The Roundtable Forum assignment offers an alternative to more traditional debate formats. Among the advantages provided by this format are the capacity to avoid “bifurcation” of issues and the ability to attend more fully to multiple layers of complexity. Students also gain rich opportunities for collaboration and community building, without sacrificing deep critical reflection, the development of critical reading, listening, and viewing skills, research abilities, and advocacy skills. In short, this format provides an avenue for fostering many of the learning outcomes associated with cooperative argumentation.
Preparing for the Roundtable Forum:
In preparation for the Roundtable, the class selects a common topic (see addendum
for examples). Following selection of the overarching topic, students select
specific issues. Each Roundtable group (of 4-8, depending upon format) selects
two to three specific issues for exploration.
Prior to Roundtable preparations, students should have a clear understanding of the elements of argumentation (pp. 111-159; and 228-235). It is also helpful to introduce ethical advocacy in deliberative communities (pp. 195-206) and to provide detailed instructions for preparation of the deliberation log (see addendum deliberation log assignment and pp. 206-228). Students should also be well versed in ethical and effective dialogue (pp. 45-80) and a keen appreciation of cooperative argumentation (pp. 81-110).
To begin the process, the class works together as a whole and in small groups to identify commonplaces (points of agreement), issues (points of disagreement), and to gain deep understanding of multiple perspectives on relevant issues. This work is also critical for preparation of the deliberation log.
The notions of presumption (and burden of proof) are helpful in preparation. In contrast to the more “stable” role of presumption in traditional debate formats, however, presumption and burden of proof shift throughout the forum proceeding, dependent upon the nature and context of the relevant issues (and perspectives held by members of the deliberative community).
Oral Presentations:
In preparation for their oral performances, students should be reminded that the aims of the Roundtable are to enhance the deliberative community’s capacity to make fair, reasoned, and informed decisions on relevant issues and to sustain and build community (rather than to win or to persuade others). Assessments of performances should correspond to this goal.
Sample Roundtable Format:
• Moderator introduces topic and panel, provides an overview of key terms
and commonplaces, and identifies selected issues (5 minutes)
• Speaker 2 provides a presentation in support of a perspective on Issue
One (5 minutes).
• Speaker 2 responds to audience questions (3 minutes).
• Speaker 3 provides a presentation in support of a different perspective
on Issue One (5 minutes).
• Speaker 3 responds to audience questions (3 minutes).
• Speaker 4 provides a presentation in support of a perspective on Issue
Two (5 minutes).
• Speaker 4 responds to audience questions (3 minutes).
• Speaker 5 provides a presentation in support of a different perspective
on Issue Two (5 minutes).
• Speaker 5 responds to audience questions (3 minutes).
• Speaker 6 provides a summary of diverse perspectives on Issues One and
Two (7 minutes)
• Panelists question one another and offer additional insights (10 minutes).
• Break (5 minutes).
• Moderator facilitates class discussion of perspectives presented, encouraging
exploration of diverse points of view, and identification of additional issues
for group exploration (20 minutes).
Speaker Responsibilities:
Moderator: Introduces the topic and panel, provides a concise and clear overview of key terms and commonplaces, and identifies the group’s selected issues. During this presentation, the Moderator is expected to provide a clear articulation of the issues selected by the group. Why are the issues important? What is at the heart of the controversy and why? Following the closing panel exploration of issues, the Moderator is responsible for facilitating class discussion of the perspectives presented. During this segment of the forum, the Moderator is responsible for encouraging exploration of diverse points of view, and for assisting the class in identifying additional issues for further exploration.
Speaker 2: This presenter is expected to clearly articulate his or her perspective on Issue One. Speaker 2 is responsible for offering a clear articulation of the issue and for providing strong, relevant and comprehensive support for his or her claims. During this presentation, the speaker is expected to anticipate and address key concerns. Anticipation of Speaker 3’s concerns is key during this presentation.
Speaker 3: : This presenter is expected to clearly articulate his or her perspective on Issue One. Speaker 3 is responsible for responding directly and thoughtfully to Speaker 2’s perspective, and for providing strong, relevant and comprehensive support for his or her key claims. During this presentation, the speaker is expected to anticipate and address key concerns likely to arise within the deliberative community (in response to the speaker’s perspective).
Speaker 4: This presenter is expected to clearly articulate his or her perspective on Issue Two. Speaker 4 is responsible for offering a clear articulation of the issue and for providing strong, relevant and comprehensive support for his or her claims. During this presentation, the speaker is expected to anticipate and address key concerns. Anticipation of Speaker 5’s concerns is key during this presentation.
