UWS BA ePDPs

Group and Leadership

There was no group leader chosen, instead we all had a different role within the team. We all got along well so there was no issues and no one was excluded. However, we had very limited material as the other groups had taken most of it, therefore, we had to problem solve and use the natural resources e.g. sticks/branches.

 

Explaining

I think all explanations given were clear as all members of the group had the same idea of what the den should look like. Therefore, we all had the same end goal which made us work more efficiently.

In my opinion we did not plan. We started to build the den and just sort of ‘winged it’ in the hopes that it would work out. This led to a few issues e.g. the roof of the den ended up collapsing as the branch was not strong enough to hold the materials.

 

Environment

The environment changes the formality of a situation e.g. the workshop felt very informal and more enjoyable.

In order to communicate effectively outdoors you have to make changes e.g. instructions have to be clear because there is a larger risk to health and safety, the volume may differ (could be louder because larger space, or quieter to prevent disruption to the environment and others who may be there).

Transitioning from communicating indoors to communicating outdoors was not an issue for my group. However, as a developing student teacher I am aware that this may not always be the case, I am now aware of strategies that I can use in order to communicate effectively with a class outdoors. E.g. standing against a wall with the children in front to shield my voice and also prevent any distractions.

As part of our Situated Communication module, we were given a den building challenge to test our communication skills in the outdoor environment, which was full of rich and engaging stimuli.  Although the end result was far from glorious, our team worked well together and came away with a better understanding of the challenges faced when communicating outside!

Group and Leadership

Was there a group leader?

I found that there was no established group leader at any point throughout the den building activity.  Everyone took turns to suggest ideas and give instructions/constructive criticism as well as show their initiative when working with others.

How was this chosen?

Seeing as there was no particular group leader, we decided simply to work alongside one another to achieve a common goal within a set time.  To have selected and agreed upon a team leader would not only have wasted time in this context but also could have created an opportunity for resentment or disagreements.  Furthermore, we all chose our own roles within the group without hesitation, and were ready to take on a similar workload, so there wasn’t really a need to have somebody as a leading figure.

If informal, how did you know? What were the actions that marked them as a leader?

Although we had no specific team leader, we all showed leadership qualities and skills within the completion of the activity.  We all made valid suggestions, as well as ensuring that we were managing with what we needed to do (carrying materials, taking turns to arrange the structures). We worked with honesty and integrity, and had the confidence to make further suggestions and raise questions where necessary.  As the task progressed, we found that good verbal communication was key to a collective understanding of the task and a greater chance of success.  Moreover, when time began to run out, we were required to hone our decision-making capabilities to decide which features of the den should take priority, and which features we could afford to miss out.  Despite the cold weather, we also kept each other going!

” As the task progressed, we found that good verbal communication was key to a collective understanding of the task and a greater chance of success.”

How did this impact on the rest of the group e.g. was there some underlying resentment/did anyone feel excluded?

As mentioned above, having no established leader was perhaps fundamental to the absence of any potential resentment in the group.  With regards to exclusion, I found that everyone had a job to do, and we worked together very well with no conflict or disagreement whatsoever.  In fact, the atmosphere was quite relaxed and informal – not to mention we also had a good laugh

What was the most challenging thing for you about working in this group?

Whilst I enjoy working in a group, there are a few factors which I consider a challenge.  Although I had spoken to everyone in my team prior to the task, I felt I wasn’t hugely acquainted with all of our members.  Therefore, I felt the need to establish a relaxed outlook on the task, and be open to different suggestions and strategies which might not have reflected my own.  Furthermore, I can sometimes find it difficult to project my voice and be heard as I consider myself a fairly soft-spoken individual outwith the university context.  If somebody talks over me, I tend to tail off and stay quiet.  I can also fall into the trap of body language and intonation being too subtle for others to notice.  Therefore, it was necessary to challenge myself to step out of my comfort zone and ensure whatever I said could be heard.  It was rather rewarding as a few of the ideas I had were used in the creation of the den. Now I know that by having my voice heard, I can contribute to the completion of tasks.

 

Explaining

How clearly did you think the group explained to you?  What made this clear or unclear?

I felt that the group’s explanations were particularly clear – we all made sure to speak clearly and that everybody knew what was expected of them.  This was evident throughout the task as nobody was left confused or without anything to do at any point.  All members understood what had been asked of them, and requests that were made.  There were also no arguments or conflict during the whole activity.

 

 

Environment

What was the impact of the environment on your communication? What changes did you make when explaining to others that you might not have considered in a typical classroom?

I believe there was a significant impact on communication.  For example, we had to speak much louder than perhaps we would have in a classroom.  Also, we needed to use hand gestures and reliance on facial expressions more often, as background noise, distance and proximity influenced how well we could hear and interpret what was being said by other members of our group.  Given that it was not a particularly windy day, we did not have to raise our voices much, but the difference in volume was obvious compared to the classroom. Furthermore, in the outdoor environment, it often proved useful to use the concrete materials around us to physically demonstrate the ideas and suggestions we had.  This allowed us to visualize what another group member had in mind, which might not always be possible indoors.

