Alors que le community organizing constitue aujourd’hui l'une des formes d'action collective les plus légitimes aux États-Unis, encourageant la participation de classes populaires urbaines que tout exclut du champ politique, les conditions de possibilité de cette participation improbable restent peu étudiées. À partir d'une enquête ethnographique et sociohistorique menée à Chicago, berceau historique de ce répertoire d’action, cette thèse se penche sur le groupe de professionnel·le·s, les community organizers, qui font exister une participation et une représentation politiques profanes. Pourtant, contrairement aux arguments classiques de la sociologie politique, ces professionnel·le·s refusent de parler au nom du groupe mobilisé, la community, se mettant activement en retrait derrière des porte-parole populaires qu’ils et elles sélectionnent et forment. Que dit l’étude de ce rôle des liens entre institutionnalisation, professionnalisation et politisation/dépolitisation ? Pour saisir les ressorts de cette dissociation originale entre professionnel·le et porte-parole et ses effets sur la division du travail politique, on montre comment ce rôle de « faiseur de représentants » émerge, se consolide et se légitime à partir des années 1970, à la frontière entre, d’une part, la tradition d'intervention sociale héritée des initiatives réformatrices des premières décennies du XXe siècle, et d’autre part les pratiques contestataires héritées des mouvements sociaux des années 1960 et 1970. La thèse expose ensuite comment ce rôle hybride, où revendication d’expertise professionnelle et travail de mobilisation et de politisation sont indissociables, se manifeste dans des pratiques quotidiennes de mise en représentation populaire. Celles-ci s’inscrivent dans un espace d’intermédiation largement déterminé par des relations d’interdépendance avec d'autres espaces et champs concurrents (champs politique et philanthropique, « espace des mouvements sociaux ») qui échappent aux porte-parole profanes. Enfin, en déplaçant la focale vers les trajectoires des community organizers, de leurs dispositions à l'engagement aux modalités de maintien dans le rôle ou de reconversion dans d’autres espaces professionnels en passant par l'incorporation en acte de ce sens pratique militant pragmatique, on voit néanmoins que devenir community organizer peut confirmer ou enclencher des dynamiques de politisation individuelle. / Community organizing is one of the most legitimate forms of collective action in the United States today, fostering the participation of urban working classes that are structurally excluded from the political field. And yet, the conditions of possibility of such socially unlikely participation have received little scholarly attention. Based on an ethnographic and sociohistorical inquiry conducted in Chicago, the historic birthplace of that repertoire of collective action, my goal in this dissertation is to address this gap by focusing on the group of professionals, called community organizers, who make popular and lay political participation and representation possible. The central paradox here is that, contrary to what the literature in political sociology usually argues, these professionals refuse to speak on behalf of the mobilized community, actively stepping back behind the spokespeople they select and train. What does the study of this role say about the links between processes of institutionalization, professionalization and politicization/depoliticization? In order to make sense of the original dissociation between the professional’s role and that of the spokesperson and understand how it affects the division of political work, the dissertation shows how the role of “leader-maker” has emerged, taken shape and been legitimized from the 1970s onwards, at the junction of, on the one hand, the reform-minded community organization tradition dating back to the early 20th century, and on the other, the legacy of the contentious politics of the 1960s and 1970s. I then shift the focus to what this hybrid role, where claims of professional expertise and mobilization and politicization cannot be disentangled, actually looks like in terms of daily practices developing popular representation. These practices occur within a space of political intermediation broadly shaped by networks of interdependencies with other competing sectors (the political and philanthropic fields, the “space of social movement”) which are beyond the lay spokespeople’s reach. By looking at organizers’ individual trajectories, however – from their social dispositions towards commitment to the actual incorporation of this pragmatic practical sense and the ways individuals can stay in the field or exit the role towards other career opportunities – the research shows that becoming an organizer can confirm or initiate dynamics of individual politicization.

