Thanks, Michael! I would definitely love to have the talk linked from EA Hub. Cafelow, is that a possibility?
I have definitely checked out SHIC and skimmed through their materials. My initial concept for teaching in schools has a notable distinction from them. Before considering the idea of internal vs. external movement building, my concept was to do a single lesson, spark a lightbulb moment with a student or two who might be EA-inclined, give them a copy of “Doing Good Better,” and then move on. Coming back for more lessons with the same class seemed like it would yield diminishing returns. I didn’t think I would convince any additional students to become EA the second go-around.
However, reading back through Catherine’s conclusions in the High School EA Outreach post, it never occurred to me that sustained exposure might be what encourages some would-be EAs who agree with my first lesson to actually adapt EA behavior.
Since the Unconference and my recent interest in the idea of external movement building, I do think I’d like to rethink a set of materials specifically aimed at people who are not EA-inclined, for classroom use, for general use by EAs when talking to non-EAs, and as guidelines for broader public outreach.
From the conclusions of the contributors to the High School EA Outreach post (and from my own findings) it might be hard to get non-EA young people to put in additional resources into doing good. But collectively, young people will still give tons of money to walk-a-thons and fundraisers they see on Facebook. If we can’t increase the quantity of giving, is it possible to improve the quality? It seems like Charity Navigator has been able to become a (nearly) household name and perpetuate certain ideas about giving. This could be a proof of concept that a large subset of the public is open to new ideas about how to do good, and that non-EA charitable funds could theoretically be redirected to more effective charities.
I have some vague thoughts on this sort of thing, but I only ran my EA-based club for about 6 months, and didn’t do any follow-up measurements. So I don’t think any of those thoughts would add much value relative to the High School EA Outreach post, the post SHIC Will Suspend Outreach Operations, and what you’ve already said/thought.
So instead, here’s a grab bag of links that came to mind as potentially relevant and useful, if you hadn’t seen them already. (Though I’d guess that the collection of resources cafelow linked to may be more relevant and useful.)
Thanks, Michael! I would definitely love to have the talk linked from EA Hub. Cafelow, is that a possibility?
I have definitely checked out SHIC and skimmed through their materials. My initial concept for teaching in schools has a notable distinction from them. Before considering the idea of internal vs. external movement building, my concept was to do a single lesson, spark a lightbulb moment with a student or two who might be EA-inclined, give them a copy of “Doing Good Better,” and then move on. Coming back for more lessons with the same class seemed like it would yield diminishing returns. I didn’t think I would convince any additional students to become EA the second go-around.
However, reading back through Catherine’s conclusions in the High School EA Outreach post, it never occurred to me that sustained exposure might be what encourages some would-be EAs who agree with my first lesson to actually adapt EA behavior.
Since the Unconference and my recent interest in the idea of external movement building, I do think I’d like to rethink a set of materials specifically aimed at people who are not EA-inclined, for classroom use, for general use by EAs when talking to non-EAs, and as guidelines for broader public outreach.
From the conclusions of the contributors to the High School EA Outreach post (and from my own findings) it might be hard to get non-EA young people to put in additional resources into doing good. But collectively, young people will still give tons of money to walk-a-thons and fundraisers they see on Facebook. If we can’t increase the quantity of giving, is it possible to improve the quality? It seems like Charity Navigator has been able to become a (nearly) household name and perpetuate certain ideas about giving. This could be a proof of concept that a large subset of the public is open to new ideas about how to do good, and that non-EA charitable funds could theoretically be redirected to more effective charities.
I have some vague thoughts on this sort of thing, but I only ran my EA-based club for about 6 months, and didn’t do any follow-up measurements. So I don’t think any of those thoughts would add much value relative to the High School EA Outreach post, the post SHIC Will Suspend Outreach Operations, and what you’ve already said/thought.
So instead, here’s a grab bag of links that came to mind as potentially relevant and useful, if you hadn’t seen them already. (Though I’d guess that the collection of resources cafelow linked to may be more relevant and useful.)
https://www.centreforeffectivealtruism.org/the-funnel-model/
https://www.centreforeffectivealtruism.org/the-concentric-circles-model
https://www.centreforeffectivealtruism.org/a-three-factor-model-of-community-building/
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/S6QHRyi7joCWN9dkv/community-vs-network
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/HCbfyHnsebJ9pDtWS/focusing-on-career-and-cause-movement-building
Only tangentially relevant:
https://www.effectivealtruism.org/articles/hard-to-reverse-decisions-destroy-option-value
Collection of EA analyses of how social social movements rise, fall, can be influential, etc.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/EdAHNdbkGR6ndAPJD/memetic-downside-risks-how-ideas-can-evolve-and-cause-harm
(I’d normally also mention the fidelity model in the context, but your talk suggests you’re already familiar with that.)