LEARNING OUTCOMES/OBJECTIVES

• Consultants will be able to identify opportunities for further developing their agenda setting practices.
• Consultants will be able to explain the benefits of further developing the agenda to students and to themselves.

MATERIALS NEEDED

INSTRUCTIONAL PLAN

This workshop includes two parts: Differentiation and Digging Deeper. In Part 1: Differentiation, consultants reflect on unique aspects of sessions and practice making intentional choices to develop agendas that are responsive to these unique characteristics. Part 2: Digging Deeper provides opportunities to help consultants go beyond a quick list of goals for a session and to develop a more collaborative understanding and approach to the session, which benefits the student and the consultant.

When completed fully as written, this training takes approximately 4-5 hours. The training could take place at a single workshop or broken up across multiple staff meetings in sequence. After each part of the lesson, we include truncated versions that take 45-60 minutes to complete. Throughout the lesson overviews, we provide guidance on adapting the lesson to fit within different time and modality constraints.

Part 1: Differentiation [2-2.5 hours]

Lesson Rationale and Context

Consultants often take a generalist approach to agenda-setting, drawing from the same set of “go-to” questions regardless of the context of the session. The first part of this lesson has consultants reflect on unique aspects of sessions and practice making intentional, meaningful choices to develop agendas that are responsive to these unique characteristics.

After reflecting on their own experiences with setting agendas, consultants consider commonalities and differences between session modalities and move between individual, small-group, and whole-group work to develop unique agendas based on each modality (e.g., in-person, synchronous online, asynchronous/email responses). This segment includes opportunities to discuss and practice:

• Identifying values/aspects unique to each modality
• Matching unique values/aspects identified for each modality to specific agenda setting strategies/questions
• Reflecting on the impact of differentiating agendas based on modality

Moving beyond session modality, consultants then consider the purpose and possibilities of differentiating agendas based on unique appointment features, discussing different students, projects, disciplines/fields, stages of work, and timelines. This portion begins with the trainer framing some of these unique session characteristics and inviting consultants to add from their own experiences. Consultants engage with this in multiple ways before ending with reflection and debriefing guided by the trainer. This segment includes opportunities to discuss and practice:

• Identifying unique characteristics of sessions based on different appointment features
• Creating banks of agenda-setting strategies/questions that support unique appointment features
• Engaging with scholarly research on agenda setting and reflecting on its application to their own work
• Role-playing scenarios to build differentiated agendas

The activities in this section represent opportunities to help consultants move beyond a generalist “go-to” list of agenda setting questions by considering the unique characteristics of each appointment and intentionally adapting their agenda-setting process to meaningfully address those unique characteristics in an organic, responsive way.

This section is designed as an extension of basic agenda setting training and would work best with consultants who are fully onboarded. This part, when completed fully as written, takes approximately 2-2.5 hours.

Lesson Overview

Reflection and Energizer [5 minutes]

Consultants reflect on agenda setting with opportunities to share. The training facilitator can choose to have consultants reflect individually using the reflection notetaker (Supporting Material A) or by using collaborative software to create a group word cloud.

Option 1: Individual reflection

• Create a simile or metaphor about agenda setting (“Setting an agenda is like...”)
• Draw what the agenda setting process looks like to you
• • The training facilitator gives time for consultants to share out and discuss responses in partners or small groups (3-4 consultants) before inviting sharing to the whole group.

Option 2: Collaborative word cloud

• Consultants create a word cloud by submitting single responses to the question: “What is one thing that is necessary for setting a successful agenda?”
• • The training facilitator pulls responses up on a project or a shared screen (if working online) and invites discussion from the group.
  • There are many word cloud generators available for free online, including Mentimeter and WordClouds.

Section A: Differentiating by Modality [60 minutes]

Consultants consider the purpose and possibilities of differentiating agendas based on session modality.

• The training facilitator introduces PowerPoint presentation 1: “Differentiating Agendas: Making Choices Based on Session Modality.”
• • The training facilitator presents commonalities and unique aspects of different session modalities to frame the upcoming activities, inviting consultants to share their experiences and add other aspects to the presentation as they go [10 minutes].
  • • The training facilitator should adapt the presentation to your own center’s modality offerings if necessary.

