From: "White Mike"
To: Subject: Group Dynamic Report For Kraus' Group Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:01:48 -0600 X-Priority: 3 Kraus' Group Members Justin Dyer 752794 Lauren Kraus 744793 Michael Meyers 774258 Elizabeth Collins 743798 Yen Fong Chan 808425 Mike Formolo ? Group Dynamic Report Our group, Kraus' Group, contained six very intelligent people with very busy schedules. When any of us were able to get together, we worked very well together, but this rarely happened. We had trouble meeting as a large group because of constant conflicts in time. The few times in which we did meet we worked mostly on questions in our notes. Everyone was given a little time to ask certain questions that had been bothering them to the rest of the group. The questions were most often about gray areas in the notes in which they were unsure about. We also worked on certain multiple choice questions and practice test questions that were giving us problems. When we did meet, we met at Memorial Union. This was a neutral distance from everyone and our group likes to drink coffee. When we met here the entire group met. Other times only certain subgroups of usually two of us would meet. These subgroups met in designated places set up between two members. We found that people living closer to each other worked together more often. In these subgroups we accomplished much more. In these we broke down the notes, analyzed the questions, and studied for the test. I think with only two people there is less stimulation to fool around and make jokes the whole time. Two things that we never did discuss in our groups were the news items and online materials, making us unable to make the connection between organic chemistry and real life. Collaboration works well in a non-competitive grading system, BUT we all oppose the non-competitive grading system. Even if the system is competitive, a curve usually is formed, which in turn helps everyone. Overall, we enjoyed working in the groups because of the social interaction, but this interaction was also our downfall because we never got anything done. We came up with a few suggestions on improving the system. First, we thought if the groups were smaller, say three people, then more would be accomplished due to less joking. Second, we feel that groups would be more likely to meet if they were set up by regions where people live. Our college lives are just too busy not to save every bit of time. Third, scheduled meeting times would improve the amount of time spent in the groups. In the future, I would stick with the groups because I'm sure some people work great in these groups, but maybe change the group structure.