2) From what I have found out about the Delphi method, there are some slight differences between the generally accepted standard and the way we performed it in the class. For starters, the panelist are typically experts on the topic at hand. While we students may be somewhat knowledgeable on the subjects, I would by no means consider us experts. I also noticed that there is usually a panel director. We had Dr. Berleant act as our panelist. I would say that he functioned more as a mediator than a facilitator. For example, there were no questionnaires, surveys, etc. that would normally be administered by a facilitator. Lastly, the biggest difference is that we were not anonymous. Usually panelist would have full anonymity, but we however did not.
3) Obviously since we are not experts or anonymous, this can greatly have a negative effect on our results. One way we could fix this is by doing research on the topic of discussion. With further knowledge on the subject, we can provide more accurate results. Also, if we could anonymously submit our thoughts, we could cut down on "group think" or any general convergence. While convergence is not always bad, too much campaigning can change people's opinions.
No comments:
Post a Comment