Choose one current problem, include the smallest useful sample, and say what kind of feedback you need. Save broader career questions for a conversation with enough time and context to address them.
Send preparation for both people
Before the meeting, write the decision you are trying to make and attach the relevant excerpt in the channel you and the mentor have agreed to use. Ask them to review a specific part, rather than assuming they can read an entire project.
Prepare your own explanation of the intended reader, the reader's task, and where you are stuck. If you received advice in the previous meeting, bring the revision or practice result so you can discuss what happened when you tried it.
The planning distinction matters: your preparation and the preparation requested from your mentor are separate. Both fields appear in the UCSF learner-mentor planning template. The writing scenario and agenda here are original; they do not reproduce its form.
A fictional junior writer's question
Illustrative example: the writer, work samples, schedule, and proposed practice below are fictional. Mentor feedback has not been supplied. The task is to help a new user locate and apply a document-type filter.
Opening A: “Our search experience includes several ways to organize and discover documents across your workspace.”
Opening B: “To find policy documents, enter your search term, then choose Policy from the document-type filter.”
Question for the mentor: “Which opening better supports a first-time user who needs to find a policy, and what information would you add before the first step?”
The question stays tied to the exact excerpt. It does not ask the mentor to endorse the writer's overall skill. The writer can explain a trade-off: A supplies general context; B begins with the task. The mentor's actual recommendation remains blank until the conversation happens.
A 30-minute agenda
| Minutes | Topic | Preparation or output |
|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | Review the previous practice | Bring the revision, or note that no prior task exists. |
| 4-8 | Explain the reader and decision | State the policy-search task and why the opening is unresolved. |
| 8-20 | Discuss openings A and B | Ask for feedback on context and the first action; record the mentor's words accurately. |
| 20-26 | Choose a practice task | Agree what the writer will revise and how it will be checked. |
| 26-30 | Confirm follow-up | Set the next sample and check date; confirm what the mentor is willing to review. |
These timings are a suggested allocation. If the mentor identifies a more fundamental gap in the reader or task description, use the discussion to address it rather than forcing a choice between the two openings.
Leave room for the answer
The before-meeting sheet should contain the samples and question. The after-meeting record needs three fields: feedback received, learner's interpretation, and agreed next practice. Keep the first one empty until you have an actual response.
A sample proposed practice is: revise the opening and first three instructions for the same policy-search task, then ask a willing reader to explain what they would do first. In this fictional schedule, the writer proposes bringing the revision on October 27. Both the task and date need agreement; the agenda cannot decide them for the mentor.
If the reader explains a different first action than intended, record that observation. It is useful material for the next conversation, but it is not a diagnosis of the writer's competence or proof that one version works for every reader.
Keep the same two excerpts in your preparation and after-meeting record so the question and answer refer to the work actually discussed. The feedback field should remain visibly blank before the meeting. Include only material you intend the mentor to review; leave private career context out of any public sample.
Copy a prompt for a focused mentoring conversation
Draft a mentor meeting agenda in US English.
Meeting length and agreed date: [enter]
My current learning goal: [enter]
The specific decision I need help with: [enter]
Work sample or two alternatives: [paste approved, non-sensitive excerpts]
Intended reader and task: [enter]
Previous practice and what I observed: [paste or NO PRIOR TASK]
What I may ask the mentor to review in advance: [enter]
Private channel for preparation and notes: [enter]
Build a timed agenda that starts from my work and question. Make the times
sum to the meeting length. Separate my preparation from the preparation I
request from my mentor. Pair each feedback question with the exact excerpt
or decision. Leave feedback received visibly blank until I supply it.
Suggest a next practice task and a check date only as proposals. Do not
invent mentor comments, endorsements, agreement, performance diagnoses,
or observations from a reader. Mark missing fields TO CONFIRM.
Return a text preparation sheet and after-meeting record. If I request an
HTML reading copy, use only the sanitized excerpts approved for that copy.
Keep the samples consistent across preparation/notes views. Do not publish
private notes or claim confidential storage or automatic sharing.
After the conversation, read the next practice back to the mentor: what you will change, what you will observe, and what you intend to bring next time. Keep the actual feedback and agreement in your shared private notes. Your next meeting can start with a piece of work that shows what you tried.
Optional: read a sanitized preparation sheet in NOS
If you separately prepare an HTML copy of the two non-sensitive excerpts, NOS can save and display them beside the feedback question. Use the copy to inspect the preparation sheet's clarity. Keep personal context and the actual mentoring record in the private location you agreed on.