Review the six building blocks for a stronger participation infra- structure in education (Figure 4.3). Which are (or were) present in your school system? Were the activities conventional, thin, or thick? Which opportunities would you have liked to have had or would like to see now, and why?

Every participation program is based on the following six main building blocks which are; disseminating information, management and acquiring of data, discussion, and the connection between the groups, neighborhood involvement in decision making community involvement and public work encouragement. These six blocks construct the main structure of every participation program with changes according to the sector for which participation is designed. In the case study of Creighton Elementary School, the school involves parents in the parent-teacher combined education program. In this program, the parents are given coaching about their participation in learning programs of students. The building block of data acquisition and management as seen in this program is about the position of that child and in class and whole class performance in subjects. The case study includes all six blocks of the participation program and shows an effective example of parents’ inclusion in the students’ education.

The students are provided education both in school and at their homes. This process involves parent-teacher meetings before the program, parents are given guidance on their part in the program and how they implemented the mathematics concepts at their home. While students learn the concepts of mathematics in schools they implement these concepts at home when their parents apply these maths skills at home. The parents are also given data on their students’ performance in the subject and his standing in the whole class. This method is effective due to its nature of parent’s inclusion in students learning the program. The program can be improved if a concept of applied mathematics is added in the program. When students see the practical application of math concepts in their daily life their learning about the subject will increase drastically. This program required a big amount of planning and preparation before it can be applied practically. The parents were given tutorials and guidance on how they will implement these methods at home. Their coaching included all the process on how the students will be accessed after the program. Future improvements can result in more efficient student learning and parent involvement in their children’s education.

1. Define patient compliance, patient engagement, and patient-centered care. How do they differ in terms of participation?

   Table of Contents Toggle

The patient compliance in the medical field is defined as the extent to which the patient sticks to his prescribed medicine. This factor needs the proper guidance of the patient’s doctor in when and how the patient should keep his medicine schedule for quick improvement in health. This process needs a good patient-physician relation as it totally depends on the patient satisfaction with physician care. Lack of trust in physician care, the incorrect hypothesis of disease and less interest of the patient in his disease cure are all the factors that take part in patient compliance in the provision of care. The patient engagement in disease cure describes all the processes by which patient can participate in his cure procedure. It includes small personal assessment of health conditions like personal insulin level or blood pressure check and tracking of vital organs by observation of factors related to them. Patient engagement in their disease control and cure results in better outcomes of cure and early detection of anomalies that can lead to severe complications. Like if the patient regularly monitors his blood pressure, the chance of any heart attack or other cardiovascular complication can be reduced. The patient-centered care is provided by the physicians and it involves the practices that are provided to patients other than their disease cure. These practices include listening to patient’s problems, informing them about their effective care and his involvement in the curing process. This type of care respects patient’s preferences and comfort and encourages patient’s emotional support. The process involves patients’ family too and they are guided on how they can help in improving patient’s physical as well emotional self. All these three concepts differ in terms of their participation factor. The participation of the patient in patient engagement procedure is maximum as a patient himself takes part in his disease cure. The concept of patient compliance may be less due to various trust issues and personal issues and the patient may participate less in his cure. While in the patient-centered cure, the patient does not directly participate in his cure rather his physician helps him in information about his condition and involves his family in the program. However, it is proved that patient’s own participation in his healthcare leads to best results of any cure.

1. Summarize the current official settings for planning and land use at the neighborhood and community levels. How can participation at these levels be improved?

The public participation in the decisions about land use and planning of their neighborhood leads to a better living environment. This participation includes all processes that can improve living standards of the neighborhood. These participation planning were done in the following areas; community visioning, planning of development of the community, and major community zoning decisions. A good participation among the residents of the community can solve various problems without the reliance on the government and can increase the overall status of a community. Community gatherings and meetings that are aimed for the benefit of the community and effective use of land can result in making centers for the community that serve as welfare for the community residents. The process can be started by asking the residents what they expect from the community leaders and what areas according to them need improvement in the community. Based on their answers community leaders can conclude which area of community needs improvement. To improve community participation for effective land use and planning process we can improve the participation infrastructure. The factors that can improve participation are as follows:

1. The community leaders have to set an example for the community and take initiative by encouraging public participation in the policy-making decisions of community. These community leaders should increase their participation network, include more and more people to participate in the community welfare programs and spread positive vibes about the leadership of the community and the local government so that the people start trusting them and provide help as much as they can.
2. Effective use of six building blocks can cater a lot of problems in participation programs before they even arise. These six building blocks provide a complete framework of how a participation program should be. They are applicable to any kind of participation program and provide effects methods of collecting and analyzing information, assessment and acquiring of data, neighborhood and community decision making and public participation encouragement. These methods if applied effectively can improve any kind of participation program. Their inclusion in land use and planning can provide a framework for improved community planning.
3. The use of systematic approach in participation results in effective participation in land use and planning. These approaches include training and intervention of local community, policy making, professional skills development, funding, and budgeting methods.

What is the Open Government Directive? How does it promote public participation? What are potential challenges in implementing this directive? Do you think it effectively encourages public participation?

The Open Government directive is targeted to specific executive departments to implement the methods of transparency, collaboration and participation of various agencies in federal government. The goals of this directive are to online publish government information, improvement in the quality of online content related to government, promoting the culture of open government, and devising a framework for the open government plan. The directive is aimed to promote public participation by encouraging agencies to publish government plans and increasing people’s knowledge about government decisions. Public engagement increases government effectiveness and the decisions are clearly declared in the societies. It encourages the common public to participate in the government policy-making and take feedback from them on how they can improve their services and increase participation.

The public participation in open government plan faces some challenges due to the ineffective strategy of public inclusion in the policies. The public participation methods are difficult to develop, understand and implement. Most of all the policymakers who are responsible for public inclusion in the plans have less idea of how this plan works. Also, the government has given more emphasis on transparency and uploading of government data online as compared to public participation in government decisions.

The Open government plan though had public participation as one of its main emphasis factors initially but the government doesn’t seem to have practically included public participation in the plan of transparency or government data correction online. The plan has not given the opportunity to common people in participating in government policymaking. The reason behind this ineffectiveness are the challenges that restrict proper participation due to the understanding of the process and difficult methods of application of participation plan.

References

Frank, L., Forsythe, L., Ellis, L., Schrandt, S., Sheridan, S., Gerson, J., … & Daugherty, S. (2015). Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute. Quality of Life Research, 24(5), 1033-1041.

Lourenço, R. P. (2015). An analysis of open government portals: A perspective of transparency for accountability. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 323-332.

Nabatchi, T., & Leighninger, M. (2015). Public participation for 21st-century democracy. John Wiley & Sons.