Comments from Participants

APT Conference 2004, The Colorado College, 29-31 October 2004

Note: Conference participants were given a questionnaire and encouraged to submit their reflections on the conference. Those comments are transcribed in their entirety below, with the exceptions noted below. Some questions on the form led to short answers, such as, "Yes!" In those cases, bracketed material has been reflecting what the question was (such as adding, "I did make use of the paper archive," when a response was, "Yes," to the question, "Did you make use of the conference paper archive?"). The comments were also edited slightly, at times adding small words apparently left out (such as articles) and at times correcting minor grammatical errors, in order to make the document more readable. All personal comments have been omitted, most particularly the ones identifying individuals as strong commentators or complaining about a particular person's paper. The commendations of chairs and discussants will be shared with members of the Program Committee, and with the chairs and discussants themselves. Following these transcriptions are excerpts from e-mail messages sent to APT or Dennis McEnnerney about the conference.

2. The quality of the presentations was mixed, but the discussions were excellent. This was a great conference. Yes, [I did make use of the paper archive]. It's a good idea. Yes, [future conferences should require pre-circulation and/or archiving of papers].

3. General impression -- good quality -- better than many other conferences. Great location and strong support from Colorado College. Very much liked the common meals and receptions, and the 1/2 hour breaks between sessions. Good diversity of perspectives and areas in the sessions. Two-hour sessions are a little lengthy -- perhaps 1 1/2 hours would be better. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, [I made use of the paper archive]. Strongly support continuing the pre-circulation and archiving requirements.

4. Generally high quality presentations and discussions, with a few clunkers (especially graduate student papers), but noticeably less than last year and, I think, a price we should willingly pay for the diversity we are after. Generally excellent [conference]. Few suggestions, save perhaps a few more roundtables like Andy Murphy's, or other experimental structures to panels. A little longer conference, if that is feasible. Absolutely, [I would be interested in participating in future APT conferences], even the conference was a little longer and thus meant canceling Thursday classes to get here for Friday morning panels. Archive was/is good. Pre-circulation requirement is a good requirement. I think people were better prepared for other people's papers than at other conferences, and that in the future, folks will be even better (if only a little better) at checking out interesting papers on other panels before the conference. Someone should be keeping track of published articles that were first presented at APT.

5. I thought that all but one of the panels I attended were excellent. The exception was plagued by poorly presented papers (the papers may have been good, but it was hard to tell), long-winded discussants, and poor management on the part of the chair. This conference, like last year's, was excellent in all respects. Bravo to the Program Committee and Colorado College! Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. I like having easy access to so many papers.

6. General impression of presentations: Individually, the presentations were not that different from other conferences; although the panels were put together particularly well so there were good connections across papers and this did make presentations more provocative. General impression of discussion: Truly outstanding and unique! I've never seen such genuine and productive discussion at a conference. People must have read the papers or just had a lot knowledge about the subject matter. This was the finest point of the APT gathering for me. I learned a lot as a presenter and as an audience member. In general, it was an outstanding conference! As a graduate student at the APT conference, I would have appreciated a session of some sort (perhaps more discussion-oriented than panel-oriented) about what political theory is and/or what political theory should be. It would be good to consider the pros and cons of new directions in the field with faculty that have been in the field a long time. It would be great to have better electronic and printing services at the hotel. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. I did make use of the paper archive. Originally, I was skeptical, but now I think it was a good idea. I appreciated the request for people to present their work rather than read it. But some people still read their work. Perhaps this is something that can be addressed?

7. Good papers, but the discussion with the audience was the most interesting part. Great conference -- enjoyed chance to speak with fellow theorists. Absolutely, [I would be interested in future APT conferences. Paper archive:] good idea -- continue. Chairing is not hard -- anyone can do it. Drop discussants -- the audience can do a better job. Explore workshops on new topics. We have the critical mass of people and papers to make an online journal (perhaps the subscription could be part of a membership fee). Theory needs more journals!! [E-mailed postscript:] Thank you for a terrific conference! It was very stimulating. I suggest cutting out discussants so we can get right down to audience dialog -- there is a room full of smart people dying to discuss the papers! The hotel was reasonable, the dinners and receptions very classy, and there was great talk. Thanks for all the work.

