Out of the 5 ways a person can act in decision making, I think I can personally identify with two of them. The first way I think I used to handle the situation was "Compete to win". I think I was somewhat aggressive in trying to have my ideas heard. Since I sit in the front of the room I used it to my advantage. I would tell the girls in the front what I thought would be the best ideas and they would repeat it louder to the class. The second way I think I used was "Compromise". By nature I am a very "see both sides of the situation" type of person. I always like things to balance and have everyone happy. So in this sense, I really tried to see both sides of every one's opinions.
Overall I observed a lot of people using the "Avoidance" method. I think in a classroom this size many students became discouraged to give their opinions and gave up. It was probably very frustrating for the students in the back to try and yell to the front of the room what they thought. It was also very interesting to see a few students from the back come up to the front and help take charge. They had the "Compete to win" attitude as well.
I think if we had more time to come to a decision it would have been better if we used the "Collaboration" method. We could have broken up into groups and compromised among the smaller groups. It would have been easier to work in a bigger group to come to one decision. This defiantly would have led us to get a more desirable result sooner and with less conflict!
Overall I observed a lot of people using the "Avoidance" method. I think in a classroom this size many students became discouraged to give their opinions and gave up. It was probably very frustrating for the students in the back to try and yell to the front of the room what they thought. It was also very interesting to see a few students from the back come up to the front and help take charge. They had the "Compete to win" attitude as well.
I think if we had more time to come to a decision it would have been better if we used the "Collaboration" method. We could have broken up into groups and compromised among the smaller groups. It would have been easier to work in a bigger group to come to one decision. This defiantly would have led us to get a more desirable result sooner and with less conflict!
I agree that if we had more time we deffinetly would have been able to work together better. I just feel that since there was a time limit and since the class needed a 100% vote, it got hectic and chaotic
ReplyDeleteSame here. If we had more time, i think we would have collaborated to get better results in a less stressful manner. You did a great job leading considering you took the initiative and you had a great attitude in taking charge and using every minute of the time to our advantage
ReplyDeleteCollaboration was definetely the best way. If we had more time to discuss the various ideas we could've probably made more people happy with the end result. With all the chaos going on I think we needed the Compete to winners to get the discussion started and give some of the quiter participants something to either disagree with or argue for.
ReplyDeleteYou're lucky you sit in the front and you were able to just spit out your ideas instead of yelling them out if you sat closer to the back. I agree that we could have gotten into groups, that probably would have made things much easier!
ReplyDelete