You may write a "response/critique" paper about a mediation, facilitation, ADR, or arbitration book you have read (e.g., Baruch-Bush and Folger's The Promise of Mediation).  The paper should be 3 to 7 pages.

The reaction/critique paper should include a short summary of the book, followed by your evaluation of it.  You may want to consider the following descriptive and evaluative issues.

ISSUES OF DESCRIPTION - Summarize the content of the book.  Possible questions to consider include: What is the central theme of the book?  What are its most important points?  Does the book raise or address worthwhile issues?  Does it pose interesting questions?   How clear are the ideas?  How readable is the text?  Who is/are the relevant audience(s) for this book?

ISSUES  OF  EVALUATION - React to the book.  You might consider the following questions: What do you like and dislike about the book; its content, its style, etc.?  Is the content coherent?  What are the strengths of the book?  What are its weaknesses?  How well are ideas presented?  Are the major points explained adequately; are the arguments appropriate?  Is the central message clear?  Is the book well grounded in both theory and research?  What kinds of evidence are employed?   Are they appropriate?

ISSUES OF RESPONSE - Respond to the book as a reader and as a student of mediation/ADR.  Potential questions are: What have you learned from the book?  What meaningful points does the author make?  How do the ideas in this book relate to other readings you have done about mediation/ADR (e.g., the readings of this course)?  What is the "practical relevance" of the book and the ideas it presents?  Who should read this book?  Do you find the substance of the book compelling and insightful, or an unproductive use of one's reading time (or something in-between)?

ISSUES OF RECOMMENDATION - Would you recommend this book to people interested in mediation/ADR?  Should this book be required or optional reading for an undergraduate and/or graduate course in mediation/ADR?

Remember, a critique is not a commentary of agreement or disagreement with a book's content and ideas, although some attention to this issue is appropriate.  A critique evaluates discourse according to some clear standard.  Your evaluative criteria should be clearly evident in the paper.

Conflict management and dispute resolution (negotiation, mediation, facilitation, arbitration, conciliation) play a part in many professions.  You need to interview a "professional" who deals with conflicts and disputes as a third party intervener as part of his/her job and write a paper concerning the nature of conflict management and dispute resolution (e.g., mediation, facilitation) in her or his profession.  You might consider the following professions: professional mediators, community mediators, ombudspersons, therapists, ministers, teachers, attorneys, law enforcement officials, human resource managers, administrators (e.g., OSU department chairs), social service workers, and the.  Your paper should go beyond simply reporting what the person tells you; you should react to and analyze the responses.

In the interview, you should ask questions concerning what your interviewee regards as conflict situations, how s/he approaches conflicts and disputes, and how she intervenes in disputes (e.g., through mediation, facilitation, negotiation).  Prepare a set of questions ahead of time and avoid jargon.  Here are some issues to consider:

1.   What types of conflict and dispute situations does your interviewee encounter?  What is the substance of typical conflicts/disputes she or he experiences?  Does your interviewee mediate or facilitate?  If so, in what situations and over what?  This information provides a foundation for the paper.
2.   Does your interviewee consider conflict fundamentally positive, negative, or neither?  Why?  Does conflict have any benefits or is it counterproductive?  How does the person view mediation and facilitation and the conflict party relationship?
3.    When the interviewee intervenes in a conflict, how does the interviewee do so?  Are particular strategies and tactics valued?  What does the person try to accomplish when encountering and managing conflict?  What type of outcome(s) does the person desire?  Are there certain approaches, behaviors, strategies, or tactics that work well when intervening as a third party
4.    As a third party, how does the person prepare to deal with a conflict or dispute?  What does s/he do?  How is information gathered?  Is there a preferred climate or atmosphere for conflict management?  What does the interviewee do to try to influence that climate or to structure the conflict interaction situation?
5.   What role does communication play?  Does the person attempt to facilitate specific forms of communication interaction?  Does the interviewee seek to influence the other parties?  Is non-verbal communication important?
6.   How does the person define effective third party intervention?  What does the interviewee see as the essential characteristics of a person who mediates or facilitates well?
7.   Are power balancing and structuring important parts of your interviewee's conflict and dispute resolution work?  How does s/he deal with these factors?
8.   Has the interviewee received training as a third party (e.g., mediation)?  If so, where and what?  What does the interviewee see as training or qualification requirements?
This list of questions is not exhaustive.  They are only suggested areas of inquiry.  The readings, lectures, etc. include additional issues to consider.  Remember, your reactions and analysis represent an essential part of the paper.

