Assignment:
While ental entities to go into "closed session"-meaning not open to the public-only when the topic of discussion is personnel decisions or pending litigation. Governing bodies that are committed to openness and transparency will schedule closed-session discussions for the end of their meetings so that members of the public in attendance are not unnecessarily inconvenienced. Governmental entities that are more secretive and less responsible may organize their agendas differently so as to discourage public participation. (Indeed the SWC Governing Board has been known to do just that by starting its meetings with closed-session matters, apparently hoping public attendees will not be willing to wait them out.) How your target governmental entity manages its agenda should be a part of the analysis you write in your paper.
Notice who is in the audience with you. How many public attendees are there?(20) Can you determine why they're there?(Nonprofit organizations asking for funding) How do they respond to the government officials? How do they respond to you? All this can be included in your paper.
Many of these governing bodies have "staffs"-professional people who are paid to help the members of the entity by providing administrative and research services. For some entities, it may well appear that the staff have become the real decision-makers, with the members merely "rubber-stamping" whatever staff suggests. See if you can determine the relationship of the staff to the members and include that in your paper as well.
Compose a paper that communicates sufficient information about the event so that your instructor can have no doubt you were actually present. More importantly, include your analysis: your impressions, opinions, and suggestions concerning the event. For example: How were you treated? What were your expectations going in? Was it what you expected? If not, how was it different? Did you feel as if this was truly democracy in action, or did it feel more like an "Ol' Boys' Club," in which decisions had already been made behind closed doors so that this event was just going through the legally-required motions? Are you glad you went, or did it just strike you as a waste of time? Do you have any interest in going again? As a result of this experience, are you more or less likely to consider public service in some capacity? Also, you might include in your analysis the reason(s) why you chose this particular meeting-did you have a particular interest in the work of this governmental entity in general, or was there a particular agenda item that piqued your curiosity? Remember, the more insightful your analysis, the higher your grade.
Your analysis need not include your political opinions on the specific issues discussed at the event you attend. The purpose of this assignment is for you to gain an understanding of this political process in a more general, institutional sense. Whether you happen to agree or disagree with the city council's specific decision to honor the girl scouts on that particular day is not nearly as important as your analysis of the process they utilized to reach that decision. Similarly, if you go to court, for example, your determination of whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty is much less important than your opinion of the justice system in practice.
Precision and brevity are valued; as such, there is no minimum length for the paper, nor is there a maximum. Nevertheless, you should be able to complete the assignment successfully in 2 to 4 pages. Your paper should be double-spaced and typed/word processed, i.e. not handwritten.
An important aspect of this assignment is for you to have the experience of being physically present at a live governmental event. Thus, in the absence of extremely special circumstances, simply watching a televised broadcast or webcast of a meeting will not satisfy the minimum requirements.