Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 37/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
applied learning or working session agenda analysis
2024 Conference
This applied learning or working session in Education / Training / Career shows 15 visible agenda rows from elearning.asam.org and scores 37/100: a thin but inspectable design signal. The clearest public signals sit in Participation Architecture and Learning Transfer; the main limits are Follow Through and Network Design. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, and Learning transfer. The public record does not show follow-up or tracking, so the score should be read as design intent... A practical reading: For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an applied learning or working session, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence. This page is an original public-evidence analysis, not a copy of the source agenda or an endorsement of the event. The score places the visible agenda in the thin outcome architecture band. The strongest visible pillars are Participation Architecture, Learning Transfer, and Problem Specificity; the thinnest visible pillars are Follow Through, Network Design, and Evidence Maturity. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, and Learning transfer. The extracted agenda preview includes 15 visible rows. The most common formats are Training, Unknown, and Panel; the most common inferred purposes are Skill Building, Unknown, and Deliberation.
Eight-pillar fingerprint
Hover any pillar to see what it measures and, where it scored low, what the agenda is missing.
Participation Architecture?73
Participation Architecture - 73/100. Participant work, contribution, interaction, and alternatives to passive broadcast.
Follow Through?5
Follow Through - 5/100. Owners, dates, commitments, progress checks, and accountability after the room.Missing: Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
Problem Specificity?43
Problem Specificity - 43/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.
Personalization?33
Personalization - 33/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.
Network Design?16
Network Design - 16/100. Structured weak ties, bridge-building, mixers, and relationship persistence.Missing: Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
Learning Transfer?63
Learning Transfer - 63/100. Applied practice, feedback, workplace use, refreshers, and 30-90 day transfer.
Evidence Maturity?28
Evidence Maturity - 28/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.Missing: Add baseline measurement, comparison logic, tracking, or post-event impact reporting so effectiveness is not inferred only from format.
Future-of-Work Fit?36
Future-of-Work Fit - 36/100. Value against time, hybrid reality, accessibility, AI, and meeting load.
Fix the gaps
Field-tested exercises matched to this agenda's weakest pillars, from the exercise library.
Follow Through (5/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Mental Toughness Workshop • WorkshopBank · 15% Solutions • WorkshopBank · Network Patches
Network Design (16/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Fun Trust-Building Group Game for Team Connection - Izzat... · Exciting Group Trust Activity for Building Confidence... · PFP: September 2005
Personalization (33/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Journey Mapping • WorkshopBank · Group Energiser & Perspective-Changing Exercise - Paradigm... · Photo Storytelling
Agenda Preview
The actual agenda we captured. Every block is classified by format and purpose. Open any block to see how we read it; the colored edge shows whether it is participant work, broadcast, logistics, or a showcase.
Room vs wrapper
67 percent of the 15 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventRegisterUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventContinueUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventResidents, Fellows-in-training, Interns, and Studentsmust join ASAM to receive a discounted registration rate.Click here to become an ASAM member. National and Chapter membership dues apply. There is no charge for Students to become a Member, but verification of student status is required.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventContains 4 Component(s)UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventThis 60-minute on-demand session from the ASAM 55th Annual Conference addresses the current role of fellowship training programs in meeting Addiction Medicine workforce needs.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event1. Describe the current role of fellowship training programs in meeting Addiction Medicine workforce needs.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event2. List key activities that fellows engage in during the Addiction Medicine training year.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventDr. Marlene Martin is an Associate Professor at UCSF and hospitalist at San Francisco General Hospital. She is the founding director of the Addiction Care Team, which provides compassionate, evidence-based care for hospitalized people with substance use disorders. As Director of Addiction Initiatives for the Latinx Center of Excellence, she co-leads PEDAL, a Spanish-language addiction training program for community health workers, aiming to improve care for Latine individuals with substance use disorders. Her work focuses on health equity, harm reduction, and innovative care models.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventChronic pain is more common among individuals with substance use disorder than in the general population, and shares common neuropsychological pathways with SUDs. Access to multidisciplinary and compassionate pain treatment is unreliable; thus, addiction medicine specialists are often asked to manage acute and chronic pain in individuals with SUDs. This case-based session will include a panel with addiction medicine clinicians from four different institutions around the US, describing their approach to pain in individuals they are caring for.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventJanet Ho, MD MPH is a board-certified palliative medicine and addiction medicine physician at the University of California, San Francisco. She completed internal medicine training and chief residency at Yale, and fellowships in health services research, palliative care, and addiction medicine at Harvard and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, MA. Her clinical and research interests lie at the intersection of serious illness, the disease that is addiction, pain, and chronic cancer pain. Dr. Ho is dedicated to improving provider knowledge and confidence in primary palliative care and addiction medicine; improving disparate quality of life and care for patients with serious illness and addiction; understanding the role of buprenorphine in palliative care; and challenging stigma against patients who use drugs.