Oh man, the decision making experiment was an experience I have never encountered before in a classroom. I have never seen such fury and conflict between students based on a single test grade. If the professor wasn't in the classroom, disagreements probably would've turned into a UFC rumble match.
In terms of my behavioral response to this chaotic mess, I would have to go with collaborating at first but as the situation becomes worse, I chose to be an advoidance and withdraw myself from the class. I decided that I will pretty much agree on any type of proposal just so I don;t need to deal with all the rukus.
Is there another way to achieve a better solution without all the chaos?
In my opinion, I don't think so. As long as time is limited to merely 30 minutes, solutions can not all be agreed upon because the class is just too big. It is human nature to see the situation that benefits "ourselves" the most. The average score was a 69 and the hiest exam grade was a 97. The range between the class mean and the highest score is too great for everyone to agree upon a solution that will benefit every group equally.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that collaborating was what most of us in the class were leaning towards but then when the "leaders" took over it led to alot of avoidance on the part of some students who didn't want to go through the hassle of arguing back and forth. The time constraint probably had alot to do with it. Although everyone finally agreed, I do still think that some are not completely satisfied. Majority rule probably would have brought about a more peaceful decision making process.
ReplyDeleteI agree, felt the same way when the leaders stepped in. they took over and it seemed impossible for them to listen to our views. even if they pretended they did. as the prof mentioned in the next lecture, 'the leader will present their views first, and put those on the board'. point proven.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned in my blog entry, our model of a leader to group interaction was when leader influence is very low and group influence is very high, so a leader had to do 3 things:
ReplyDelete1. To act as facilitator, defining problem, highlighting alternative to consider;
2. To work to get concurrence on a decision;
3. To provide resources and encouragement.
Our "real leaders" did not really follow any of this requirements... In the end we've got a chaos which caused avoidance in lots of group members...
loved you blog!!! I'm exited to hear that i wasn't the only one that as thinking of the mess.. i sit all the way back so i had "THE" view!
ReplyDeleteand i also think you are right about the fact that the grate difference between the grades made it very difficult to agree on something that makes everyone happy to add to that think about the ethnic variations and peoples personalities.
Just like you i started with collaboration... but after like 20 mins of the same thing i just gave up and withdraw myself from the whole thing... i gave up on it..
I guess it's hard for the people who did the best in the class to agree on what benefits that greatest good. You're right, if the score differences hadn't been so dramatic, it would have been easier for everyone to agree on some solution. But in any case, the majority took over.
ReplyDelete