ASSUME GROUP INTERRACTIONS ON THE POSITIVE
1. How did your involvement with this group differ from other groups you have been involved with before? Did you consider this a team or a group? Why? What specific roles were assigned to members and how did this affect interaction and performance?
2. What roles did individuals play? What roles did you assume? Did interaction change as certain people were asked to be the observer? Did you notice any of the individual roles emerge? If so, how did the group deal with this person?
3. What norms emerged in the group? Which of these were formal norms and which were informal? Did you notice any change in group members' attendance during the group project? Did members come early or stay late? Was attendance during the group project better than or about the same as before the project? How did meetings start? What happened the day the group leader was the observer? Relate your ideas to the kind of leadership that emerged in your group. Which of the leadership styles did your group incorporate? Was it successful?
4. How were status and power distributed within the group? What members of the group had status? What members had power? Identify individual members within the group and describe what power bases they were able to use. Were these effective? Did you notice any power plays among group members? What power base(s) were you able to employ?
5. How did interaction patterns change throughout the group process? Did you maintain the same pattern from beginning to end? Were cliques identified? Do you feel the group had adequate interaction, or do you feel other patterns would have benefited the group more? Explain. Do you feel you were a cohesive group? If so, what did members do to reinforce the cohesiveness? If not cohesive, what could the group have done differently? Could you identify any clear rituals performed by your group?
6. What stages of group interaction did your group move through? Were you able to clearly identify all the stages? Did your group get "stuck" in one of the stages?
7. What kind of agenda did the group follow? Was it closer to the reflective thinking process, or did you create a different kind of agenda? Describe. Was it successful or do you feel there needed to be a different format?
8. Evaluate the overall success of your group. Do you feel you were an effective or ineffective group? What elements of the process were you most pleased with? What elements do you feel need the most improvement? Identify two things that you would like to change if you were to follow through with this assignment again and explain why you feel these changes would be necessary.
Upload your video to YouTube.com, creating an unlisted video link to share with the professor (
Sample Solution
My involvement with this group was quite different from other groups I have been involved with before. We considered it a team, as each member’s contributions were essential in completing the project, and there were specific roles assigned to members which affected our interactions and performance significantly.
The roles that were assigned for completion of the project included an observer, facilitator/leader, recorder, timekeeper and individual contributors. The observer had the responsibility of observing the dynamics within the group without making any judgments or participating actively in discussion; they remained neutral throughout. The facilitator/leader managed all discussions, ensuring everyone had a chance to participate equally while also ensuring progress was made on task goals. The recorder kept track of all decisions made and notes taken during meetings while the timekeeper ensured that we stayed within allotted times for each meeting and topic discussed. Everyone else filled in individual contributor roles as needed – some provided guidance on research topics while others shared their knowledge more generally across tasks as needed. This combination of roles allowed us to collaborate effectively throughout our project timeline.
We established both formal and informal norms for our group which further enabled us to work together efficiently towards achieving results such as equal participation by every member during meetings and online chats providing updates when necessary outside of scheduled meetings etc.. Furthermore we noticed an increase in attendance due to high motivation levels among all members due to progress being made with each stage completion thus far; pre-scheduled reminders through email or text messages also helped maintain attendance at higher levels than before the project started! In terms of leadership style, we incorporated elements from democratic participatory leadership – everyone was encouraged to contribute their views openly but decisions were still taken by consensus after thorough discussion if required between multiple members having differing opinions based upon existing context & data available at hand (for example).
In terms of power distribution within our group we noticed certain members had more influence over others: those who spoke up first often set off conversations around particular topics while those who spoke last oftentimes ended up agreeing with what those first speakers said even though they might not always agree initially – these dynamics could be observed quite easily over time amongst our core membership base especially when discussing deeper subject matters like choosing course modules for upcoming academic semesters! Lastly interaction patterns changed in various ways throughout this process; cliques began appearing naturally just like how certain topics became easier or harder depending upon collective understanding level among individuals present during particular stages - however overall I believe enough interaction occurred between all participants eventually leading towards successful completion of assignment goal(s).