The Subject in the Crowd: A Critical Discussion of Jodi Dean’s “Crowds and Party”

This article presents a critical discussion of Jodi Dean’s (2016) book “Crowds and Party”. I pay particular attention to her discussion of crowds and the Communist Party that is influenced by psychoanalysis. Dean has put forward an important argument for the affectivity within crowds that may be transformed into a Communist Party that is characterised by a similar affective infrastructure. I suggest that Dean’s discussion of affect is slightly vague at times and may be supplemented with Sigmund Freud’s work on affect. In contrast to Dean, who stresses the collectivity and deindividuation of the crowd, I argue that the crowd needs to be thought of as a place where individuality and collectivity come together and remain in tension. Such a tension may then be managed by the Party, as Dean illustrates.

From engagement to outcomes: measuring the impact of researcher training using the rugby team impact framework

This study addresses our approach to the difficult task of measuring the impact of an eLearning service, the Graduate Virtual Research Environment (GVRE), provided to doctoral students at a UK University since October 2009. The GVRE provides research students with access to a training needs analysis tool which is linked to a repository of video learning resources created by academics and experienced research students. This paper explores the use of the Rugby Team Impact Framework as a guide to measuring impact and our use of a number of techniques to gather evidence about the changes resulting from use of the GVRE. The framework gives four levels of evidence, starting with simple measures of provision, through attendance, interest and to outcomes. As with other research, we found the former easy to assess but the outcomes harder to define. We conclude with a critical evaluation of our research process and outcomes.

Facilitating Inclusion: Austrian Wisdom Councils as Democratic Innovation between Consensus and Diversity

Democratic innovations face the challenge of realizing deliberative democratic ideals in the context of structural inequality. Consensus decision making and expertise have been said to have exclusive effects on marginalized groups like women and ethnic and sexual minorities, which obstructs diversity. Wisdom Councils as practiced in Austria attempt to counter inequalities by including marginalized groups through the moderation technique dynamic facilitation. Exploratory participatory observations and interviews with a moderator and the participants of two Wisdom Councils in Austria provide a deeper understanding of the inclusive processes at work in Wisdom Councils facilitating a productive combination of consensus and diversity.