|Go Back||Return to FIT Summary.|
|Facilitator-in-Training Name||Mahesh Trivedi|
|Evaluator(s)||Jennifer Valtos and Rebecca Koch|
|Date of Session||05/28/2019|
|Skill||Skill 9: Appreciating Interdependence|
|How well did the facilitator lead the group and create a safe space? Please explain and give examples.|
Did a fairly good job of initially going to participants for first input regarding formal and informal practice since the last session. Good metaphor using iPhone, iPad, iGeneration to convey the role of CIT in developing other-focused perspectives required in compassionate integrity.
|How well did the facilitator explain this Skill using the PowerPoint presentation? Please give examples.|
Did a good job with the owl slide, the necessity of using both "wings," in explaining the importance of systems. Continued "i" theme when introducing the "wheel" slide, which creating some thematic continuity.
|How well did the facilitator explain and lead the activities in this Skill? Please explain and give specific examples.|
Described the activity fairly well; however, even though we are not doing the activities, it may be better to provide the instructions as you would in an actual setting and then simulate a debrief.
|What aspects of this Skill did you think the facilitator did exceptionally well? Please give examples.|
Demonstrating a real appreciation for the material and its potential is a marked strength.
|How well did the facilitator lead the Contemplative Practice in this Skill? Please explain and give specific examples.|
|What aspects of this Skill could the facilitator improve? Please give examples.|
There were multiple instances in which your thoughts and opinions regarding the material was provided at the expense of participant engagement. It is crucial to the facilitator role to engage participants in an experiential way so that they develop a personal understanding of the material. You asked several questions in your opening introduction without leaving time or space for participants to provide their thoughts. When one participant did provide highly emotional content (finding a swastika painted on the door of her granddaughter's pre-school), it would have been much better to acknowledge the pain and fear something like that might cause.
The structural violence slide asks a question that you did not allow participants to answer but, rather, answered it for them and lectures quite a bit, at one point in the latter part of the session, introded slides and spoke for more than eight minutes without ever asking a question or providing a space for participant input. Although you admitted you didn't know much about positive peace, continued to speak about it, even reading from the manual (something that is discouraged in facilitation).
You demonstrated a more engaging style in your first session and returning to that style will be a better fit for CIT facilitation.
|Entry Date||June 3, 2019|