Libby Sellers

Spring 2014
Professor Lori Bedell
In-Class Deliberation Reflection
The Civic Issues Forum on higher education that our class participated in was more
beneficial to me than I had originally thought it would be. Our groups worked together much
more effectively than I was expecting, and I gained a stronger understanding and opinion about
higher education. The deliberation was in two separate groups, which allowed us to see more
points of view because the timid people had a chance to voice their thoughts. In my opinion, our
class was able to successfully deliberate according to the nine criteria for deliberative discussion.
The first criterion for deliberative discussion is creating a solid information base or,
to be more precise, discussing personal and emotional experiences, as well as well-known
facts. In my group, there were definitely personal experiences shared. During the third day of
discussion, people began to share about their experiences with getting into, or not getting into,
the colleges they had desired. One girl shared a story about how she had really wanted to get into
a prestigious college, but had been unable to receive a scholarship because of her race and the
fact that the college was trying to be more diverse. Another student shared his story of a close
friend who had almost identical scores to his own on SATs, GPA, and several other grades, but
had not been granted the same privileges as our fellow classmate because of his socioeconomic
status. It was clear to me that both of those stories affected the two individuals emotionally
because it is sad for people to work so hard to achieve their goals, and not be able to control the
outcomes of their efforts. There were various additional conversations throughout the three days
of deliberation that involved and incorporated personal information, and they added layers to my
understanding of the discussion. In addition, we drew from the packets of information about the
three options of higher education that we were provided with in order to stay on topic, and ensure
that we did not interpret the options incorrectly.
Another important aspect of a deliberative conversation is prioritizing the key values at
stake. This is something that we did during the entire class period of discussion, but focused on
at the end of the deliberation days. During the first day, we came to the conclusion that we
should encourage students who want to go to STEM fields with incentives in order to stay
competitive on global market, give funding to research to increase our competitive edge and
productivity, and merge classes in order for students to experience different topics and fields of
study. On the second day, we discussed the idea of making higher education more diverse, and
realized that, although it adds different views from all sides, it takes away from what the
populations of higher education has been previously. The key values we drew from the third day
of deliberation were that firstly, there must be more education given to young teens about the
scholarships available for them before they even reach the point of higher education, and that
secondly, scholarships should be given out based upon merit, ignoring socioeconomic status. We
came to these conclusions through a combination of sharing personal experiences (the first
criterion) and creating hypothetical situations in which we discussed the possible outcomes of
changing the values we identified in several different ways.
The solutions to the hypothetical situations we came up with for the second criterion are
something that our group did throughout the deliberation, which fulfilled the third criterion for a
deliberative discussion. We mostly identified a broad range of solutions by discussing theoretical
situations and problems and solving them with ideas that each group member contributed to.
This was a very effective way of coming up with multiple solutions because we were able to hear
opinions from many points of view. In addition to discussing theoreticals, we weighed the pros
and cons of each topic solution that was brought up in relation to the three higher education
options. It was important for us to do this in the process of deliberation because without the
weighing of pros and cons, we could not come to conclusions about which solutions are the best.
For example, when our group came to the conclusion that there is a need for students to be
educated about their scholarship options in high school rather than in college, we needed to
discuss the pros and cons of our decision. One pro for this is that students would be aware of
their options previous to applying for colleges and making big decisions about their futures. A
con is that not all students will put in the time and effort to pay attention and retain information
when it is presented to them, leaving the system unproductive and pointless.
The most effective way to make the best decision possible is to come up with many
potential solutions, weigh the pros and cons of those solutions, and adopt the most seemingly
successful possibility. Throughout our three days of deliberation, we made sure that everyone
was contributing to the conversation so that we were able to gain as many viewpoints as we
could. This gave us an advantage because we had various ideas coming from different people,
which allowed us to increase our understanding of the topic, as well as our opinions about each
idea. We chose what decision was best for each option out of the dozens we discussed, because
of the conclusions we had drawn from the contributions of each group member.
Allowing everyone in the group a fair chance to talk was something I felt our group
lacked. There were absolutely one or two people that shared their opinions and stories much
more frequently than the rest of the group, and I myself felt overwhelmed at times. I did not feel
comfortable or at ease with sharing my own thoughts in some points of conversation. I felt as if
there were not enough breaks in the dialogue, which hindered the more reserved group members
from contributing their own ideas. We did gain a multitude of viewpoints, stories, and attitudes
that led us to our conclusions. However, we lacked in this criterion.
On one hand, to me, most of the students in our class seem very similar in status and
position in life at this time, so the stories and thoughts that each person shared were easily
understood and interpreted correctly. Because of this, mutual comprehension was achieved. On
the other hand, one certain member of our group was contributing stories that were a little
difficult for the rest of us to understand because of the content and concepts within them. This
could be frustrating, but it was beneficial for us to hear about diverse life experiences that we
wouldnt otherwise be exposed to. There was certainly disagreement amongst our group
stemming off of said stories, because they went off topic in most of our minds, however we
talked about our problems each time, and were able to come to constructive inferences.
Because everyone has a diverse background, we were able to communicate our individual
differences and accept each persons perspective. This was not only helpful in making decisions,
but it also allowed us to have a deeper understanding of why people think the way they do. For
example, one group member shared that he used to live in China. Our group was discussing the
comparison between Americas productivity and Chinas, and he was able to share his
background in relation to China and tell us a little bit more about the reasons behind Chinas
high productivity which happens to be that they dont care for their workers like we do in the
United States. This added a new viewpoint, and gave the student ethos because of his
experiences amongst the actual topic at hand. Our group respected his opinion and story a great
deal more because of the relevance to the conversation and the ways in which he aided us in
coming to an end conclusion.
Overall, I believe that our groups deliberation was effective and successful. Not only did
we look at the three options from various points of view, but we also included all group
members, respected one another and did not make snide remarks or comebacks, and we
discussed all possible outcomes until we reached a decision about what should be done.
Personally, I see the Civic Issues Forum on higher education to be beneficial to me personally
because I now further understand deliberation. Previous to this class forum activity, I viewed
deliberation as simply a conversation had between two separate parties that eventually results in
a shared conclusion. I now understand that deliberation does not always have to come to a happy
ending, and that there are many more aspects of deliberation than just the conversation portion.