“I believe there was a significant impact on communication.  For example, we had to speak much louder than perhaps we would have in a classroom.”

How challenging was it to speak above the sounds in the environment?  How can we make this communication easier on both speaker and listener?

There were a few occasions when the wind picked up, as well as dogs barking and the sound of traffic from the surrounding roads.  I felt that my hearing became a little more strained when this happened.  I also found that I had to speak louder, although not by much as we stayed close together.  I feel that being in smaller groups did make the communication simpler as we did not have to worry about projecting our voices too much, and if we could not hear each other, we simply moved closer together.

 

Negotiation

Were your negotiations successful? Why/why not?  What was most challenging about these?

Unfortunately, our negotiations were unsuccessful and few in number.  As we were one of the last groups to have access to the materials available, we did not have much to offer in exchange for additional group members or better materials.  I feel that our tone and language was particularly strong and persuasive, but due to the lack of physical materials, a lot of our negotiations and offers fell flat.

The main aim of chapter is to explore the definition, types and purposes of questions while also exploring different possible answers to questions

 

The three main themes of the chapter are:
– The importance of questioning

– Structuring of questions

– Types of Questions

 

Hargie claims that A question can be verbal or non verbal. For example, “hmm” is a request for the speaker, a nod is also a non-verbal gesture which suggests a question.

 

I disagree with Hargie when he states that  group conversations are most effective when there are many contributors. If this was in an instance of children in particular it may not be effective as they may be nervous or anxious to speak out in front of others in fear of being wrong

 

A word I was unsure of was ‘Ascertain’ – verb –to find out definitely; learn with certainty or assurance; determine

 

One theory that was presented in the chapter was the “Funnel Sequence” or the “pyramid”. This theory starts with the questioner asking many open questions but gradually these questions are substituted for closed questions. This theory is effective because the structure gradually narrows on the vital information needed, without demanding the question. This makes it useful for purposes such as interviews.

The main aim of the chapter is to emphasize the variety of questioning and where and how they can be applied.

The writer explored the themes of the types and ranges of questions, the purpose of questioning and the outcomes of questioning.

I agree with the idea that children feel scared to answer questions wrongly. The chapter explains that “children assume that adults will ask reasonable questions, and so they feel under pressure to respond to the expectations inherent in these questions”. Some children fear that they will answer the questioned incorrectly and show that they do not know the answer.

Although I agree with most of what is written in the chapter, I do not agree with the statement “some open questions place more restriction upon respondents than others.” I disagree with this because open questions allow for more varied and detailed answers that you may not be able to get from a closed question. Open questions give people encouragement and choice to speak and respond. The answer could be time consuming depending on the volume of the response as it has to be detailed. This questioning type is used by doctors or interviewers.

One word in which I was unsure about was ubiquitous. The definition is: present, appearing, or found everywhere.

Overall, the chapter was an interesting piece and it has allowed me to have a deeper understanding of questioning.

Reference: ‘Finding out about others: the skill of questioning’, in Hargie, O. (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: Routledge.

The main aim of this chapter was to highlight the necessity and complexity of questioning in everyday life, as well as to inform the reader of different types of questions and their various contexts. 

It was possible to identify three inherent themes throughout:

1. Questions as a catalyst for conversation;
2. Types of questions and their application;
3. Patterns of/structure of questioning.

Whilst the chapter was highly interesting and informative, Hargie makes a number of valid claims.  One of these is that questions are at the heart of the majority of daily human interactions, which he skilfully reinforces with reference to a number of scholars, including Mokros and Aahkus.  He also provides a lengthy list of situations in which the skill of questioning is prevalent: in TV quiz shows, courtrooms and radio interviews, to name but a few.

A point made by the author which I found particularly interesting (and which I also agree with) is that questions can act as a pretext to success or failure.  Whether part of a police interrogation or a doctor’s consultation, the presentation and subsequent interpretation of questions by an individual can ultimately play a huge part in the outcome of their situation.

However, whilst Hargie makes a valid point in regards to IRF (Initiation, Response and Follow-up) structures of questioning in classrooms, I have to admit that I disagree.  Whilst this method of questioning may still be in use in a small number of schools, it can be observed that simply regurgitating information learned by rote is becoming less common.  A number of teachers are now able to tailor questions in such a manner as to encourage discussion, questioning and instil deeper understanding of subject material within their pupils at any age.

It is also worth noting that Hargie poses the idea questions ‘playing a crucial role’ in learning and that such methods allow children to ‘make sense of their surroundings’.  This is subtly reflective of Piaget’s concept, where children take part in ‘accommodation’ of new knowledge so as to build a relevant ‘schema’ (ultimately as a result of questioning).

Overall, the chapter was a fascinating insight into the complexity of questions and their pivotal role in everyday conversation, as well as their role in building understanding at any age.

