A Curriculum in Mediation

Home | About this site | Lesson Plans | Student Training | Adult & College | Downloads |Site Support | About us

version

Mac Safari Users: If pdf files will not open:
Open Acrobat or Adobe Reader, go to its internet preferences, and uncheck “Display PDF in browser using...”
Then go to HD/Library/Internet Plug-Ins and make sure AdobePDFViewer.plugin is not in there.

Peer Mediator Training Workshop Presenter Notes - view page 17
17 Setting our Agenda- M5
Need MITs in quads with workbooks, pen/pencil

PLEASE NOTE: The information below supplements the specific flow and process directions of the Student Workbook pages and is reflective of the theory and practice delineated in the 12 page pdf Conflict Management booklet. Therefore, this "teacher's guide" information, the Student Workbook information and the Conflict Management booklet work together for presenters' preparation and should be considered integral to one other. No document stands on its own from a presenter's preparation viewpoint. Use the view page ___ link above, page by page, to view related Student Workbook pages. Download the 12 page pdf Conflict Management booklet to your desktop, read it once, and have it ready as reference as you proceed with preparation.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Setting Our Agenda - Focusing, Neutralizing & Balancing <17mit.pdf> (1.4 MB) [17M5] view. We have all of the un constellated stuff of a mediation start process floating around the table now and it's time to focus our efforts and decide where to go from here. It's agenda setting time once we have heard the stories from each disputant. Language used in anger such as insults and threats are neutralized (toned down) to "words" said if we have to include them in the agenda. We really prefer not to re-open wounds once the "puss" is all out and like to stick with concise details in this method of neutralizing language. An equal "investment" in the agenda for the disputants is vital for balance, again. Balance, balance, balance throughout a mediation is essential to ensure its integrity. The graphic on M5 (figure 5) indicates that agenda setting is a three phase FOCUSING process. Possibilities for items are listed under each disputant's column to be used in a "scratch pad" fashion. These are discussed between mediators and with the disputants and a balanced "little" agreement about what's driving this conflict (i.e. finalist items) is developed through questions and discussion. FOR TODAY'S TRAINING ONLY - we establish only two agenda finalist items because of time constraints --1). Something reflecting a material concern regarding the iPod and its $100 worth of songs - partial hint: Kelly has an income source in our story. 2). Something related to their past history of a friendship relationship - partial hint angry feelings are present in both. These items are written into the "trapezoid portion of figure 6 showing that we are "funneling" our focus toward, but not quite yet, the "Central Box." We will complete the Central Box after a quad level discussion, as noted near the bottom of the page.

The role play, done effectively, will now get more intense as we put our theory, learned so far, to work to surface the conflict--this is, to really look at stuff. Remind the MITs that the very specific instructions as to start, stop, wait, etc., must be observed for all MITs to benefit from our training as we move ahead into the "meat" of the role play.

But first, and within the role play itself, we sneak in some more skills acquisition now. Those skills are: separating out the key issues and factors driving the dispute, neutralizing language to bring down the emotional level of the dispute, and, balancing the issues and factors which will discussed.

The role play involves discussion by the mediator diads to determine the two most important items that need to be discussed. This becomes a three step process wherein a small brainstorming session between mediators, within their diad, lists possibilities before settling on finalist items. Figure 5 with its two sets of arrows leading inward toward the Central Box is meant to convey this process.

For today's training purposes only, we are determining only two items because of time constraints.
One item shall be relationship-centered------------------and the other shall be material-centered

As the mediators decide upon the issues, for today's purposes of this role play today only, Pat and Kelly do the same via their own discussion. They too do a brainstorm for possibilities by stepping back temporarily from their roles as disputants to look objectively at what has been brought out in the initial statements so far. They too write two possibilities--one relational and one material--first, before they decide on finalist agenda items later on in this section. This then becomes practice for isolating the important items and defining them. We do it this way so that everyone in the quad has the experience of sifting through data to find the key issues and factors. We would NOT expect this to occur between real disputants in a real mediation--be wonderful if it did, however, for it would show a joining of minds and hearts in a common purpose, and we could all go home earlier. Of course, an actual mediation most likely will not be limited to two specifically centered agenda items.

Within the quads now, for training purposes then, disputants and mediators discuss the finalist agenda item choices and come to consensus on which should actually be discussed farther with our whole class consensus discussion to follow. This begins now to better reflect, in its way, a real mediation, in that mediators would present their proposed list of agenda items to disputants for disputants' approval before proceeding. In this special training model, it is hoped that four minds can do the mediator work of producing the finalist two items--and it's simply good practice for us as MITs--but, again, not exactly real life mediation format.

The, "Please wait Here for further directions . . ." is designed to have all diads of mediators and all diads of disputants ready with their two finalist agenda items to compare within each quad before continuing. Again, this is a special activity for today's training purposes only. Presenters monitor progress within quads toward this goal. When each quad (both diads within it) is ready, direct MITs to share their two items within their quads among all four members and arrive at a quad consensus, through discussion, of their quad's two (2) most salient items--one relational and one material. One objective here is to demonstrate that a common "experience" may engender separate perceptions and impressions among participants. Earnest discussion at this point has great value.

The current recorder mediator will report out to the whole class when directed. Presenters, in turn, will list agenda items on the group memory board (white board or easel) adding a letter to whom it belongs, Pat (P) or Kelly (K) or both (B). After all quads have reported out, we explore some whole class consensus answers, via whole class discussion, and arrive at those consensus issues. The point we make here is that even during the initial statements, making a quick note of a possible item in the possibilities fields is OK and by putting the possible idea under a disputant's name, we know to whom it belongs, or from whence it came when it comes time to create this agenda. Our immersion as mediators in the "busyness" of process sometimes fogs our precise memory and these little notes become later helpers.

As we leave this page, the white board or easel should have our two consensus issue items with which we will continue our work on the next page.

< < Back ----- Next > >