The authors describe an interview-based research project that explored the impact of theory and research on practice and training. The study found that many training programs refer only occasionally to theory and research, instead relying primarily on the wisdom and personal experience of the trainer. The authors identify barriers to the integration of theory and research into training programs, and propose new resources and strategies for overcoming these obstacles."W e behave as if we are content to live on two sovereign islands, one for academics and one for practitioners-separated by an uncharted sea, full of monsters" (Honeyman, McAdoo, and Welsh, 2001, p. 1).As the volume, diversity, and sophistication of dispute resolution interventions increase, so too does the mass of theory development and research, both qualitative and quantitative. Yet many in our field have a nagging sense that more could be done to apply what we learn through research and theory building to enhance practice.Research and writing on dispute resolution tend to come either from the perspective of the academic or from practitioners who offer description of interventions and practical advice. Both types of writing are important to our field, but they illustrate the challenges of creating a genuine marriage of rigorous theory and grounded practice wisdom that can be taken seriously by academics and practitioners alike. Although many of us would argue that theory development and research are critical to the authenticity

There is often an inconsistency in conflict resolution teaching between what we are trying to impart-that process matters deeply and that we should be proactive about enabling effective and appropriate processand how class is often conducted. This short article offers some reflections on the sources of that inconsistency, and some suggestions for corrective action.T he first thing to understand is how a typical mediation or negotiation class is conducted in a law school. Most conflict resolution teachers understand the importance of experiential learning in learning about the process of negotiation or mediation, and so they structure a class that is a mix of role-plays, discussions, lectures, and other exercises. 1 Without a doubt, many professors recognize that students must experience the process of negotiation or mediation in order to understand it and improve their skills.The substance of what we teach in class encourages students to be proactive in the roles they will play in dispute resolution processes-for example, to take the initiative in setting the tone of the interaction, plan for an agenda, and negotiate control over process as well as substantive outcomes.The inconsistency that concerns us and that has given rise to this article appears in the pedagogic planning and delivery of courses on mediation and negotiation. If substantively we are teaching our students that they should be aware, and take responsibility for, choices over process, then how class processes are conducted should reflect, and ideally model, this philosophical commitment.

Teaching LA Wyers' Skills

No abstract

No abstract