Group Discussion: Definition Of Group Norm

Our group worked on all the components of the project together, which included the research, reference pages, scripts, and the PowerPoint. I believe our decision to not assign specific tasks to a single individual allowed us to fully understand all the information and get along better due to the fact we all were doing the same amount of work. In a group setting, we had to work together and communicate with one another in order to create a suitable presentation. One thing I saw that our group thrived at was listening to one another. Our book defines listening as the “active, complex process that consists of being mindful, physically receiving messages, selecting and organizing messages, interpreting messages, responding, and remembering (Wood, 2016).” Each group member had to

At the first stage my group was getting to know each other and coming to a decision on what topic we were going to discuss which was, one of the group members on placement. The second stage was when we all had different opinions about being able to have a one to one with a toddler and we was expressing our opinions such as I thought it was possible to have a one to one, it may not be as successful as talking to an older child but the child would still acknowledge the question asked and show some sort of reaction like smiling, grunting answering yes or no. At the third stage we all listened and valued each other’s opinions and points about having a one to one with a toddler. Finally at performing stage we all came to an agreement on how we agree that one of the group members will be able to have a one to one communication with a child at the age of three.

Each of my team members focused on becoming respective category “experts”, but we were all vocal and engaged in the decisions made throughout each round. Decision ideas or prospective planning processes were either pitched prior to our bi-weekly meeting of in the beginning of the meeting and discussed as a team.

I comunicated ideas and points with my group during the lab and during the poster to better understand it. I introduced ideas that would make the poster look nicer with better sticky notes that were colorful and i talked to them about wh was doing what for the poster so everyone had something to do and no one was left with

Next time I think I would like to push a little harder with the collaboration and have more of a deadline set with the other group members as to when things have to be finished by . It felt like the most collaboration we had was via email instead of on the group wiki, which was a little disappointing. A lot of the time I felt like I was talking to myself on the wiki and discussion board.

We all took time to read each students case and formulate our own opinions and ideas before bringing them before the group. Each group was giving all the time they needed to prepare there discussions. We were able to reach consensus by listening to the opinions and feels and arguments of all other group members. We actively listened to each other point of view. After each group member spoke we discussed the reasons behind their answers.

I would never say anything because I didn’t want to slow everyone else down. Using this behavior I made sure that when I didn’t understand I would ask things like, “Do you mean (whatever I needed to understand), or, “So you're saying that…”. It not only helped me understand better and faster, but it saved me a lot of time because now I wouldn’t have to look it up on the internet or in the textbook. Another behavior that helped me a great amount would be requesting information. An example of this would be to start a new problem I would say, “So how would we solve this problem?” It helped me and my group stay on task and helped us work better as a group. I was not the only person who used this behavior and our group had a great time focusing. This behavior also works on helping you become a better speaker. I’m fairly shy so this helped me feel like I was more a part of the group. The last behavior I used more than the others would be testing reasoning. When a group member would come up with what he or she thought was the answer to the problem they would explain

I hope that I accomplished what was expected. It is quite intimidating being the first discussion leader. I tried to complete this quickly and proficiently, to allow for more discussion time. Thank you for your patience.

Group member cohesiveness was absent from the group meeting for several reasons, but the primary reasons were due to the fact that the group members did not have a common description of value or structure to the discussion. Each member viewed their own area of involvement within the organization as being more valuable than any other area, and it was this exclusion of other valuable traits that lead the group to begin to clash in such a

Our fist discussion was regarding the video “Planning a Playground”. The group in this video was discussing planning for a playground, what it would cost to put it up and how they could raise the money. I liked how this group communicated effectively an overall worked together. I picked up on some nervousness but that was mainly because they were meeting for the first time. The only issue that I could see off top was at some points some of the members would cut off the member that was speaking. I don’t feel that it was intentional or malicious but to communicate effectively you need to let others speak until their done so that you completely understand what is being said. In most cases this is how things are misunderstood because you only take from the part you hear or stopped them from saying. I identified constructive conflict occurring in this group. Constructive conflict is when behaviors help to build relationships, when you are able to manage your emotions and accept and resolve responses. It’s when you have task-completion,

In the video, “The Ineffective Meeting” I recognized that the person who scheduled the meeting was not present at the scheduled start time, which appeared to be their custom. This resulted in the other participants treating the recurring meeting as a waste of time and resources. The participants had negative group roles instead of the progressive positive group roles of facilitator, harmonizer, record keeper, reporter and leader. Also, there was no clear defined structure to the meeting as related to topics and roles of the participants. At one point the meeting’s agenda was mentioned, however it appeared to not have been distributed to the entire team. This in turn resulted in team members not been fully prepared for the meeting.

The definition of the word norm to me is a standard of appropriate behavior for people with a given identity. When the word international is used with norms, in my opinion, I tend to think about the behavior of a country that is seen normal internationally with other countries. In addition, I define international norms as certain rules that you are supposed to respect or diplomatic tendencies that you are supposed to follow by and if you deviate from these norms you are looked at as irrational. Types of behavior that seem normal to the international community are protection of human rights, joining international institutions like the UN or ICC, and following international and environmental laws. However, as the years go by, norms change

When doing so the other group members were active listener, by using their whole body verbally and nonverbal. Like facing the speaker and giving eye contact and try to avoided interruption. The group also acknowledges the thoughts of the speaker by giving constructive feed back. Due to the effectiveness of the group communication, we were able to build trust, respect and understand the issues and make decision for effective change. We illustrate this by coming together as a group one again to accomplish the goal we initially wanted to accomplish. Since the first organization that we had chosen was incorrect, so we had to make the necessary changes to accomplish our goals. The other effective feature is the purpose of the group. Kozier et al (2010) stated that the effective group purpose is when “goal, task, and outcomes are clarified. Understanding and modified so that members of the group can commit themselves to purposes through cooperation” (p.401). For instance, each individual was assign a task and knew what was to be accomplished. As group we all decided to meet at suitable day and time which was beneficial to all team members, because we could commit to the group and focus on what needed to be achieved.

My feelings about the group process was a little mix at first but, at the end I felt like we actually brought it together. Beginning of the group member were all over the place and had no direction, when we were able to take a breather in just think ideas started to flow. I felt like that took the communicator to make it happen. By reinsuring the other group members that everything will go smoothly if we just don’t overthink everything.

It started with the bulk of our research which was mainly going through information on our topic and finding support for the points we wanted to discuss within our paper. Then we created our group outline we found this to quite easy as well as it was easy to divide up the work of doing so by each focusing on our own lens then bring it together to work it all together, we also at this point discussed and formulated our introduction and conclusion. Next we began to go from the process of going from the outline to our actual paper. We did this by creating our each own section then putting them together, however since we had already worked on making sure the segments would flow together well in the outlining process we did not come across many problems. While we had each individually put together the main detail sections of our paper, we also put together our introduction, conclusion and solution segments of our group paper together. For the introduction segment of the paper we had a bit of disagreement about a word choice however we eventually settled it over conversation and overcame it. After we had finished our first draft of our group paper we let another group of peers that were in our class look over our paper to make sure we had not gotten caught up in any biases or if we were overlooking and major paper structure flaws. After small critiquing from the other group and looking over