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventDr. Wiegand serves in a volunteer capacity for many local, state, and national committees. He has been awarded the Charlotte Hegedus Award from the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence for professionals who have consistently demonstrated high level of cooperative work with individuals or groups with substance use disorders for at least five years. Dr. Wiegand is the 2022 awardee of the American Society of Addiction Medicine Annual Award. This award is given to an individual for outstanding contributions to the growth and vitality of ASAM, for thoughtful leadership in the field, and for a deep understanding of the art and science of Addiction Medicine.” And “for expanding the frontiers of the field of Addiction Medicine and broadening our understanding of the addictive process, through research and innovation.” He was also awarded the 2022 ACMT Service Award.DemoShowcase+
Format · Participant workDemoA hands-on or applied walkthrough that invites attendee questions and direct engagement.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventJeremiah Fairbanks, DO is a current addiction medicine fellow at the University of Minnesota. He completed his medical training at Des Moines University followed by a family medicine residency through the University of Minnesota. He has helped develop programs treating office based opioid use disorder through primary care in southern Minnesota and has his family medicine board certification.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSubstance use disorder treatment programs are an essential element in the effort for health equity in addiction treatment. This workshop reviews the impact of structural racism and discrimination on disparities in substance use and addiction treatment and discusses best practices for integration of diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging (DEIB) into addiction treatment. Learners will apply an evidence-based tool for assessing organizations' DEIB culture and identify potential strategies to incorporate DEIB into their own individual practices and those of their organizations.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventDr. Alvanzo has served as an expert on National Institutes of Health (NIH), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM), National Quality Forum (NQF) and PEW Research Center panels regarding opioids and integration of recovery-oriented care in various medical settings.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventZina is a social worker, certified addiction professional and ARISE trained interventionist. She is also a Certified Diversity Executive and collaborates with treatment providers on the development of transformational DEIB strategies that align with their mission and values. She provides organizations with tools and trainings to hardwire DEIB within their organizational plans by developing sustainable, ongoing initiatives that holds them accountable to keeping systems, processes, and goals inclusive to employees, clients and communities.TrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 38/100 and verified 37/100 with no fourth-loop cap.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an applied learning or working session, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence.
Strongest signals: Participation Architecture, Learning Transfer, and Problem Specificity. Weakest signals: Follow Through, Network Design, and Evidence Maturity.
How This Agenda Could Improve +
- Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
- Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
- Add baseline measurement, comparison logic, tracking, or post-event impact reporting so effectiveness is not inferred only from format.
Fastest next move: Add named owners, dated next steps, and a visible continuation path before treating the event as outcome-ready.
Role-Specific Reading +
Sponsor lens
Look beyond exposure. Strong sponsor value would show qualified interaction, problem work, buyer learning, customer evidence, or follow-up. The practical sponsor move is to look for structured introductions, buyer-seller fit, and relationship persistence.
Designer lens
The agenda is useful as a pattern sample from elearning.asam.org. Redesign attention should go first to the lowest-scoring pillars; in practice, turn the thinnest agenda blocks into participant work.
Executive lens
Treat the visible agenda as an operating plan. The executive move is to require owners, dates, and evidence before treating the event as strategic. If owners, proof, and follow-through are not visible, the public record does not yet prove strategic movement.
Aggregator lens
Treat the source URL as evidence, not decoration. The data-product move is to label the source boundary clearly before ranking the record before ranking or syndicating the record.
What GES Means Here +
The Gathering Effectiveness Score is a strict 0-100 public-evidence reading of the agenda across eight pillars. It rewards visible participant work, follow-through, transfer, network design, and proof mechanisms more than polish, speaker fame, attendance, or satisfaction.
Visible mechanisms: Participant work, Feedback, Network design, Learning transfer.
Evidence boundary: Scores reflect visible agenda/source evidence and should not be read as proof of causal event impact.
Limitations, Score Caps, and Review Flags +
Limitations
- No visible follow-up, progress monitoring, or longitudinal tracking.
- No baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- No fourth-loop score cap applied.
Review flags
- No source-backed follow-up, validation, baseline, tracking, or impact evidence.
Is this proof the event worked? +
No. This is a strict public-evidence reading of the agenda. Proof would require baseline, comparison, follow-up, attribution, and impact evidence beyond the listing.
What should a reader inspect first? +
Start with the source URL, then compare the eight pillar scores against the agenda rows. The biggest opportunities usually sit in follow-through, evidence maturity, and participant work.
Why publish weak records? +
Weak records are part of the map. They show where public agendas still describe sessions and speakers more often than outcomes, commitments, transfer, or proof.
How should I use the rows? +
Read the agenda rows as the visible design trace: formats, purposes, and evidence labels show what the public source made inspectable, not everything that happened in the room. This is a source-grounded interpretation of the public agenda record, not a copy of the source, and not an endorsement of the event.
Where To Go Next
Compare this agenda against other Education / Training / Career events scored on the same eight pillars.