8. I found the conference size very amenable to provocative and stimulating and in-depth discussion -- let's keep limiting the number of panels at any one timeslot. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, the papers should be pre-circulated and the archive is useful.

9. Sessions: uniformly excellent. I was on the environmental political theory panel and it was the best panel experience I've had. Maybe [add] one more day of panels. This conference has become, quickly, the premier political theory conference. Another day of panels would allow more specific topics. Absolutely, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, [I made use of the paper archive]. An excellent idea.

10. All excellent panels -- most allowed for much audience interaction, papers were of high quality, chairs kept time and directed things very well. [Evaluation of conference overall]: again -- excellent. The division of sessions in three building was a drawback -- missed chance to linger with colleagues between sessions. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, [I made use of the paper archive]. [Archiving requirement:] excellent -- keep it. Yes, [future conferences should pre-circulate papers].

11. I like the fact that the papers are on-line; like last year, the overall quality has been high (better than many of the big regional conferences). Perhaps urging people to bring projects that are almost complete would help. There are still too many works-in-progress. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, [I did make use of the paper archive. The pre-circulation and archiving requirements are] good. Yes, [future conferences should require pre-circulation and/or archiving].

12. Roundtable on the Environment -- fantastic: interesting papers, inspired discussion. Problems of Justice & Rationality -- interesting range of papers. Against Progress -- a little uneven, but some great comments from the discussant. [Conference overall:] very well designed. I prefer it to APSA for the depth of discussion and ability to follow up with people at lunch and dinner. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences. [Paper archive:] yes, it is a good idea. Great conference -- look forward to the next one. Could we please make sure that our hotel has a business office with online access, photocopies, etc. Otherwise, very fine job!

13. I have enjoyed both the panels and the social events. I am impressed by the comfort level and cordial attitude of the participants. It's made for a very enjoyable and educational experience. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. I read papers that were sent to me via e-mail, but I didn't have time to access them online. I do think it's useful to make them available beforehand.

14. The panels were mixed. Some were great, some were so-so. Some presentations were unclear or too long, others were very clear. I've enjoyed [the conference]. Suggestion: only three panels a day -- four at two hours each is too exhausting. Yes, [I would be interested in participating in future APT conferences]. No, [I haven't made use of the paper archive] -- but I will tomorrow. Pre-circulation is good to ensure paper presenters are prepared. It's also convenient to get copies from panels you couldn't attend.

15. Terrific [conference] -- but 8 a.m. panels are not ideal and had less than great turnout. Two hours is a great amount of time for panels, but eight hours of panels is more than I could take. Yes, [I would be interested in participating in future APT conferences]. I will [make use of the paper archive]!

16. I thought the quality of the presentations was generally good -- I thought that the quality of the discussions was even better, and what was most valuable about this conference versus others such as APSA. Especially liked the long discussion periods -- protecting this is key. To that end: 1) keep panels to three papers; 2) continue to stress time limits of presentations; and 3) continue to encourage people to talk rather than read when presenting. Also especially liked common meals. Yes, definitely, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, I made use of [the paper archive]. Yes, I think it should be continued.

17. I attended several [sessions] -- and the best linked scholarly concerns with some contemporary reality. In an effort to expand this, I suggest the following: one panel which did both -- a roundtable on religion and politics -- was a magnificent interchange of panelists and easily 30 respondents in the audience -- lovely throughout. At the International Social Theory Consortium, in an effort to join papers to a process where they talk to each other, puts [illegible word] to %(25?) of panels to a "theme" -- not a theme for the whole conference (most panels are as usual) -- but if you want a conversation. The theme is not simply a list of topics (as at many conferences), but a couple of paragraphs that open up a way of thinking. The last one at York University in Toronto was terrific -- participants and audience spoke to one another! Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences].

18. I found most of the discussion and presentations to be very substantive. At times, I found participants to be a bit offhanded in their engagement with the material. Excellent [conference] in terms of size and number of options. Sessions at 8 a.m. not very opportune! Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. No, [I haven't made us of the paper archive] (no time). Yes, future conferences should require pre-circulation.

