Welcome to the think-tank for outside-the-box proposals.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Proposal #26: Interchange - expanded.

I propose that International Interchange Committees co-opts a number of new members experienced in what has been known as JB-X and what is known within Brazil as Interplus in order to develp a new form of the interchange program suitable for the range of age 16-18. Once this format is in place studies may be done in order to use interesting features of the program also during "regular" interchanges.

Rationale

For a lont time already CISV International has been talking about a gap of activites for 16-18 years old people. In the meanwhile in different parts of the organization different proposals came out which has not been considered enough by the official level of the organization. It's about time to seriuosly look into the problem to avoid that CISV members of a very active age would leave the organization cause not able to find room.

Respectfully submitted, Teo (ITA)

{Visit the interchange website to learn more about IC. JB-X is a programme that was invented by juniors at the EJBM (European Junior Branch Meeting) in 1999 - here's an old infoletter about JBX. Basically it is a two-week interchange between two JBs, that unfortunately died a few years ago, even if most people involved thought it was a great idea. Interplus is a simmilar idea, hosted within Brazil - if you know Portugese, check this page.}

11 Comments:

{1/11/06 08:59} Anonymous Anonymous said...

At least for the european and mediterranian region there is a possibility that can be used. It's called Youth Exchange and is financed by the European Comission. Up to six different organisations from different countries can come together and meet (it's basically a mixture of a seminar camp, workshop and youth meeting). Last spring a finish CISV Delegation participated in a Youth Exchange in Poland and now both CISV-Israel and CISV-Egypt will participate in a Euro-Med Youth Exchange - also in Poland. The great thing about this is that we can use it both for 'only-CISV' youth exchanges, but we can also do these exchanges with other organisations in other countries. Another exciting element about this is that 70% of the travel costs are covered and most of the hosting costs, which would enable us to also take youth to such experiences, who can't afford the normal CISV-Programmes.

 
{2/11/06 00:12} Blogger Nick said...

Basti, can you provide us a link to more information on this Youth Exchange programme?

 
{2/11/06 04:19} Blogger Marcos said...

I think this proposal relates to something I mentioned in some other topic here already.

The problem is that the programmes, in CISV, are defined by its structures and not goals. When you define the programme by its structures, there is no other thing to do than repeat and, till a certain limit, what has been done.

If Interchange was clearly defined by its Educational Goals, the committee would have felt obligated to develop, improve and innovate the programme based on those lines. And we would have moved on...

I obviously agree with this proposal, though I feel structural changes are needed to guarantee the development of our activities and to make sure that in 50 years we are not moving from an avant-guard organization to a conservative utopic idea.

 
{2/11/06 12:59} Blogger Unknown said...

hey marcos, could you prepare a devils proposal based on the idea of your last comment?

 
{2/11/06 13:52} Blogger Marcos said...

of course! I'll do this. It is one that can easily become a motion.
====================================

As for your proposal, more specifically this time, I totally agree with it. I think both activities (or at least Interplus, that I have done in the psat) still need some improvement and shape-up - but are definitely a great starting point to whatever we want to achieve.

Both happened for quite a long time(InterPlus is still going on) and, if merged in concept could provide some really good stuff.

To have 16-18 activities is fundamental, since this age is key on intelectual development and it's the age when people usually decide what to do with themselves. Besides, it would help develop Junior Branches.

How could we make this happen? Motion?

 
{2/11/06 19:37} Blogger Nick said...

Marcos, I strongly agree with you on this issue: Like: "Village is a four-week programme for 11y olds." Now what IS a village, really?
So, re-describing, re-defining, re-ordering and re-adjusting the concepts of CISV prorgammes to their goals I think is more than overdue.

Getting back to Teo's proposal, I do agree with it, even if the interchange programme will become more diversified.

 
{7/11/06 03:52} Anonymous Anonymous said...

This posting has developed an exciting suggestion. Imagine if our collective work was guided by a shared vision of our goals and hopes? What if we thought about our programs based on what we would like to see as the primary expectations? What if the rest of the organization ran on the same idea?

 
{24/11/06 00:15} Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for bringing this up...

As some other people I have worked in JB-X for several years, as an alternative to what CISV was offering.

CISV is trying to explore those roads where we arte excluding people, but at the end JB-X was not welcomed...

I encourage those motivated juniors now to explore the possibilities again... a lot of work was done, even a guide (handbook), past experiences, evaluation tools...

Good luck...

 
{24/11/06 00:15} Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for bringing this up...

As some other people I have worked in JB-X for several years, as an alternative to what CISV was offering.

CISV is trying to explore those roads where we arte excluding people, but at the end JB-X was not welcomed...

I encourage those motivated juniors now to explore the possibilities again... a lot of work was done, even a guide (handbook), past experiences, evaluation tools...

Good luck...

Marta

 
{24/11/06 00:45} Blogger Marcos said...

Matt, from France, wrote a fabulous article about JB-X and the choice of "killing" it. From what I remember, Marta, JBX wasn't even "asked" to be accepted.

Clarifications available on an infoletter from November 2004 - Edited by Mr. James Schaffer. Article by Matt, page 18.
link:
http://share.cisv.org/ijb/Infoletters/2004-05_by_james/InfoletterNov04.pdf

username: ijb.public
password: ijb

Cheers

 
{6/12/06 02:09} Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have always thought of JB-X as an excellent idea and a perfect project! I was disapointed when it passed away. I'm all for a revival!

For Info and thoughts on JB-X there is a wiki page here:
http://www.ijb.cisv.org/ewiki/index.php?id=JB-X about it

IYM Taskforce have been trying in the last year to take into account the success of JB-X, the ideas, the purpose and it is this year that we are looking to re-define the educational content and number 1 priority is redefining the goals of the activity. (So Marcos, I totally agree with what you have said) Many points about this are in a proposal I have, but need to edit some more,

so watch this space

Laura x

 

Post a Comment

<< Home