Speaker 5: : This presenter is expected to clearly articulate his or her perspective on Issue One. Speaker 5 is responsible for responding directly and thoughtfully to Speaker 4’s perspective, and for providing strong, relevant and comprehensive support for his or her key claims. During this presentation, the speaker is expected to anticipate and address key concerns likely to arise within the deliberative community (in response to the speaker’s perspective).
Speaker 6: This presenter is responsible for providing a clear, concise, and articulate overview of diverse perspectives on the relevant issues. The speaker is expected to attend thoughtfully to observations and concerns raised during all aspects of the forum (including each of the four “formal” presentations, during audience questioning, and during the panelists’ final exploration of issues).
Audience Question Periods: These periods should be used to explore issues and to seek additional information. Speakers are expected to respond thoughtfully to each question, illuminating areas of concern, and responding to the audience’s informational needs. Respondents should use this opportunity to foster deepened understanding of relevant issues. Responses should be concise and clear, and respondents should avoid needlessly prolonged answers. As a result of audience cross examination, the deliberative community should be better informed or otherwise better equipped to make judgments about relevant issues.
Final Panel Exploration: During this period, all six panelists are expected to contribute richly to the audience’s understanding and exploration of the relevant issues. Participants are expected to question one another and to respond thoughtfully to questions raised throughout the forum. “New” information and ideas surfacing during the Roundtable should be explored, audience concerns should be addressed, and additional issues should be identified.
OVERALL CRITERIA FOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT:
1. To what degree did each speaker fulfill his or her responsibilities?
2. Were the presentations clear, concise, easy to comprehend?
3. How effectively did each speaker use available information?
4. How useful, relevant and strong was the support each speaker provided for
controversial claims?
5. Were the speakers’ claims relevant? Did they justify the proposed conclusions?
6. Were each speaker’s assumptions warranted?
7. Did the speakers show sensitivity to the audience’s concerns?
8. How effectively did each speaker respond to opposing arguments presented
during the debate?
9. To what extent did presenters demonstrate relational accountability throughout
their participation?
10. To what extent did presenters demonstrate awareness of the role of standpoint?
11. To what extent did presenters demonstrate thoughtful consideration of multiple
perspectives?
12. Above all, how effectively did each presentation contribute to the audience’s
capacity to make informed, fair, and reasonable decisions about the relevant
issues?
Individual Performance Assessment Criteria:
Moderator:
• Connects well with the audience
• Sustains audience attention
• Fulfills Moderator’s responsibilities
• Clearly articulates central and subordinate issues
• Provides a coherent and concise overview of relevant commonplaces
• Identifies and clearly articulates definitions of key terms
• Facilitates dialogue skillfully
• Fosters balanced partiality, critical reflection, and relational accountability
among participants
• Demonstrates relational accountability
• Demonstrates empathic, content, and critical listening skills
• Contributes significantly to panel discussion
• Contributes significantly to audience deliberations
• Makes effective use of speaking time
• Utilizes appropriate language conventions
Speaker 2:
• Connects well with the audience
• Sustains audience attention
• Fulfills Speaker 2’s responsibilities
• Clearly articulates speaker’s perspective on the central issue
• Recognizes and taps relevant commonplaces
• Provides strong, relevant, and comprehensive support for central claims
• Makes effective use of available resources
• Anticipates and addresses Speaker 3’s perspective
• Anticipates and addresses audience concerns
• Demonstrates empathic, content, and critical listening skills
• Demonstrates relational accountability
• Develops logically coherent and consistent arguments
• Responds effectively to audience questions
• Contributes significantly to panel discussion
• Contributes significantly to audience deliberations
• Makes effective use of speaking time
• Utilizes appropriate language conventions
Speakers 3-5:
• Connects well with the audience
• Sustains audience attention
• Fulfills Speaker’s responsibilities
• Clearly articulates speaker’s perspective on the central issue
• Recognizes and taps relevant commonplaces
• Responds directly to previous speaker’s key claims
• Provides strong, relevant, and comprehensive support for central claims
• Makes effective use of available resources
• Anticipates and addresses audience concerns
• Demonstrates empathic , content, and critical listening skills
• Demonstrates relational accountability
• Develops logically coherent and consistent arguments
• Responds effectively to audience questions
• Contributes significantly to panel discussion
• Contributes significantly to audience deliberations
• Makes effective use of speaking time
• Utilizes appropriate language conventions
Speaker 6:
• Connects well with the audience
• Sustains audience attention
• Fulfills Speaker 6’s responsibilities
• Makes effective use of available resources
• Identifies and summarizes key points of controversy related to key issues
• Identifies and summarizes assumptions shared by roundtable participants
• Succinctly summarizes multiple perspective on key issues
• Demonstrates empathic , content, and critical listening skills
• Demonstrates relational accountability
• Contributes significantly to panel discussion
• Contributes significantly to audience deliberations
• Makes effective use of speaking time
• Utilizes appropriate language conventions