Critical Analysis of Group Process



Critical Analysis of Group Process

Lynda Chase

Ferris State University

Critical Analysis of Group Process

Abstract

In the following paper you will see a summary of my perception for each group member with individual behaviors and contributions throughout the project regarding our topic of Community Assessment of Students within Grand Rapids Public High School. I will do an analysis of the group and go through the stages of development in which our group journeyed during this project. Characteristics and behaviors took on new description as we approached the final phase of our project.

Critical Analysis of Group Process

The optimal size of a small task group is five to seven members (Cragen, Kasch, Wright, 2009, p. 12) . Cragen, Kasch, and Wright state that a small group engaged in communication interaction over time, in face-to-face and/or computer-mediated environments, who have common goals and norms and have developed a communication pattern for meeting their goals in an interdependent manner (2009, p. 9).

Group Characteristics and Evolution

The group began by letting the emails fly with multiple ideas for developing a problem statement. By consensus we picked the risk of excess rates of chronic health problems in high school age students as our problem statement. We then reviewed the data comparing local data to benchmarks and what the contributing factors were. Additional resources for this age group of children were looked at and if the resources were adequate. Last, barriers to these issues were discussed. The very first thing we did during the first planning was to sign a contract and figure out what the best means of communication was. Throughout the planning we continued to revisit this and to make sure we were effective and progressing towards our goals.

Group Interactions

Our project started with seven members and then we had a great addition, Jim. Our group has great communication skills. We would communicate through emails, blogging, and text messaging. I feel everyone took an active role throughout this project. The entire group participated in taking the initiative to step up to the plate and do what needed to be done to accomplish our goals. We fit like a custom made wooden puzzle. Work was completed in a timely fashion. Although we needed an extension, this was needed to perfect our work. We all agreed that it would be better to ask for an extension then to turn in a mediocre assignment.

We preceded to the final part of the paper the power point

During this portion of the paper Jim, Ashley and Sheila took the lead. The entire group participated gathering and submitting data. The threesome organized the power point and added pictures, graphs, sound and flare to make it a success. We submitted a final draft that everyone agreed on that was a project of perfection.

Analysis of Group Process

“Group process refers to how an organization's members work together to get things done” (2009). We had good synergy within our group throughout the entire project.

“Leadership and learning are indispensible to each other,” John F. Kennedy. Ashley stepped up to be the first to volunteer to do our power point organization. Jim ended up doing part of the narration and organizing the slides to make it more interesting to our audience. In the evaluation rubric that I completed I gave praise to Ashley and Jim for their strong organizational skills (Chase, 2012).

Our group had multiple leaders that actually worked in sync. Many times there’s too many chiefs and not enough Indians. The working or performing phase of the group process is where the discussions take place, processes are identified, and refocusing occurs if needed (Kearney-Nunnery, 2008, p 145). Our group was very strong in our communication skills. Everyone was fully engaged throughout our project.

Analysis of Own Behaviors and Role in Group

During the evaluation of my peers I found it refreshing to give them the compliments that were well earned, a feather in their cap. As a nurse, mother, and grandmother I strive to give more. I always find it difficult to be positive in my self evaluation whether it is for my job or academics. I feel that even though I think I could have been a stronger participant during the second portion of the project, I think it would’ve caused chaos having one more chief. I feel that I was an active contributor to the project. This is evident by my self evaluation and the evaluations that were completed by my peers.

According to my peers I seemed to do my full share of the work. I took an active part in providing ideas and helping other members of the group. From Ashley, she stated I participated and encourage group discussion. I received all positive comments in these areas. I also try and give positive feedback to encourage personal growth. I felt proud to be part of this group and to be accepted for the contribution of my work.

In my evaluation I gave myself mostly positive remarks because I felt I did have a positive effect towards the end result of our project. I felt that I did at least my equal share of the work and it was completed on time. I posted my problem statement in a timely fashion and discussed the other statements that were posted. I participated in the group interaction and helped move the project along. Although I wasn’t one of the organizers for the power point, I did proof it and assisted in correcting some grammatical errors.

Conclusion

Group productivity, quality, and strong communication skills are ingredients of a group. We continually had positive communication which gave us an undeniably good outcome, achieving our goals. In group work everyone needs to participate for the group to achieve its goals. In this group process our group was able to come up with a problem and find a way to come up with a solution. We worked continually to put together a paper and power point. It took everyone to participate. We continued to strive for an awesome group project.

References

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Ashley Bridges.

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Nicole Chambers.

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Jim Harrington

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Denise Lyon

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Sheila Lucus.

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Rebekkah McConnell

Chase, L. M. (2012). Group participation rubric [Peer commentary on the paper “Critical Analysis of Group Process”] for Dana Sartorious.

Chase, L. (2012). Collaborative work skills: community assessment group work self evaluation.

