Toward inclusive justice: Applying the Diverse Voices design method to improve the Washington State Access to Justice Technology Principles

Author:

Magassa Lassana1ORCID,Friedman Batya2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. The Information School, University of Washington, Seattle, United States

2. Information School, University of Washington, Seattle, United States

Abstract

Just court systems are enabled by inclusive justice practices. Toward creating conditions for more inclusive justice–specifically engaging with and enabling experiential experts–we applied the Diverse Voices method to improve the Access to Justice Technology Principles (ATJ-TPrinc) which guide court administration in Washington State, USA. We situate our work in literature on inclusive justice, public interest technology in the courts, value sensitive design, and experiential experts. Then we present our research context, the Washington State ATJ-TPrinc, and our method, the Diverse Voices. We provide details on our methods, including our project genesis and implementation of the Diverse Voices process. We conducted experiential expert panels with four stakeholder groups: legal professionals, currently/formerly incarcerated people, immigrant communities, and rural communities. We then report key concerns and insights that surfaced during the panels as well as the review process and adoption of the revised Principles by the Washington State Supreme Court. We document changes to the ATJ-Princ informed by feedback from the expert panelists, including two new principles – P11 Human Touch and P12 Language Access. The discussion focuses on evidence for success, skillful implementation of the Diverse Voices method, the need for complementary regulation, and benefits to inclusive justice efforts and public interest technology projects. Our contributions entail: (1) a case study demonstrating the use of the Diverse Voices method to improve a tech policy document for the Washington State court system; (2) for public interest technology, a model for public engagement around tech policy that foregrounds participation of experiential experts, as well as the conditions necessary to ensure concerns raised are both heard and acted upon; (3) facilitation techniques and skills for enabling diverse stakeholder groups to express their concerns around responsible computing systems; and (4) revised and expanded access to justice technology principles to support more inclusive justice.

Funder

Tech Policy Lab

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)

Reference91 articles.

1. Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes

2. Proceeding in Parallel or Drifting Apart? A Systematic Review of Policy Appraisal Research and Practices

3. Michelle Alexander. 2010. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press.

4. Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the college classroom;Berk Ronald A.;International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning,2009

5. Redesigning justice innovation: A standardized methodology;Bernal Daniel W.;Stan. JCR and CL,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3