What Works in Transformative Mediator Coaching: Field Test Findings

A process for the formative assessment (coaching) of mediators practicing from the transformative orientation was field tested at six different sites. Specifically varied were whether or not the mediator\u27s original training was in the transformative orientation, the mediator\u27s amount of experience practicing from the transformative orientation, and whether the role-play mediation sessions were live or videotaped. In addition to drawing conclusions about the qualifications necessary for a coach and the pros and cons of videotaped sessions versus live stop-action sessions, we developed guidelines for structuring the coaching process. We also identified a range of possible uses of the process

Living with No: Political Polarization and Transformative Dialogue

We argue that dispute resolution processes should not be seen as a substitute for the political process, but rather a complement that can help strengthen it. Based on this view, and on the authors’ experience with dialogue work in the former Yugoslavia, as well as in urban and rural settings in the United States, we argue that transformative processes, specifically an approach we call Transformative Dialogue, are best suited to addressing the challenges of political polarization both in the United States and internationally. This is because the primary goal of transformative processes is not to reach agreement or find common ground, but rather to change the quality of conflict interactions from negative and destructive to positive and constructive. Transformative dialogue is about helping people gain their voice and choose identities and interactions that otherwise would be closed to them

Identifying Practice Competence in Transformative Mediators: An Interactive Rating Scale Assessment Model

Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio

Identification of Novel Targets of CSL-Dependent Notch Signaling in Hematopoiesis

Somatic activating mutations in the Notch1 receptor result in the overexpression of activated Notch1, which can be tumorigenic. The goal of this study is to understand the molecular mechanisms underlying the phenotypic changes caused by the overexpression of ligand independent Notch 1 by using a tetracycline inducible promoter in an in vitro embryonic stem (ES) cells/OP9 stromal cells coculture system, recapitulating normal hematopoiesis. First, an in silico analysis of the promoters of Notch regulated genes (previously determined by microarray analysis) revealed that the motifs recognized by regulatory proteins known to mediate hematopoiesis were overrepresented. Notch 1 does not bind DNA but instead binds the CSL transcription factor to regulate gene expression. The in silico analysis also showed that there were putative CSL binding sites observed in the promoters of 28 out of 148 genes. A custom ChIP-chip array was used to assess the occupancy of CSL in the promoter regions of the Notch1 regulated genes in vivo and showed that 61 genes were bound by activated Notch responsive CSL. Then, comprehensive mapping of the CSL binding sites genome-wide using ChIP-seq analysis revealed that over 10,000 genes were bound within 10 kb of the TSS (transcription start site). The majority of the targets discovered by ChIP-seq belong to pathways that have been shown by others to crosstalk with Notch signaling. Finally, 83 miRNAs were significantly differentially expressed by greater than 1.5-fold during the course of in vitro hematopoiesis. Thirty one miRNA were up-regulated and fifty two were down-regulated. Overexpression of Notch1 altered this pattern of expression of microRNA: six miRNAs were up-regulated and four were down regulated as a result of activated Notch1 overexpression during the course of hematopoiesis. Time course analysis of hematopoietic development revealed that cells with Notch 1 overexpression mimic miRNA expression of cells in a less mature stage, which is consistent with our previous biological characterization

BMQ

BMQ: Boston Medical Quarterly was published from 1950-1966 by the Boston University School of Medicine and the Massachusetts Memorial Hospitals