The training facilitator distributes materials from their center that pertain to each modality offering. At our center, we looked at the observation forms for staff feedback that differ based on the modality of the appointment (see Supporting Material H for our center’s observation forms for in-person, synchronous online, and asynchronous online sessions). For adaptation in centers that do not use observation forms, training facilitators can use any other materials relevant to their centers that discuss appointment modality (for example, existing training materials, student-facing promo materials, etc.).

• Consultants take time to review the materials for each modality, noting unique values, characteristics, or challenges that are stressed by each type of form [15 minutes].
• • After reviewing, consultants share their responses with a partner or small group (3-4 consultants). The training facilitator invites the groups to share items from their list of unique values/characteristics/challenges. The training facilitator adds each group’s responses to collaborative lists of unique values/characteristics/challenges for each modality, which are projected in the room (or on a shared screen if online) [10 minutes].
• Consultants return to small groups. The training instructor should pass out copies of the Modality Notetaker (Supporting Material B).
• • Reviewing the lists of unique values/characteristics/challenges for each modality, consultants discuss and jot down in their small groups what strategies, variations, choices, and/or questions they would include during the agenda setting process that are unique to that modality. In other words, consultants are matching the values/characteristics/challenges they identified for each modality to agenda setting strategies that address each [15 minutes].
    
    
  • As small group discussion begins to dwindle, training instructors pass out poster-boards for each group or assign each group a whiteboard space (if working online, consultants can do this on a document, presentation, or virtual whiteboard space that they can screen share later). The training instructor assigns each group one modality to focus on. Synthesizing each member’s notes on the Modality Notetaker, small groups copy the values/characteristics/challenges they identified for each modality and the agenda setting strategies that address each on to their whiteboard/poster board [5 minutes].
    
    
  • Continuing to work with their small groups, consultants review three (3) other whiteboards/poster boards, one for each modality, and add their responses from their small group discussion to create collaborative lists of unique agenda setting strategies, choices, and/or questions that are unique to each modality and address the characteristics identified for each modality. By the time this activity is completed, consultants should have created their own whiteboard/poster board and contributed to an additional three (3) whiteboards/poster boards from other groups, one from each modality [15 minutes].
• Bringing the small groups back together, the training facilitator invites discussion on the activity and debriefs with the consultants [5-10 minutes].
• • What strategies or choices did you discuss with your group?
  • How did your list of strategies, choices, and/or questions look different between modalities?
  • What kinds of valuable information can you uncover with an effective agenda? Any relevant consultation experiences?
  • What kinds of valuable information can you close off with an underdeveloped/generalist agenda? Any relevant consultation experiences?

Section B: Differentiating by Other Characteristics [75 minutes]

Consultants consider the purpose and possibilities of differentiating agendas based on unique projects, disciplines, fields, students, timelines, and more.

• • The training facilitator introduces PowerPoint presentation 2: “Differentiating Agendas: Going Beyond Session Modality.”
  • • The training facilitator presents aspects of sessions that consultants may use to effectively differentiate sessions beyond modality to frame the upcoming activities, inviting consultants to share their experiences and add other aspects to the presentation as they go [10 minutes].
  • In small groups, consultants are assigned a unique project/assignment/scenario to consider (e.g., personal statement for medical school, lab report for biology, public health literature review, CV for a research position, etc.).
  • • Replicating the work they did previously in section A, consultants work in small groups to list unique values/characteristics/challenges of their scenario and brainstorm agenda setting strategies, choices, and/or questions that address those unique aspects. Using a whiteboard space or poster board, consultant groups present to the large group on their findings: explaining what they identified, what suggestions they are making, and providing three (3) questions that they recommend using that are outside of typical go-to's. Each group presents [35 minutes].
      
