1. Discussion

2.   Where have we been?  Where are we now?  Where do we want to be?  How do we get there? Approach

3.   Four key principles  Seven Action Tasks  Five criteria for evaluation  Three stages of scale SEED SCALE

4.   Oficially?  Karen HLC “Laboratory for SEED SCALE”  Overall curriculum  Practicum Original intent within the Masters Program (Where have we come from Part 1)

5.   19 Responses from all 5 graduating classes  3 Short questions  Brief suggestions Tiny survey amongst Alumni (Where have we come from part 2)

6.  20052007200920112013Total Very Clear14421 12 Clear11012 5 Not Clear10001 2 Total35434 19 Do you consider that it was clear that SEED SCALE was the overarching development framework in the Future Generations program?

7.  2007 200920112013Total Not enough00112 4 About right15012 9 Too much20310 6 Total35434 19 Do you feel that SEED SCALE was emphasized..?

8.  20092007200920112013Total Not enough25214 14 About right10210 4 Not relevant00010 1 Total35434 19 Do you consider that other development models were presented for comparison with SEED SCALE?

9.   Other models of development converge some sort at a point with central themes that they speak to- perhaps if we have discussions looking at this central themes- students may come up with more innovative ways of applying this in community change. For me i’m just realising that the central theme that speaks to my work with the community is PARTNERSHIPS- so im creating my development model around this.  I think more of a focus on social and environmental justice would have been helpful to my work. In some ways, the program felt too conservative. We had one class on social movements, but that wasn't taught very well. We were learning about some pretty terrible global inequalities and powerful corporate and political forces that were limiting communities' ability to achieve "just and lasting change," but there was very little critical discussion of those powerful forces and how to resist them on a community level. I think there needs to be more of a focus on the injustices that are stemming from multinational corporations and examples of communities that have successfully fought back.  A large number of courses presented other development models, including the Sustainable Dev, Economics course, Empowerment course, but there was no single course that focused specifically on comparative models and provided a platform for critical analysis of various models. The Sus Dev course by Jerry Hembd attempted to do this, not enough time given and faculty appeared to be quite divided on the purpose of the graduate program.  Only the two classes taught by Daniel Taylor integrated or focused on this process. Attempt was made by other faculty to present a variety of approaches to community development. The S-S courses in many ways became the default practicum courses, and there was confusion and/or tug-and-pull between the S-S courses and the practicum courses. Comments Class of 2005

10.   SEED SCALE should be developed more and compared to other developed model and should be tested in different continents and learning from it’s implementation  I think it is ok to present SEED-SCALE as the overarching development framework in the program as it is being advocated by the organization. However, other development models also need to be presented adequately before the SEED-SCALE. SEED-SCALE can, then, be introduced as an alternative (not as the only effective one as is presently seen to be projected in the course).  My only comment is that, if the priority of Future Generations is to use the MA program as a vehicle to test and gather data about SEED SCALE in various communities around the world, make it explicit from the time of application. There is nothing wrong with teaching one development model and asking students to implement it in their communities, gather data, and give feedback. But it should be clear from the beginning, so that students know what they are signing up for. I felt like this is what we were being asked to do, but we weren't directly ever asked to do so. This created some confusion and tension in the program which I believe could have been saved. Otherwise, I liked taking a class on SEED SCALE specifically, and thought it was a worthwhile model to test out through my Practicum (at least the SEED part). Comments Class of 2007

11.   It would be better if it could be introduced in the last year after theories of development.  Other development models??? There are OTHER development models? Really?  I think incorporating SEED SCALE into all course works may be monotonous and not practical in some instances. For example how do you incorporate it in inter-cultural communicative competence?  We also need to consider the fact that some students work with rigid organizations that consider new ideas and development concepts at being big headed and insubordinate. In that case, Future Generations should emphasize it to people working in organizations that they personally initiated. Comments Class of 2009

12.   Hi Dan, the recent telephone alumni survey was very helpful and some students gave in-depth comments regarding SEED-Scale. I have a copy of the transcribed interviews and I believe that Christie sent you the matrix already.  Maybe as part of one of the courses, students able to should complete a SEEDSCALE exercise/project that is applicable to their field of work. In that way it will help the student to apply the SEEDSCALE approach and could be a form of baseline information for FG since most of the SEEDSCALE examples are more concentrated in the area of health.  I think it needs to have brief information about all same modal in the world and it should be compared with other models, also it will be very useful if we give more example of such successful models of SEED SCALE.especially Three way Partnership is one of the best methods for implementation of such programs. Comments Class of 2011

13.  Class of 2013….. Focus group Evidence of where we are now..

14.   Presentation of SEED SCALE confusing over all terms  Term I, but not II, term III but not IV  Taught completely separate from USIP  Not explicitly discussed as part of Synthesis and Integration  Really need synthesis and integration each term, perhaps beginning with term II.  How does one relate to the other, or to other development models (such as ABCD)  SEED SCALE is not applied completely; different people take parts that seem relevant and “tweak” them  Difficult to apply in the practicum, but is frequently used to analyze previous work and plan future work.

15.  Where do we want to be? Three general options 1.Parallel strings taught by different people brought together by synthesis and integration at term IV (where we are now) 2.Parallel strings but integrated each term, II, III, IV (or other mechanisms different faculty present other models for discussion and comparison) 3.All courses touch on SEED SCALE or lead to SEED SCALE (original intent)

16.  How do we get there?

17.   SEED SCALE is the Core Conceptual Framework  Inclusion in curriculum  Two core SEED SCALE Courses  Improved mechanisms of Synthesis and Integration  (suggestion of three 1 hour Synthesis and Integration)  (Agreed learning objectives for each module)  Core conceptual framework defined in course catalogue, each faculty member to be aware of this core framework.  Different faculty should present alternative models for discussion and comparison where relevant to learning objectives.  Research aspects  CORE Framework research is the responsibility of faculty  Explicit feedback loop from from research and faculty into curriculum  No restriction on practicum topics Faculty position