Campusalam

• Skip to main content
• Skip to main navigation
• Skip to search
• Skip to navigation for this section

As in the radio programme, this gathers a panel of speakers to engage with a complex issue, seeking a variety of opinion. You can use it to deal with topics that are not necessarily moral ones!

A suggested format:

1. Choose a good issue. It should be somewhat complicated. It should have different aspects which require different kinds of knowledge or expertise. Or it should have strikingly different perspectives or opinions around it. It should be something that requires some kind of verdict or conclusion, not just totally open-ended.

2. Appoint a panel of three to four people. They do not need to be experts – it’s often better if they are not. But they should be responsible and have good judgment. They should represent some kind of diversity or range of opinion; but be willing to work together co-operatively.

3. Have your planning team or panel put in some advance thinking on the issue. What are the different angles or perspectives that should be represented? What different aspects or topics within the issue need exploring? Choose experts who can speak on those.

On the day:

1. The Chair introduces the topic and explains the format and the day.

2. Each panel member gives a brief (five minute) talk on their perspective on the issue.

3. Each ‘expert witness’ is summoned. They speak for five minutes, then are questioned by the panel.

4. The panel retire to discuss and confer.

5. During this time, the audience can have a coffee break; or a facilitator can lead a discussion amongst the audience (altogether or in small groups). The audience itself might reach a consensus; or they might like just to have their say.

6. The panel return and give their conclusion. There may be a consensus; or each member might like to speak briefly on their view.

Pros:

- An excellent way to bring out the many facets of a complex issue
- Very good at allowing a wide range of diverse views to be heard and understood
- Good at facilitating understanding of conflicting views without generating conflict or hostility
- Allows contentious views (or individuals) some space but keeps it contained within a firm format
- Can be very participative and encourages involvement
- The variety keeps people’s interest more than a single long lecture
- May give more of a ‘result’ than other formats in the form of a resolution reached.

Cons:

- It takes much more preparation from the planning team: some expertise or judgment in analysing the issue
- It needs a lot of people: panel, expert witnesses, chair, facilitator(s) for the audience (if using)
- If you have to pay all or some of these people, it will be quite expensive compared to other models
- It needs good chairing, organising, and timekeeping