Disclaimer: I am not involved in Greek life nor do I plan on ever getting involved in it

 The deliberation event I attended was on the topic of Greek life here at Penn state. The issue deliberated was how to prevent fraternity and sorority life from having bad behaviors and staining the university reputation. The reason I attended this deliberation, other than the time convenience, was because since the recent death of a fraternity member and the reasons behind the tragedy, Greek life on campus has been under the spotlight and the worse is expected from its participants. The topic is prevalent and affect all students of Penn state are directly or indirectly affected by it regardless of their participation in Greek life.

As I left the room that day I realized three things. I realized that one,I had learned so much on this topic; two, I knew so little about it before; and three, I had formed an uninformed negative opinion about it.

During the discussion, the first thing I noticed was the outstanding job of the facilitator whom I think greatly contributed to the success of the deliberation. I believe he efficiently used people’s inputs and reflections to build questions, keep the discussion going, and foster thoughtfulness. The three methods I noticed he used were paraphrasing, challenging and inviting. In doing so, the facilitator not only stabilized the discussion but also connected ideas together and made the audience feel like their points were valid, which I think ultimately stimulated greater participation.

It is also important to note that the reason this deliberation attracted so many students was because Greek life is an important part of the Penn State life and so many people are interested in it. Other topics may have been equally relevant but did not affect the students on an individual level.

Several facets of it were discussed and there was a very diverse and representative audience that shared their perspective on the issue from their experience. The audience was composed of active participants in Penn state Greek life, non participants students who view it from an outside eye and also community members that were not affiliated with Greek life but had opinions on it. The particularity of the audience I think enriched the discussion and led to a relatively fruitful outcome as it allowed for a complete evaluation of the three options . Different parties shared their own experience in regards to the issue and how they thought the solutions offered would or would not solve the problem; still while providing alternatives.

Similarly to our deliberation, the team was divided into sub teams that focused on designated options and strengthen the structure of the discussion. Each teams presented their options, offered solutions to it and finally opened the floor for comments and discussion. The discussion was well structured in terms of time management. However, I do think that there was a lack in the quality of the information given by certain sub teams. In other words assertions were made but no statistics or proofs were given to corroborate those.