Explain why you believe you could or could not be a mediator now that you've read from the textbook and watched the lectures.
Things to consider:
Neutrality - On all issues? What if it is a mediation about an issue you have strong opinions about or previous experience with--domestic violence, drug laws, landlord/tenant issues, car repair shops, etc.
Self-determination of conflict parties - What if you thought one party was getting a better deal but both were satisfied with the agreement? In general, could you refrain from making suggestions that determine part of the outcome while still guiding parties to develop their own solution?
Choose and cite 2 of the following to discuss (or pick others from our readings): framing, reframing, finding common ground, searching for interests in their positional statements, keeping everyone civil, etc. - Could you do it?
You will NOT be given deductions for saying you would be a bad mediator! You need to offer a rationale for why you would or would not be a good mediator, or which parts you would and would not be good at.