      
    • Time is given for other consultants to contribute to other groups’ recommendations (either by raising hands and explaining, or by rotating and adding to whiteboard/poster boards) [10 minutes].
• Consultants explore scholarly connections between their previous discussions and writing center scholarship. The training facilitator should pass out an excerpt of a selected, relevant reading on agenda setting. In our center, we read an excerpt from the discussion section and conclusion sections of “What’s Your Plan for the Consultation?” (Scrocco, 2023). Training facilitators can choose to use this excerpt or a different reading more relevant to their center’s context. Time is given for independent reading and notetaking [10 minutes].
• • Consultants are brought back to a large group to share-out thoughts. The training facilitator connects this excerpt to center-wide observation feedback about agenda setting or other discussion of center usage trends, depending on the context of the center [5 minutes].
• Consultants practice applying this concept by dividing into partners for discussion and role playing. Consultants start by discussing how they would approach the following scenario:
• • “A student comes in for help on their research paper. The research paper is on a topic of the student’s choice and should include academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
• Consultants are asked to discuss agenda setting choices they would make and questions they could ask the student to make an effective plan for the session [10 minutes].
  
  
• Still working in pairs, consultants practice differentiating their agenda setting strategies with the introduction of new information to the original scenario. The training facilitator assigns each consultant a new version of the scenario with additional information. Each member of a pair should have a different version of the scenario.
• • Example: “A graduate student comes in for help on their research paper. The research paper is on a topic of the student’s choice and should include academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
    
    
  • Example: “A student comes in for help on their research paper for their first-year psychology course. The research paper needs to be on a concept covered in the course textbook and should include at least two other academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
    
    
  • Example: “A graduate student comes in for help on their research paper. Your appointment is held online via Zoom. The research paper is on a topic of the student’s choice and should include academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
• Training facilitators can adapt or replace these examples with scenarios that are more relevant to usage trends in their center.
  
  
• Each consultant role-plays two times: once as the consultant, and once as the student, using one of the updated versions of the scenario in each role [10 minutes].
  
  
• The training facilitator gives consultants time to debrief with their partners by reflecting on what strategies they used to differentiate their agendas and why they made the choices they made. The training facilitator encourages consultants to discuss what strategies were effective and what could change to be more effective next time. The training facilitator can invite partners to share out to reflect as a whole group discussion [5-10 minutes].

Reflection [5-10 minutes]

Consultants reflect on their personal values and priorities in agenda setting. They can do this by writing a mission statement, drawing a moral compass, creating a radar/web chart, designing a personalized agenda notetaker, or alternative methods that they propose. The training facilitator can use the Reflection Options (Supporting Material D) to guide reflection.

• Consultants share with a partner or small group, then time is given briefly to share as a large group [5-10 minutes].

Part 2: Digging Deeper [2-2.5 hours]

Lesson Rationale and Context

We find that once consultants feel comfortable with the different aspects of a consultation (i.e., rapport building, agenda setting, providing feedback, reflection), they tend to try to “get to the work” of the session as quickly as possible because they feel this best meets the expectations of students. By “getting to the work,” our consultants often mean looking at the student’s paper and providing feedback. However, by glossing over the agenda, or not digging deeper, we have observed many missed opportunities, such as the following:

• Assumed understanding of the assignment expectations
• Assumed understanding of the key words or terminology relevant to the discipline and assignment
• Assumed approaches about how to best meet the needs of the student

The activities in this section represent opportunities to help consultants go beyond a quick list of goals for a session and to develop a more collaborative understanding and approach to the session, which benefits the student and the consultant.

This section is designed as an extension of basic agenda setting training and would work best with consultants who are fully onboarded. This part, when completed fully as written, takes approximately 2-3 hours.

Lesson Overview

Section A: Considering Missed Opportunities [60 minutes]

Consultants consider the purpose and possibilities of differentiating agendas based on session modality.

• As a whole group, view or short video (we recommend that centers develop a video or have a role play that as closely as possible represents the contexts in which their consultants/tutor work) that shows a good agenda setting situation but that misses opportunities by not digging a little deeper. 
• • The video or role play is intended to create a sense of context and engagement for consultants. 
  • Initially, consultants will take notes about the agenda setting they observe in the video or role play.
  • • See agenda notetaker (Supporting Material E).
• Consultants will then discuss what they noted with a shoulder partner [5-10 minutes] and then broaden the conversation to their table groups [15-25 minutes].
• • Each table group will collectively decide on two to three (2-3) missed opportunities to “dig a little deeper” that they noticed in the video or role play as well as two to three (2-3) strategies they would use to achieve more depth.
    
