civic action: Public transportation A trolleybus going fromthe university campus to the railway station was chosen: various commuters were reached. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’: brief summary • Public transportation is usually a dull place where people seem tired and unhappy. Nevertheless, most of people cannot avoid using it. The goal of this civic action was to brighten up passengers’ day and release tension between commuters and ticket officers.All passengersof all age groups in public transportation, especially constant commuters, were included in our target group. Participants entered a vehicle looking as if they are ticket collectors and asked to prepare tickets. However, they suddenly announced that today’s ticket is actually a smile. At the same time stickers with smiling faces were distributed. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’: methods • Invisible Theatre to imitate the process of ticket inspection and make it seem as natural as possible. The aim was to pleasantly surprise passengers. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’: evidence • Photos • Videos • Participants: evaluation questionnaires (8 in total) • Audience: • questionnaires prepared in advance (16 in total) • some of the opinions were recorded using audio recorder (15 recordings) 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’: feedback from the participants’ point of view • All of the participants declared that the goals of the action were reached: people were smiling, the feedback was generally positive (evaluation 9.25/10). • Success:Passengers believed that the participants were actual ticket officers and, thus, were pleasantly surprised after finding out the real purpose of “smile collecting”. • Problems: the share amount of passengers in public transportation: it was difficult to walk around. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’: feedback from the audience’s point of view • A number of people mentioned that this civic action brightened up their mood and encouraged to interact with fellow commuters. • Best aspects: Passengers mentioned that real ticket officers often seem angry and unpleasant; therefore it was a nice contrast for them to see smiling ‘collectors’. • Improvements: One respondent mentioned the lack of more detailed information about the goals of the civic action. • Impact: Asone of the respondentsput it, ‘Smile collectors’ enabled the passengers to come out of their usual self-isolation and improved their mood. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘Smile collectors’: reflections on thefeedback • Reflections and conclusions: • The aim of pleasantly surprising passengers and improving general atmosphere in public transportation has been reached • The chosen method of invisible theatre brought in the necessary element of surprise. • Suggestions: • Invisible theatre is a great method if people in simple daily situations are to be engaged (e.g. commuting on public transportation, shopping in a supermarket, sending a letter in a post office etc.) 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’ Date and time: 2012-11-11, 13:00-15:00 Number of participants: 300 • Place of a civic action: Rotušės square It was chosen, since the square is in the heart of the city. It is a busy place, popular among people of all ages. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’: brief summary • Animal welfare is still an important issue in Lithuanian society. Despite the growing number of organizations dealing with animal rights, the need for public awareness raising campaigns is pressing. The goal of this civic action was to emphasize that animals are entitled to freedoms and encourage people to take care of them and not to be indifferent if they encounter mistreated animals.We aimed at reaching out to all people, from children to seniors.The idea was to visualize the five freedoms: 1) freedom from hunger and thirst; 2) freedom from discomfort; 3) freedom from pain, injury and disease; 4) freedom to behave normally; 5) freedom from fear and distress. In order to make our message clear we were contrasting two situations: displayed a situation where the freedoms are paid attention to and vice versa. For example, one ‘actor’ played a dog that had plenty of food and water, slept on a pillow, while another ‘actor’ played one that had neither food nor shelter. In addition to these ‘scenes’ not only organizers of the civic action, but also representatives of organizations of animal care were interacting with people. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’: methods • Image Theatre was chosen as it is visually striking and emotionally susceptible. Without using any words, a reality that some animals have to live through is revealed and the idea that it should not be tolerated is put through. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’: evidence • Photos • Videos • Online media coverage • Participants: evaluation questionnaires (19 in total) • Audience: • questionnaires prepared in advance (17 in total) • some of the opinions were recorded using audio recorder (7 recordings) 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

7-8.02.2013, Dublin

Video https://vimeo.com/62618145 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

Online media 1 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

Online media 2 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’: feedback from the participants’ point of view • The majority of the participants declared that the goals of the action were reached: audience was interested in the topic of animal rights, discussions took place and people got more acquainted with the five freedoms as well as the situation of homeless animals in Lithuania (evaluation 9.3/10). • Success: As one participant put it,since the main idea was presented visually, the problematic focus got pin sharp. • Problems: One of the issues was a modest number of organisationsof animal care taking part in the civic action: much more were invited, but were not able to participate. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’: feedback from the audience’s point of view • Passersbywere attracted by vivid and ingenious performances and/or children’s drawings. • Best aspects:The majority acknowledged that such civic actions have educational qualities: widen horizon and not only inform, but also instigate dialogue and corresponding actions. • Improvements:Some people pointed out that it was a little bit too cold to stand around for a long time, so it would be better to organize such civic action in spring or summer. • Impact: The civic action united people and showcased the way to cooperate. The main message was made clear and discussions were instigated. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

‘The five freedoms’: reflections on thefeedback • Reflections and conclusions: • The goals of emphasizing that animals are entitled to freedoms and encouraging people to take care of them and not to be indifferent if they encounter mistreated animals have been attained. • The chosen method of image theatre enabled the organisers to create a visually striking and attractive display as well as make the main message very clear. • Suggestions: • Image theatre is highly suitable for civic actions as it is an attention grabber. After instantly attracting attention it becomes much easier to communicate one’s desired message. • While organising a civic action, it is a good idea to cooperate with non-profit organisations related to a respective field. On the one hand, it is a great opportunity to get more publicity. On the other hand, it enables like-minded and socially conscious people to unite and work towards common goals. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

Promotionalchannelsused • SIH website • SIH facebookpage • A newsletter • Websites and facebook pages ofsocial partners (e.g. organizations of animal care) • Popular news websites(15min.lt, alfa.lt, delfi.lt) 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

Final conference: the most successful civic action ‘The five freedoms’ • This civic action attracted the biggest audience. • The problem isrelevant. • The implementation is visual, attractive and showcases how the methods of Boal’s theatre can be used in organizing a civic action. 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

Thank you! aiste@sih.lt 7-8.02.2013, Dublin

LLP Grundtvig learning partnership project