In the Decision making process on 10/13/10 class, we all students were a part of decision making process. In order to get a better grade, we all had to agree upon the several suggestion made by students.
In the beginning of the process, a male student came up, and tried to manage individuals ideas, but then some people started rasing their voice. eventually many studnets came up in front of the class, then it led people to diconnected with others in the communication.
I think many students had "compete to win" mode. they tried to find a best way to maximize thier benefits. I had a same mode, I tried to share my opinion but then many people came up so I could not express my thougths on the process. so I came up just only to tell the my opinion to the one who wrote the suggestion on the white board. I believe that everybody was behaving based on thier own benefit otherwise we would not get any benefits becuase of no perfect agreements.
some people who got a good score more likely had "Accomodation way" mode because they were not frustrated as much as other studnets who got lower grades.
I also found that some learders had "Compromise" mode. they tried to be mediators so at least they could get something out of the process.
If we decided leaders based on votes in the beginning, it would be more effiecient to control the process and maximize the output. even though we got great output in this decision making process, it would have not had same results. It was hard for all students to agree upon individual's opinion so leaders or a leading manager would have to manage the process. all studnets said that it was such a chaos because there were too many people in the front. it made people start acting for themselves but not for all students.
but we had to know that all students had to agree upon the suggestion made by individual students. In order to make the process flow, I believe that if we had a leader, we would work more effieciently
but we had to know that all students had to agree upon the suggestion made by individual students. In order to make the process flow, I believe that if we had a leader, we would work more effieciently
I think it was really difficult to figure out if the leaders, that nominated themselves, were competent enough to make a decision for the whole class. They also had to take into account other people’s ideas and make everybody happy. But I think we achieved alot anyway.
ReplyDeleteHey great job on the blog. I just have one issue with your idea to elect a leader with voting. This could have been a very difficult way to approach this idea with the give time constraints. Think about the process many people do to achieve votes, build a campaign, present your beliefs, and gain trust in your voters. These are just a few of the thing people have to do to become leaders, and given the time constraints and the amount of people in the class, this task could have been nearly impossible. If we would have spread into groups, and each group had a leader that would express their beliefs of the group, I felt that this could have been most efficient. We could have outreached to the maximum amount of people, and we could have looked at the situation from many aspects of the spectrum rather than just one. Great job for this week!!!!
ReplyDeleteI agree that some people were in the compromise mode. I have not had a professor tell the class to come up with a way to manage our grades so for me just the gesture of the professor caring made me happy. I believe that when someone gives you a chance to change something that you do not normally get a change you try to make minor changes and not take advantage of the situation. Some people ideas to me were to much and they needed to be more considerate in thinking about the structure and familiarity that the professor normally has with his grading system and exam style.
ReplyDelete