I think there should be a discipline wide discussion about the role of discussants. I think the tradition of listening to the discussant (who is often someone who has the time, not necessarily the expertise to do the role) provide suggestions and critiques is a waste of time for the audience. and far too often is an exercise in public shaming. APSA is horrible in that respect. What about changing the role to a "reviewer" - one person who is willing to read the paper and provide written feedback to each panelist who wants it. And then just open it up right away to audience questions.
I do my best to not validate this kind of bullying with a full response. I keep mine curt and cordial, but sending a clear message I won’t engage.
I think this is a great approach, Sara!
I think there should be a discipline wide discussion about the role of discussants. I think the tradition of listening to the discussant (who is often someone who has the time, not necessarily the expertise to do the role) provide suggestions and critiques is a waste of time for the audience. and far too often is an exercise in public shaming. APSA is horrible in that respect. What about changing the role to a "reviewer" - one person who is willing to read the paper and provide written feedback to each panelist who wants it. And then just open it up right away to audience questions.
I agree, Shannon - it is often not very useful at all!
My first time here and I love it already. Would love to collaborate via my newsletter: Gradinterface, I could be reached via Gradinterface@gmail.com