Description of Panel

 The full text of the panel proposal: Final Text of Panel Submission

Audience Participation:

before the conference
we would like to achieve maximal audience participation - not only at the panel, but before. Everyone is invited to contribute to the panel BEFORE the CHI conference by contributing ideas, asking questions, raising issues - please go to the CHI'2009 Panel Discussion Page

at the conference
For Audience Participation at the conference, we have amended the plans:
In order to achieve maximal audience participation, we will utilize a social computing environment during the panel supporting:

• backchan.nl (http://backchan.nl) to allow audience participants to generate comments and questions–and to vote on the relevance of other participants comments and questions, resulting in a ranking for the questions/comments to be discussed in the discussion portion of the panel. (If you wish to familiarize yourself with backchan.nl, Drew Henry has set up an initial instance for the panel, and you can practice using it at: http://backchan.nl/meetings/view/24

Reviews from the CHI Reviewers:

Review-1:

• Overall Rating 7 (Strong accept: I would argue strongly for accepting this paper.)
• Expertise 4 (Expert)
• The Review

Excellent proposal. Excellent set of speakers. Most appropriate topic for
 a panel discussion at CHI.

The idea of setting up social computing systems at the venue of the panel
 was one of the strong points of the proposal. I hope this doesn't get
 lost in the logistics of setting the panel up.
 I also recommend that the panels spend more time in debate/discussion
 than in opening statements/introductions for the panelist. Most people
 coming to the panel would know who these people are. In the past, I have
 seen that weaving opening statements into the discussion session might
 help this a little bit.

Review-2

• Overall Rating: 6 (Accept: I would argue for accepting this paper.)
• Expertise: 3 (Knowledgeable)
• The Review

The panel will discuss the challenges and opportunities in collaborative
 construction of knowledge. The goal for the panel will be to synthesize
 from different perspectives an analytic framework to understand new
 developments, how to promote rigorous research methods, and how to
 identify the unique challenges in developing evaluation and assessment
 methods for creativity research.

 This panel would be very interesting for CHI, but I would caution the
 moderator to keep the panel on task and focused as this is topic that is
 widely applicable and would gather many view points (as stated in the
 proposal) from the panelists and the audience. As such, I would expect
 that panelists spend more time in debate/discussion than in opening
 statements (also stated by another reviewer).