10 Commandments of Panel Discussions

 

Is it time for the panel discussion format of conference sessions to get some guidelines?

I commented a couple days ago:

Most abused session format
The panel. As both perp and victim of several panels this conference, I am convinced there need to be some guidelines. Too many talking heads pontificating ad hoc, ad nauseum, off-topic. There must be a better way. Ideas? I need to think more about this.

I may have been a little harsh here. I did enjoy the panels I saw and participated in. I just think they could have been so much better with a few little enforced rules. Anyway here's how my thinking goes so far...

10 Commandments of Panel Discussions

For conveners:

I. Thou shalt limit the session to a single question about a topic pertinent to the targeted attendees.

II. Thou shalt limit the number of panelists to not more than one per 15 minutes of presentation time allotted. For the math challenged, that means no more than four panelists per hour of session.

III. Thou shalt select panelists based on diversity of view, opinion and experience. Invite an outsider looking in, now and then.

IV. Thou shalt plan for at least one-half of allotted time for discussion based on attendee questions.It is a panel discussion, not sequential lectures, after all.

V. Thou shalt have a moderator who actually moderates - enforcing time limits and keeping panelists on topic. An electric cattle prod brandished now and then is advised.

For participants

VI. Thou shalt stay on topic. Period.

VII. Unless given a longer time to make opening remarks, thou shalt limit thy responses to less than three minutes per response. Wear a damn watch.

VIII. Thou shalt show the participants and fellow panelists respect by speaking directly to the question.

IX. Thou shalt not talk again until each panelist has replied. Heated back-and-forth dialogs are the exception.

X. Thou shalt understand and keep holy the right to remain silent on topics about which thou knows diddly-squat. As Honest Abe once said, “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

OK, folks, add your own!

Ric Murray offered in a comment what I believe is an outstanding alternative to panel discussions:

I have an idea for a different approach to panels that I would like to see... The TED Talk format of giving people 15 minutes to "do their thing." It could be scheduled (but yuck). My idea would be for presenters to sign up before the conference (as they do if the want to present a "real" session). The difference would be, first-come-first-served would fill the schedule. A room could be set aside for the length of the conference. This also might meet your 10 minutes or walk criteria.

I keep reading Tweets, blogs, and getting the impression that many attendees learn more from the hallway conversations. This would be like bringing the hallway into a room. You might even find great speakers who aren't the "big names." How democratic, huh?

Cool, huh? I am forwarding this to the ISTE Powers-That-Be.

Rationale or rationalization?

rationale: an underlying reason
rationalization: an excuse or more attractive explanation

Two related, but different words. Two situations to which my reasons may fall into either category.

_________________________________

The first came during the SIGMS Forum at NECC, when the panel was asked if the goal of "saving library jobs" was self-serving. On the surface it certainly appears so. But I personally don't look at it that way.

The library media special has some unique roles in a school - the promotion of independent reading and love of reading; the teaching of critical research and information evaluation skills; and the promotion of intellectual freedom and provision of a diversity of ideas and options that cannot be found in textbooks.  While I would not argue for the retention of any one librarian, I can certainly argue for the retention of the position, just as I would argue for not eliminating art, music, PE, math, science, or any other position that offers children a unique learning experience.

The second situation comes as a response to a comment left on the Blue Skunk to a "take-away" listed Wednesday that read:  Best simple idea: If you want to get teachers using online resources with kids, cut their Xerox budgets. Dan replied:

"Best Simple Idea" oughtta be retitled "Best Indication That [Whoever Pitched That One] Is Too Far Removed From Classroom Teaching For [His/Her] Own Good."

Likelier than this cheerful migration online, which the author envisions, is a lot of grumbling, ending if and only if the administration accedes funds.

I mean, carrots over sticks. Every time, right?

LC gave some support for the idea:

I like your best "simple idea." It's super environmentally friendly. If teachers that have the access to online education still use paper to teach their students, I think they need to be seriously reprimanded, maybe even put in jail for a day. Well, OK, maybe that's a bit on the harsh side, but in the spirit of educational progress, I think teachers must find reasons to use the internet and software for educational purposes. Think outside the box. On the internet, you can reverse your work almost always, and do it instantaneously without damaging the environment. On paper, you can scribble over it or erase it, but eventually you will have to ask for another sheet of paper. Webpages provide a heck of a lot more info than sheet pages. The return from purchasing internet programs and software will be noticeable within the first day you use it. It's a worthy investment.

Well, it really wasn't my idea, but it deserves some consideration.  In every school I've worked at, funding is a zero-sum game. In other words, there is a finite amount that can be spent on all programs, and by spending on one thing, you have less to spend in other areas. And vice versa.

So, if we can use technology to decrease the amount of money spent on printing, paper, toner, and time spent copying, that frees up additional funds for lower class sizes, better materials, extra-curriculars, etc. One inherent advantage of placing stuff online is that doing so is virtually free.

Tom Landry once described leadership as "getting people to do what they don't want to do, in order to achieve what they want to achieve." This is that sort of leadership whether the carrot or stick approach is used.

_________________________________ 

But back to my original question. Are my responses rationales or rationalizations?  To me a primary difference is that rationales are made prior to forming an opinion, whereas rationalizations often occur after the opinion has been formed - and publicly stated.

I have to admit, both of my reasons may be more rationalizations than rationales.

Did I ever mention I am not a quick thinker?

A second Thanksgiving Day

 curmudgeon: An ill tempered (and frequently old) person full of stubborn ideas or opinions - wiktionary

A not uncommon response when asking a Minnesotan how things are going is, "Oh, could be worse." Effusive, we're not.

The "could-be-worse" philosophy is one I personally need to remember more often. 

The LWW and I are spending a few days unwinding by visiting the beautiful Texas Hill Country north of San Antonio. It's been a busy summer and a few days of getting up late, reading and touring are welcome. Yesterday, July 4th, we took the whole day visiting President Lyndon Johnson's ranch and hometown of Johnson City.

While most of us remember Johnson as the "Vietnam War" president with chants of "LBJ, LBJ, how many babies did you kill today," I was struck by his efforts to create his 'the Great Society." It was under Johnson that effective civil rights legislation was passed. Medicare and Medicaid was enacted during his term. Money poured into schools with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Thanks to Lady Bird, the environmental movement got started, and he added substantially to the National Parks domain. LBJ signed into law funding for the start of public broadcast. Any NPR listeners out there? 

Johnson was motivated by the experiences of his own childhood. He grew up poor, worked his way through college, and remained in close contact with his Hill Country neighbors and empathized with the disadvantaged. He was described as the last great "rural liberal."

 Anyway, something about LBJ and the 4th of July made me question my curmudgeonly stance on so many issues:

• I complain about aching knees when getting up in the morning when thousands of our veterans have no knees to ache.
• I grouse about my steak being over-cooked when I eat more in a week that others do in a month.
• I fuss about the seat pitch on airplanes when I can fly across the country in hours, safely.
• I moan about my grandsons living too far from home when they are healthy, smart and loving.
• I steam about a lack of funding for technology in schools when education in this country for both boys and girls is universal.
• I grumble about taxes, gas prices, and my 401K's performance when I am blessed with a job I love that allows me comforts unknown to 99% of the rest of the world.
• I despise the politics in this country yet I recognize that I live in a society in which its citizens enjoy more freedom and safety than during any place or time in history.
  

When it comes right down to it, what do I really have to complain about?  Perhaps we need two Thanksgiving Days in the US. Just as a reminder that many, many, many of us do indeed lead charmed lives.

Could be worse.