 

References:

Hargie, O (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and Practice.  5th ed.  London: Routledge

Image by <a href=”https://pixabay.com/users/qimono-1962238/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=2492009″>Arek Socha</a> from <a href=”https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=2492009″>Pixabay</a>

Reading review:

The main aim of the chapter was to emphasise and highlight the importance of questioning and how it may be used, in different situations, in an effective manner. The chapter provides many tips and examples of the ways teachers should ask questions to improve teaching and learning in the classroom. It also indicates what methods of questioning are frowned upon due to their limited or invasive nature.

 

There were many key themes within the chapter:

1.The purpose of questions

• In a school setting, teachers usually ask questions to children to check that they have an understanding of what they have been taught.
• There are many possible goals one may have when asking a question. Some of these include; to communicate in discussions, to obtain information or to initiate interaction and so on.

2.Types of questions

• The chapter outlined two main types of questions, open and closed.
• Teachers are encouraged to use more open questions in the classroom
• Closed questions can be used in areas like maths due to the limited possibility of many answers

3.Effects of leading questions on children

• It is agreed upon by many authors, including Pipe et al. 2007, that “leading questions have a distorting effect upon children’s answers…”
• It was made clear throughout the paragraph that asking an open question can provide you with much more information

4.Related aspects of questioning

• Structuring
• Pausing
• Distribution
• Responses

 

Smith et al. 2006 claim that teachers mostly use closed questions because time is limited and information needs to be gathered. This is backed up by the findings of Siraj Blatchford and Manni (2008:7), who found that “94.5% of all questions asked by early childhood staff were closed questions.”

One part of the reading I disagreed with was the way in which a female social worker conversed with a four-year-old child. (Box 5.3 of the reading).

The main aim of this chapter was to further develop the readers understanding of questioning, the range of questions and the important role it plays in our everyday lives when communicating. Some of the key themes within the chapter are the purpose of questions, different types of questions, for example, open or closed questions, how effective each question type is and the range of contexts these questions may be used in.

Within this chapter, Hargie makes several claims surrounding questions and uses a range of evidence to back this up. One claim is that pausing can be used as a type of probe. This is backed up with evidence from Margutti (2006) who showed that teachers in a classroom often use pauses to indicate the start of a new question-answer sequence and micro-pauses were used after a question to show that some form of answer or response was expected.

Another point which Hargie makes is that pupils in a classroom often do not ask questions in the classroom, even when they have one, due to the fear that other pupils may react negatively. This is backed up through a study in the US which showed that the older children get, the more uncomfortable they feel when it comes to asking and answering questions. I strongly agree with this point due to my own experiences as a pupil.

One thing I disagree with is the use of non-leading open-ended questions and other prompts in Box 5.3 from the Orkney satanic abuse crisis. This form of questioning seems very distressing and frustrating for the child and we see them refuse to agree with the social worker. As a result, the original question is still unanswered at the end of the conversation.

One concept mentioned in the chapter was the funnel sequence which is the “approach of beginning an interaction with a very open question and gradually reducing the level of openness.” (Kahn and Cannell, 1957, pg. 127)

Reference: ‘Finding out about others: the skill of questioning’, in Hargie, O. (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: Routledge.

very clear and informative 🙂

The main aim of the text is to provide the readers with appropriate knowledge on the importance of questioning within different types of communication. The key themes that I have identified throughout the text include; the importance of questioning, the advantages of questioning and how to be an effective communicator in todays society.

Within the document, Bolden (2009:122) noted that questions allow the questioner to control the conversation by ‘requesting the addressee to engage with a specific topic and/or perform a particular responsive action’. This statement demonstrates the importance of questioning within conversation in order to identify and analyse important information which may be needed for a particular reason. This may also open-up new doors of knowledge which the addressee may not have been willing to share.

Within this reading, it was stated that leading questions and open-ended questions should not be used when speaking to children. However, I disagree with this statement, to an extent. Many children may become confused when asked questions of this nature, however children develop and learn at different stages and therefore, I would not disregard these questions with all children. When children reach a certain age or become more mature through-out school, some children may enjoy answering these type of questions, voicing their opinions or beliefs if they feel passionate about a certain subject or just even enjoy a challenge.

Within our group, there was no clear leader and instead we worked together and allowed time for each person to give their thoughts/opinions on how to build the den. The most challenging thing about working in the group was assigning roles. It was important to ensure that everyone had a worthy job and felt like part of the team.

We were shown other group’s dens and told by one person how they constructed it and how they worked as a team. They pointed to the materials that were used and this was made very clear.

When communicating outdoors, it was important that everyone was listening as the outdoor area was louder than it would have been being inside. Therefore, the spokesperson had to speak with a louder voice to ensure that everyone in both groups could hear their explanation.

We did not negotiate with any other group. This is because we had a sheet which acted as a roof for our den and we were not willing to give this up. Due to this, other groups did not want to give their materials to our group and therefore, our den did not change.