Cragen, J. F., Kasch, C. R., & Wright, D. W. (2009). Communication in small groups: Theory, process, skills (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Kearney-Nunnery, R. (2008). Advancing your career: Concepts of professional nursing (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis Company

Appendix

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|5 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|45/45 |Total each column | | | |

Person Being Evaluated: Ashley Bridges

Ashley was part of the back bone of our group. She was like a steamroller and rolled ahead. Ashley was strong in her leadership skills but was not authoritarian in her direction. She consumed a large part of our group’s success. She presented her work to the group in a timely fashion so that others could respond with suggestions. She strived for perfection! Many of the discussions were stimulated by Ashley and she also provided useful feedback to her peers to help with the success of the project.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

Person Being Evaluated: Jim Harrington

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|5 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|45/45 |Total each column | | | |

Jim was a huge participant in this group’s success! Jim gave the group energy to push forward not only in discussions but with the project itself. He displayed his comments in a positive way which supported the group. Jim put a lot of time and energy into the project, perfecting the presentation. He provided positive feedback to his peers. Jim was part of the glue that held our group together which made us stronger in the end.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

Person Being Evaluated: Dana Sartorius

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|5 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|45/45 |Total each column | | | |

Dana supported the group by participating in the discussions and following up with feedback to her peers. She completed her work in a timely fashion so that her peers could review the information and offer suggestions. She took note of the suggestions to improve upon her work that benefitted the entire group. Dana was a huge support to the group by offering suggestions. Dana took accountability for her contribution to the group made her offerings in a positive way.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

Person Being Evaluated: Denise Lyon

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|4 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|44/45 |Total each column | | | |

Denise contributed to the group by participating with positive, constructive feedback to the group. Her work was completed in a timely fashion so others could have time for review. Denise continually asks appropriate questions and provides answers to her peers that help move the group forward in their discussions of the group project. Denise provided alternate routes when the group came upon barriers to the project. She’s a team player and deserves a “W” for her participation.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

Person Being Evaluated: Nicole Chambers

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|4 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|5 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|44/45 |Total each column | | | |

She communicated ideas and suggestions to improve the subject matter of the project. Nicole responded quickly with in-depth answers to concerns of the group. Deadlines were met in a timely fashion so that others could respond to her ideas. Her ideas made for a positive outcome of the group’s project.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

Person Being Evaluated: Rebekkah McConnell

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|4 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|44/45 |Total each column | | | |

Rebekkah shined with her extensive communication and the sharing of ideas for this project. She continually gave suggestions and constructive feedback to her peers regarding the project. Work and responses were completed in a timely fashion. She was always willing to help others, which promoted success within the group. By responding in a positive way Rebekkah supported the group in the group process.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Lynda Chase

Person Being Evaluated: Sheila Lucas

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|5 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|45/45 |Total each column | | | |

Sheila was part of the core that not only built on the group process but held the group together. She continually supported the group with suggestions and ideas that moved the project toward completion in a timely fashion. She did more than her share of the work load. Sheila gave guidelines and set expectations for the group so the project would be completed by the deadline. Sheila encouraged discussion amongst the group to provide information that was needed for the completion of the project. She was not only organized but communicated to her peers in a positive, constructive way. Sheila was a huge contribution to the success of the group project.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Self Evaluation: Lynda Chase

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|5 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|5 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|4 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|5 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|44/45 |Total each column | | | |

I feel that I did my share of the work. I continuously made suggestions in regards to the organizations of the project. I enjoyed helping other group members and encouraging them to communicate and step forward towards our goals. My work was submitted on time so our assignments were not delinquent. I believe I could’ve expressed more feelings and preferences during the discussions. I accepted constructive ideas from the group members and incorporated them into the project assignment.

Adapted with permission from Participation Rubric for Unit Development by Dr. Barbara Frandsen © Barbara Frandsen, St. Edward's University, Austin, Texas, 2005.

GROUP PARTICIPATION RUBRIC

Evaluator: Nicole

Person Being Evaluated: Lynda

Due only in class on day of presentation: Only this form will be accepted.

For Critique: due only on the day Critique is due and only this form will be accepted.

|Score |Excellent-5 |Good-4 |Average-3 |Poor-2 |

|4 |Did a full share of the work or|Did an equal share of the work |Did almost as much work as |Did less work than others|

| |more | |others | |

|4 |Took the initiative in helping |Worked agreeably with group |Could be coaxed into meeting|Did not meet members at |

| |the group to get organized |members concerning times and |with other group members |agreed times and places |

| | |places to meet | | |

|4 |Provided many ideas for group |Participated in discussions |Listened to others; on some |Seemed bored with |

| |project |about group project |occasions, made suggestions |conversations about the |

| | | | |group project |

|5 |Assisted other group members |Offered encouragement to other |Seemed preoccupied with own |Took little pride in |

| | |group members |part of project |group project |

|5 |Work was ready on time or |Work was ready very close to |Work was usually late but |Some work never got |

| |sometimes ahead of time |the agreed time |was completed in time to be |completed and other |

| | | |graded |members completed the |

| | | | |assignment |

|4 |Clearly communicated desires, |Usually shared feelings and |Rarely expressed feelings, |Never spoke up to express|

| |ideas, personal needs and |thoughts with other group |preferences |excitement and/or |

| |feelings |members | |frustration |

|5 |Expressed frequent appreciation|Often encouraged and |Encouraged and appreciated |Group members often |

| |for other group members |appreciated other group members|other group members. Seemed |wondered "What is going |

| | | |to take the work of others |on here?" |

| | | |for granted. | |

|5 |Gave feedback to others that |Gave feedback in ways that did |Sometimes hurt feelings of |Was openly rude when |

| |dignified |not offend |others with feedback |giving feedback |

|5 |Accepted feedback from others |Reluctantly accepted feedback |Argued own point of view |Refused to listen to |

| |willingly | |over feedback |feedback |

|41/45 |Total each column | | | |

Lynda participated in group discussions about the project. She turned in her portion of the assignment on time. She expressed appreciation for work done by other group members.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download