Group Actions and Dynamics of the Chemettes

 In order to accomplish the task of beginning and finishing the Chemistry 212 Group Project, t he members of the Chemettes had to work together in every aspect imaginable.  First of all, the order of meetings was discussed.  Since all of the members have busy and dissimilar schedules, picking a meeting time that was convenient was our fir st big problem.  The solution to this problem was to select two, one-hour slots each week to hold a meeting that every member could participate in.  Finding a place to meet wasn’t nearly as hard because the decision to meet at Memorial Union was unanimous.  The search for our article began by every member finding at least three articles from reliable newspapers on the web, for a grand total of fourteen articles, and then every member voting for the article that she liked best.  Our lis t of suitable newspapers was lengthy, including many well-known and respected ones such as: The New York Times and The Seattle Times.

The advantages of working in the group for this project was that the workload was divided among four different people and there were many ideas that were shared.  Like any other real life event though, working in the group also had its disadvantages at times.  One problem that the group encountered was when our ideas mismatched or when it was difficult to sched ule a meeting around everyone’s busy and conflicting schedules.  We all enjoyed the group project and would like to be involved in one again.  The Chemettes did, on occasion, meet to work on other things than the group project.  We met to d iscuss our Chemistry lab each week and study together before the Chemistry tests.  The group project gave us a reason to meet each week, but our friendship will give us a reason to meet in the future.