This sample of an academic paper on Critical Reflection On Group Presentation reveals arguments and important aspects of this topic. Read this essay’s introduction, body paragraphs and the conclusion below.
This is a report in which our group uses reflection as a process to analyse the experiences and all the group incidents which occurred during our group assignments will be analysed in other to highlight how these experiences, whether positive or negative affected the groups learning outcome or output. Reflection can be defined as a way reviewing an experience of practice so as to describe, analyse, evaluate and as such learn about the practice Reid(1993).
From the above definition it can be said that reflection is the process that enables an individual or the group to undertake a retrospective analysis or evaluation of the past experiences or learning in a view to making changes, where necessary. Reflection can be directly linked to learning because it enables an individual or a group of individuals to refer to past experiences, which then enables them to come up with new solutions and ideas to tackle future tasks and problems.
According to Rowntree(1988), reflection means studying one’s own study methods as seriously as one studies the subject and thinking about a learning task after doing it. He maintains unless this is done, the task will almost certainly be wasted. This report will go on further to analyse and evaluate two critical incidents, which occurred during the group case study of Dyson, and give a conclusion on lessons learned during this reflection.
Group formation, development and operating practices. This section highlights the various formation and development processes undergone by our group in other to function efficiently as an effective unit.
It explains the different ways in which our group had to identify each other’s unique personalities and subsequently form and assign group tasks to each member. Using Tuckman’s theory Tuckman’s model highlights the different stages in team development which is mainly subdivided into forming, storming, norming and performing. Forming : This is the stage in which our group came together and held initial meetings to understand and identify each member. The group was able to appoint a group leader who began to delegate individual tasks and provide general direction and guidance for the group.
This is the stage at which our group started to proffer ideas, suggestions and solutions regarding the group task, at this stage some of the group members had a lot of disagreements regarding, some of the suggestions brought forward. Norming At this point the group reaches agreement and consensus regarding the specific roles to be played by every member of the group, at this point the unity in our group was stronger than group initially formed. Performing: At this stage the group was able to function well because each member was able to carry out their assigned task without much interference from the group leader.
Using the Belbin Test theory This model describes different team roles of individuals. In our group we had an interesting blend of mostly plant, complete finisher, team workers and resource investigator. Due to the fact that we had about four team workers in the group, we were able to function well by identifying each team role. Critical incident 1 Description of situation: We as a group agreed to meet on a particular day 21-03-2009 to practice and final tune over presentation skills for the Dyson case study. We all agreed to take turns in presentation, so that the best speaker could be identified and selected.
When it was time for Nehal, our only female group member she broke down in tears and sobbed for a long period. As a result she could not make her own mock presentation because her emotional state. Analysis of feelings: Nehal’s emotional break down negatively affected moral of the group because the main presentation day was the following day. We as a group, spent considerable length of time trying to console her and find out the root-cause of her problems. Some group member even felt the group as a whole could be psychologically weighted down on the main presentation day.
Evaluation of the experience: We as a group realised that some times it is difficult to keep away some of our private problems from academic life and work. The group also realised the need to consult with other group members whenever a member of group was confronted with certain issues, so that the group member would be excused or not compelled to participate against his/her will. The theory of critical reflection emphasises the need to develop a rationale for practice, enliven the learning environment and so create conditions in which each person is respected, valued and heard (Brookfield 1995)
Making sense of the experience: Our group had a good blend of team workers, a plant and a complete finishers using Belbin’s test. Whereas using the learning style questionnaire, Nehal emerged as an activist, which explains the ease to express her feelings whenever and wherever. What to do if a similar situation reoccurred: Having reflected on these experience, our group has decided that the best way to handle a re occurrence would be to provide all forms of support and encouragement for any distressed group member.
The counselling process helps to achieve self understanding and decision making by the counselee, who should be responsible for own actions. (Herr and Cramer; 1992) Critical incident 2: Description of Situation: On the final presentation day group members Abdul and Kashif had a serious disagreement on the final format for the structure of our Dyson project. Kashif had made some of the slides with an inconsistent pattern much was to the disliking Abdul and some other group members. Abdul felt the inconsistent designs could cost the group some marks. Analysis of Feelings:
Kashif clearly believed he had done a fantastic job of designing the slides and so would not welcome any designs. Abdul couldn’t understand why Kashif was so head strong about making changes to the slides. Although the other group members slightly disagreed with kashif, they all wanted and amicable solution to the problem. Evaluation of Experience: The group eventually realised that the disagreement had a positive effect on the over all performance of the group, because some of the slides were eventually changed and as a result the group scored highest on the day.
This is in line with a theory that critical reflection start to occur when individuals question information, ideas or behaviour. (Merriam and Brockett, 1997) Making Sense of the Experience: According to the Belbin’s test Kashif emerged as a complete finisher which explains why he found it a bit difficult to take the new ideas being given by Abdul who was a team worker, the group interestingly had a plant that came up with great ideas to forge the group ahead. What to do if Situation Reoccurred:
The group resolved that in the case of reoccurrence, the lessons from the past experience would enable us to establish a unified approach to group work to alteration and changes. The theory of evaluation relates to the process in which hypothesis leads to observations, which gives ways to empirical generalization and finally ends up as theories. (Wallace 1971) Conclusion This reflection on the experience of our group has enabled the group to know how to avoid certain problems and to solve Unavoidable problems amicably when they arise.
This has enabled us to learn the process of solving new problem, based on the experience gathered during past problems. The concept of reflective practice has its origins in the conviction that in the context of professional practice, problems and other complex matters are best dealt with by people who can flexibly and intuitively draw on their knowledge of practice rather than apply rules drawn from formal theory. (Foley, 2000) The capacity to reflect on action in other to engage in a process of continuous learning was one of the defining characteristics of professional practice (Donald Schon 1983)