    
  • For example, consultants might note that the consultant assumed a shared understanding of a literature review, even though one is coming from a science background, and one is coming from a humanities background.
    
    
  • A strategy that consultants might propose would be to ask the student what the primary purpose of a literature review is within their discipline. Alternatively, if the student was still developing their familiarity with their discipline’s genres and purposes, the consultant could offer to look up a literature review in the student’s discipline and collaboratively discuss the purpose and identify features and characteristics that they notice.
• Table groups would designate one to two spokespersons to present the opportunities and strategies they discussed to dig deeper [15-20 minutes].

Section B: Digging Deeper for New Opportunities [25-40 minutes]

The second part of the training [15 minutes] would be a brief review of the purpose and potential opportunities available to consultants through agenda setting.

• Consultants would be grouped into small groups (2-3 is ideal with 4 being our center’s max). As a small group, they would brainstorm a list of potential benefits of digging deeper during agenda setting, which could be on a poster board or on a whiteboard space.
• • For example, consultants might talk about how taking time to align their understanding of a literature review with that of the student allowed them to more quickly address the concerns that the student writer had.
• Small groups could rotate and review other group’s lists [5-10 minutes].
  
  
• A whole group discussion of the top 5 or top 10 benefits could be generated [5-15 minutes].

Section C: Strategies to Dig Deeper [50-80 minutes]

The third part of the training [30-45 minutes] would include structured small group discussions about scenarios where more information is needed for the agenda.

• Potential ways to break consultants into different groups is as follows:
• • consultation modalities: in-person, asynchronous online, synchronous online
  • genres: lab report, personal essay, grant proposal, literary analysis, research paper, resume
  • disciplines: natural sciences, social sciences, engineering, history, gender, race & identity, journalism, music theory, sociology, psychology, social work, education
  • different types of students: student who is focused on the task; student who appears nervous and is quiet; student who states they are confident with their assignment; student who says they are working in a discipline in which they are not familiar; student who says they don’t care about the assignment.
• Groups would be asked to identify what type of information they want to know more about.
• • They would then develop a list of questions, a map, or a plan of action for how to set an effective agenda for the scenario.
  • See Scenarios example (Supporting Material F)
• Consultant groups could then present their ideas to the entire staff [15-25 minutes].
• • The training facilitators would add questions and comments to help point to effective strategies, creative approaches, ways to create more equitable/accessible situations/support, etc.
  • See Discussion & Reflection Questions example (Supporting Material G)
• We would end this lesson with an exit ticket asking the consultants what are 2-3 shifts you will make to your agenda setting practices to help you “dig a little deeper”? [5-10 minutes]
  
  
• See Exit Ticket example (Supporting Material H)

ASSESSING FOR UNDERSTANDING

Provide feedback based on assessment to staff through trainings and in our other consultant-facing materials (i.e., newsletter, reflections).

EXTENSIONS AND ADAPTATIONS

The complete lesson is divided into two parts (Differentiation and Digging Deeper) and subsections to allow for training facilitators to break up this lesson across multiple, shorter training sessions/meetings. Each part includes subsections for training facilitators to break up sections further when working within more limited time constraints.

Training facilitators can choose to present the entire lesson (roughly 4-4.5 hours) as one large workshop, divide the lesson in half and present the two parts across two training sessions (2-2.5 hours each), or present a single subsection per training session to adapt it into a training sequence across many training sessions (roughly 45-75 minutes per session).

Alternatively, training facilitators can follow the subsequent shortened versions of each part of the lesson for a condensed version of the training.

Differentiation (Part 1): Shortened Lesson [45-60 minutes]

Consultants take time to independently consider each modality, noting unique values or aspects that are relevant to each modality. After reviewing, they share their responses with a partner or small group, who work together to create a collaborative list of the unique aspects of each modality [10 minutes].

• If time allows, groups can be invited to share items from their list, to create a whole-group list of unique aspects of each modality that is displayed in the room; alternatively, this information could be collected and then shared back to consultants via email, newsletter, etc.