Community organizing as an area of social work practice has historic roots in challenging inequality, building capacity, and meeting the needs of local peoples through taking collective action. While the literature of community organizing is rich in conceptual frameworks, practice approaches, and case studies, it lacks the level of formal theory that exists in clinical social work. Formal practice theories provide social workers with evidence informed guidance about “what to do”, “how to do it”, and “what to expect”; however, social workers engaging in community organizing have little formal practice theory. The results of this study build the beginning foundation for a direct practice theory of community organizing that can be utilized by social workers engaged in community organizing to better inform practice. In this study, I used Delphi methodology to build formal practice theory by exploring the perspectives of nine community-organizing experts with an average of nearly 30 years of experience from the union organizing and civil rights organizing traditions. Through three waves of data collection, I learned that community organizing is a dialectical process that includes three distinct stages: community building, plan, and mobilize. These distinct stages do not operate solely in a linear or cyclical fashion, but work dynamically with the ever changing social environment to achieve social change. My findings support the idea that community organizing is dependent upon the participation and inclusion of local peoples. While practitioners have distinct roles in organizing efforts, community members determine many aspects of what and how the organizing process unfolds. My findings provide the beginning foundation for a direct social work practice theory of community organizing that can be utilized to guide professional practice as well as provide a basis for further research. It is through further research that community organizing can be better understood and utilized to create evidence informed interventions that are both respectful and inclusive of community members as well as empirical and evidence informed.

Community organizing has a rich tradition within the field of social work. Prevailing community practice models, approaches, and frameworks remain primarily based on practice wisdom, experience, and intuition. Difference, pervasive in various contemporary contexts of practice, largely mediates interactions at the community level. Although difference is addressed at various levels of the practice continuum and within the IFSW and NASW codes of ethics, few methodologically driven tools exist within the literature to guide practitioners. This grounded theory study initiates early development of a community practice model based on forging alliances across boundaries of difference. The Critical Difference Engagement model is based on local community leaders’ and organizers’ experiences working across dimensions of power, race, gender, age, sexual orientation, and socio-economic status, it provides practitioners with a framework for social change and building solidarity across difference in multiple contexts.

Thesis advisor: Dennis L. Shirley / Over the past fifteen years there has been a growing scholarly interest in education issues among community based organizations (CBOs). Education organizing is the mobilization of parents and community members for the purpose of transforming schools and CBOs have already demonstrated their ability to impact both student outcomes and educational policy (Shirley, 1997). The Annenberg Institute found that "successful organizing strategies contributed to increased student attendance, improved standardized test score performance, higher graduation rates and college-going aspirations" (Mediratta, Shah, & McAlister, 2008 ). While an increasing number of researchers are exploring this phenomenon, we know little about the experiences of CBOs members who are engaged in this work. Utilizing a qualitative case study approach and a conceptual framework that draws from situated learning, social capital, and networking theory, this study explored the following questions as they relate to the experiences of members in three different CBOs: * What motivates families to participate in CBOs involved in education organizing? * How do members learn the work of education organizing? What skills (if any) are acquired as both individuals and as a collective, and how are they developed? * What impact (both material and personal) does participation have on CBO members' lives? Findings from this study revealed that participation in the process of education organizing has the potential to not only transform schools, but the participants themselves. Initial understandings of self-interest evolved to include broader social concerns. Members reported increases in confidence, desire, and ability to fully participate in democratic processes. The findings also indicated that the effectiveness of a CBO is related to its organizational structure, its members' capacity for learning, the types of issues that members are trying to address, and the strength of their relationships within local civic ecologies. Those groups that were able to operate in diverse networks while developing the necessary technological, political, and cultural knowledge generally met with the most success. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2009. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Teacher Education, Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction.

