Raquel's Group Interaction- Post 2

The interesting thing about learning is that it never ends. With all the insights that came this last year in NCC, I have had several more just by reading the posts of my fellow classmates.

Colleen reminded me that group interaction is not limited to the small three to five person groups I’ve gotten used to in my course work. While I have never had to engage in a large group setting for academic work, I have certainly been a part of massive group demonstrations for political causes. The same characteristics apply for large and small groups to be successful, although the dynamic is very different.

Chris challenged my beliefs about group interaction by saying that there doesn’t need to be a leader for a group to be successful. I have been in situations where several leaders emerged and held an agreement to govern specific aspects of the group, but I cannot see a group working effectively if there is no leader at all. Similarly to Chris, I have often had to take the lead in groups in order to prevent chaos from arising when there is no sense of direction and time passes with little productivity. However, I have learned through my time at NCC that simply because I have not experienced it directly, does not mean it is doesn’t happen. Although I have not personally experienced it, I do believe it is possible.

I disagree with Linda’s claim that every member of a group must be committed in order for it to succeed. I think that while it is helpful and ideal, it is not necessary that every member be fully committed. There have been plenty of times when one or two group members contributed less than others and seemed no to care about the outcome of the work or the grade. And what inevitably happens is that the rest of the group members draw closer together to make up for the slackers to get the job done. While it does put a lot of stress on the ones who have to work harder and it creates resentment among the members, it does not mean the group cannot meet the goals and be successful.