Consultants return to small groups. Reviewing the lists of unique values/aspects for each modality, consultants discuss and jot down in their small groups what variations/choices/questions they would include during the agenda setting process that are unique to that modality. In other words, consultants are matching the values/aspects they identified for each modality to agenda setting strategies/questions that address each [15 minutes].

In small groups, consultants are assigned a unique project/assignment/scenario to consider (e.g., personal statement for medical school, lab report for biology, public health literature review, CV for a research position, etc.). Replicating the work they did previously, consultants work in their small groups to list unique values/aspects of their scenario and brainstorm agenda setting strategies/choices/questions that address those unique aspects [10 minutes].

• If time allows, consultant groups can be invited to present their findings to the whole group: explaining what they identified, what suggestions they are making, and providing questions that they recommend using that are outside of typical go-to's. Alternatively, this information can be collected and then shared back to consultants via email, newsletter, etc.

Consultants practice applying this concept by dividing into partners for discussion and role playing. Consultants start by discussing how they would approach the following scenario: “A student comes in for help on their research paper. The research paper is on a topic of the student’s choice and should include academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.” Consultants discuss agenda setting choices they would make and questions they could ask the student to make an effective plan for the session [5 minutes].

• Still working in pairs, consultants practice differentiating their agenda setting strategies with the introduction of new information to the original scenario.
• • Example: “A graduate student comes in for help on their research paper. The research paper is on a topic of the student’s choice and should include academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
    
    
  • Example: “A student comes in for help on their research paper for their first-year psychology course. The research paper needs to be on a concept covered in the course textbook and should include at least two other academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
    
    
  • Example: “A graduate student comes in for help on their research paper. Your appointment is held online via Zoom. The research paper is on a topic of the student’s choice and should include academic sources. The paper should follow the style guide most frequently used by their discipline.”
• Training facilitators can adapt or replace these examples with scenarios that are more relevant to usage trends in their center.
• • Each person role-plays two times: once as the consultant, and once as the student, with different scenarios used for each role [10 minutes].
    
    
  • Consultants debrief with their partners by reflecting on what strategies they used to differentiate their agendas and why they made the choices they did. The trainer can invite partners to share out to reflect as a whole group discussion [5 minutes].

Digging Deeper (Part 2): Shortened Lesson [45-60 minutes]

Consultants will discuss sessions that they have led with a shoulder partner (anyone sitting near them), emphasizing the details related to how they set the agenda and how that shaped the following interactions with the student. Partners will listen, take notes, and ask questions about setting the agenda [10-15 minutes].

• With their shoulder partner, consultants will create a list of two to three (2-3) missed opportunities to “dig a little deeper” that they noted in their shared experiences as well as two to three (2-3) strategies they would use to achieve more depth [15-20 minutes].
  
  
• If time allows, pairs could share with another pair or with the larger group [5-10 minutes]; alternatively, this information could be collected and then shared back to consultants via email, newsletter, etc.

In small groups of approximately four participants, consultants would discuss agenda scenarios.

• Groups would be asked to identify what type of information they want to know more about.
  
  
• They would then develop a list of questions, a map, or a plan of action for how to set an effective agenda for the scenario [10-30 minutes depending on how many scenarios consultants discuss].

RESOURCES

Jakonen, T., & Duran, D. (2024). Learner-centered EAP practices: Managing agenda in tutorial interaction. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 68, 101345, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101345.

Newkirk, T. (1989). The first five minutes: Setting the agenda in a writing conference. Writing and response: Theory, practice, and research, 317-331.

Bruce, S. (2009). Breaking ice and setting goals: Tips for getting started. In S. Bruce, & B. Rafoth (Eds.), ESL writers: A guide for writing center tutors (pp. 33–41). Boynton/Cook Publishers. 

Macauley, W. J. (2005). Setting the agenda for the next thirty minutes. in B. Rafoth (Ed.), A tutor’s guide: Helping writers one to one (pp. 1-8).Heinemann.

REFERENCES

Scrocco, D. A. (2023). What’s your plan for the consultation? Examining alignment between tutorial plans and consultations among writing tutors using the Read/Plan-Ahead tutoring method. Praxis: A Writing Center Journal, 20(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/48512