19. The quality [of panels] in general was very good -- several of the papers were excellent. I would suggest instructions be sent out to discussants as to possible ways of framing their presentations to encourage discussion, especially from the audience. Chairs should also be sure that each paper is addressed adequately in the discussion. Definitely, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. Yes, [I made use of the paper archive] -- it was excellent. I would suggest recommending that panelists bring 10-15 copies of their paper. Great job!!

20. Great! Keep it up! [I would be interested in future APT conferences] -- yes! [I made use of the paper archive] -- yes! What a great conference -- nice atmosphere, very friendly and cordial.

21. Please -- keep urging people not to read their papers! Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences. Paper archive:] It's a grand idea -- keep doing it.

22. [Panels] well put together, highly organized, interesting papers. One roundtable was odd. Very welcoming conference -- extremely thoughtful organizers, great food & drinks, nice program. Hotel was a bit sketchy, however. Perhaps starting Saturday panels at 9 rather than 8? Also it would be nice to have the hotel and conference in the same facilities. Definitely, [I would be interested in future APT conferences. Paper archive:] Great idea! Being able to access the papers easily before and after the conference is really helpful. Thank you! It has been a great experience.

23. All [five panels I attended] were stimulating and informative. Quality of papers and discussions was first rate. "Collegiality" was gratifying. Yes, [I would be interested in attending future APT conferences]. I think the pre-circulation and archiving [requirements] were a good idea; maybe having hard copies of papers available would also help. Mealtime conversations are crucial.

24. All [panels I attended] were excellent. I've been here both years and value the openness and non-hierarchical spirit as well as the quality of the papers. Please don't increase too greatly the number of papers. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences. Paper archive/pre-circulation requirement:] I think that it is a good requirement, but I didn't read other papers online. I think the discussants were all good. Well done.

25. Very well organized [conference]. Yes, [I would be interested in future APT conferences]. I couldn't access the archive. Chairs or panels should direct presenters not to assume discussants can access it. Presenters need to be reminded to send their papers directly to their discussants. Please try to hold the conference in beautiful and warm locations. Alternating between east and west is a good idea.

26. Particularly impressed with discussants' contributions. Few weak papers, but not much sense of really [illegible word] stuff happening. [Conference overall:] Excellent, will be back next year. Suggestions: Organize panels on perhaps: a) political theory and the work of government; b) historicizing ethics pertaining to politics, government, law; c) historicizing/pluralizing "Enlightenment" and its implications for political theory. Yes, [I would be] willing to take part -- responsibility for soliciting papers on themes like the above, for helping to organize the panel. [I made use of the paper archive:] lots. Keep requirement. The "Reconcieving Enlightenment" panel is an illustration of advances in historical work that may undermine background assumptions at a theoretical level, produce a "Gadamerian Surprise," so to speak, opening up new possibilities for theoretical work.

Comments sent by e-mail after the conference:

27. I loved the conference. The panels were great and the informal time for conversation was wonderful. And I really like the two-hour format, with a full hour (or close to it) for discussion. It makes things so much more substantive than the usual APSA format. Anyway, I forgot to fill out an evaluation form, so thought I'd send along these comments. I'll look forward to the next one.

28. The conference was a great success and you have earned congratulations!! Now the criticisms (this is a sign of the success of the conference): I think the Calvin College venue was preferable. Having all four simultaneous sessions in the same place lent the conference a unity that was slightly diminished at Colorado College. I thought that some of the panels were unified around words rather than thematic content. I realize how hard it is to put these panels together and the problems are unavoidable, but it is worth attending to the problem. Would it be possible to make the conference more diverse -- in philosophy there is a small group of black philosophers who write on political philosophy from a black and often anti-racist perspective. Would it be possible to make some effort to increase minority participation? I look forward to next fall. APT is now the organization I go to for professional stimulation. Thank you again for doing such an excellent job of putting the conferences together!

29. I just want to say that I really appreciate the hard work that went into organizing the APT conference. It was a great experience! The idea of having the group dinner was especially helpful in terms of getting to meet new people. Many thanks.

Latest Revision: 15 December 2004; reset 25 May 2009.