Academic research is rhetorical (McCloskey, The Rhetoric of Economics, 1988).  Certainly social science research, when it appears as published scholarship, attempts to influence policy decisions, disciplines, and other scholars.  It is argument attempting to gain adherence.

Your task concerns the evaluation of published mediation, facilitation, arbitration, or alternative dispute resolution (ADR) empirical research .  In doing so, you will be examining research as a kind of rhetorical act.  You need not employ rhetorical principles, but conceiving of published research as rhetorical may help you in your task.

Select a published empirical research (not solely theoretical) essay dealing with some aspect of conflict or dispute behavior.  Relevant publications include: Communication Monographs, Human Communication Research, Journal of Conflict Resolution, International Journal of Conflict Management, Peace Review, Negotiation Journal,  Mediation Quarterly, Conciliation Courts Review, and the Dispute Resolution Journal.  You may find others, particularly in contextual areas that interest you (e.g., Society and Natural Resources, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology).  You can also report on research published in conflict and dispute resolution anthologies (some available at OSU's Valley Library, U of O's Law Library, and Willamette U.'s Law Library).  Include a copy of the research article.

The Critique Process
First, offer background on the study.  Briefly summarize the research.  What is it about?  What is the research purpose?  What is the study attempting to discover?  Summarize the literature review.  What previous research provides the foundation for this study?  Include enough information to describe what this study is addressing.  Include the research questions and/or hypotheses.

Second, focus on the research method.  What methodology is employed?  Present the important dimensions of the methodological procedure.  Is it quantitative or qualitative research?

Third, evaluate the research foundation, statement of research problem, question(s) or hypothesis(es).  Is the research grounded adequately in theory and previous research (is the literature review adequate)?  Are the research questions clear?  Does the methodology employed seem appropriate to answer the research question or address the research problem?  You may not have much background in research methods, but through common sense, rational evaluation, you should be able to assess the "logic" of the investigative procedure.  You could also consider the "style" of    presentation (e.g., too jargon laden, unstated assumptions).

Fourth, offer suggestions for improving the research.  What could the researcher(s) have done to strengthen the study?  How might a replication improve on this effort?

Finally, consider external validity (generalizability).  Are the results of this study applicable to a population beyond the research itself?  Does this study have real world applications?  Is this study meaningful?  Is it significant?  Is is trite?  Is it a waste of time?  Do you wonder why it  was published?  What did you learn?

This paper alternative features a critique (evaluation) of a mediation program.  There are thousands of mediation programs in the country.  Some are government run, some are non-profit, and others are for profit.  Your evaluation can address any of these types.

Step One: Select a mediation program to evaluate.  This could be a local program that you can visit on-site (e.g., Community Outreach of Corvallis/Benton County; Lane County Community Mediation; Neighbor-to-Neighbor of Marion County), or a program you discover via the internet.  Many mediation programs have web sites.  Any search engine will present numerous program sites.

Step Two: Describe the mediation program.  What services does it provide?  What kinds of mediation activities are offered?  For example, does the program provide VORP or VOMP (Victim-Offender Reconciliation Program; Victim-Offender Mediation) services?  Does the program do public policy mediation?  Does the program sponsor training?  Is the program connected to an institution (e.g., court connected)?  How is the program funded?  Who are the program's clients?  How large or comprehensive is the program?

Step Three:  Based on the information you can gather (in-person, via the web), evaluate the program.  Based on your understanding of the mediation process at this point in the course, present and explain evaluative criteria appropriate for examining the mediation program.  Apply those criteria, and provide judgment about the quality of the program.