This dissertation examines contemporary changes in relations and forms of urban governance by focusing on neighborhood associations in Tucson and analyzing their practices and experiences in the midst of an emerging trend that values collective action and direct democracy. This urban ethnography focuses on practices, strategies, and ideologies of neighborhood associations to discuss issues of representation, participation, and social integration. This dissertation is based on fieldwork conducted for a total of 24 months between 2005 and 2007. It combines participant observation and in-depth interviews with Tucson residents, members of neighborhood associations, and City and non-governmental organizations' officials.This work is presented in three main parts divided into several chapters. In the first part, I provide a general review of the development of concepts of governance and representative democracy in contemporary as well as earlier times. I aim to contextualize the work of neighborhood associations within a general movement towards more direct participatory democracy and argue that a new understanding of the transformations impacting the functioning of representative democracy is crucial to its preservation as a central institution of social integration.The second part of this dissertation presents an analysis of fieldwork data and argues that neighborhood associations are positioning themselves, at the local and global levels, as an important part of the emerging discourses and practices of civil society. Within this broad context, neighborhood associations engage in a variety of activities, pursue multiple strategies, and adopt very different ideologies. A central idea that results from this analysis is that neighborhood associations greatly value practices of direct democracy and strive to exercise greater control over processes of representative democracy in order to prevent its perceived deficiencies from thwarting their projects and corrupting their ideals.The third part extends the data analysis and provides a political and historical reconstruction of neighborhood associations and their cultural evolution as a continuation of the counterculture movement of the 1960s. I also argue that there is a powerful drive towards the global implementation and exercise of direct democratic processes. I draw on the example of Morocco's urban governance reforms and discuss its growing neighborhood associations to show the delicate and conflicted paths they tread between their engagement with the existing system of representative democracy and their attempts to step beyond the limitations of that system to carry out some of the ideals of building a direct and participatory urban democracy.

Black women formed the first welfare rights organization in Atlanta composed of recipients and continued anti-poverty organizing for decades. Their strategy adapted to the political climate, including the ebb and flow of social movements. This thesis explores how and why that strategy changed as well as how the experiences of the women involved altered ideas of activism and movements.

No description available.

Thesis advisor: M Cathleen Kaveny / This dissertation examines the question of whether a politics of the common good remains possible within contemporary democratic societies, characterized by deep pluralism, division, and contention. To engage this question, it draws on the moral and theological framework of the Catholic common good tradition, and employs that framework to identify, analyze, and theorize a real, practical exemplar of common good politics: the democratic tradition of community organizing founded by Saul Alinsky. By placing these two traditions of practice and theory in sustained dialogue for the first time, this study contributes toward a new understanding of each, while developing an original constructive account of the “politics of the common good.” Chapter 1 introduces Catholic common good theory as a framework of ethical analysis and assesses its current state of development. It argues that while contemporary Catholic thinkers have articulated a rich moral vision of the common good, and reconceived it in democratic terms, they have struggled to adequately account for the role of power conflict in political life. Chapter 2 places the Catholic common good tradition in dialogue with the Alinsky tradition. Analyzing the life, work, and methodology of its controversial founder, Saul Alinsky, it traces his deep relationship to the Catholic church and shows how he sought to embody the Catholic tradition’s vision of the common good in democratic practice, while imbuing it with a greater degree of political realism and attentiveness to power. Chapter 3 offers a historical and ethical analysis of Alinsky-style community organizing as a practice and dynamically developing tradition of democratic politics. Drawing on Alasdair MacIntyre’s practice theory, it shows how organizing forms the moral virtues, practical skills, and political institutions needed to promote the common good in a democratic society. It also further articulates the Alinsky tradition’s historical and intellectual relationship to the Catholic tradition. Chapter 4 examines how community organizing exemplifies a democratic form of political prudence. Reconstructing Thomas Aquinas’s theory of prudence, and employing it to analyze two real case studies of organizing campaigns, it develops a constructive account of political prudence as the virtue that enables morally principled and pragmatically effective collective action for the common good in the public realm. Chapter 5 synthesizes the results of the preceding chapters. It argues that prudent political action, and not merely public deliberation, is the social process by which to promote the common good, social justice, and social solidarity in a democratic society. Integrating key insights from both the Catholic tradition and the Alinsky tradition, it clarifies the role of power conflict in the pursuit of the common good, and identifies further areas for theoretical development. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2023. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology.

No description available.

No description available.