Reflective Journal

The aim of this reflective journal is to reflect on my experience with a group assignment. Reflecting on this task will help me to identify the mistakes that were made such as to improve in time and group management.

Reflection using Gibb’s Reflective Framework

Description

The teacher gave a group assignment and explained that the work should be completed through a group discussion rather than individual work. Because of time constraints and poor group management, the group members decided that the work should be divided amongst all the five members. Each person took their work home and submitted the completed parts to the group after a period of 1 week. To our surprise, the work was disconnected and the individual assignments could not be used in that they lacked flow. In the end, we decided to redo the work as a group and disregard individual tasks.

Feelings

All the group members were excited that they would work from the comfort of their homes. I was pleased with the idea in that I could manage my time and do the work at my own pace. After bringing in the work, disappointment was apparent since everyone had made plans for the day. Although some were reluctant to redo the work, I urged them to cooperate and remain motivated. I felt satisfied after submitting the final task that was done accurately.

Evaluation

It was commendable that every group member had produced quality work and submitted it before the stipulated group timeline. Additionally, most of the group members canceled their plans after realizing the need to redo the task, an aspect that contributed to the group’s motivation and work ethics. The fact that the group members assumed that the work would have the desired continuity caused the group failure. The cooperation between the group members and the motivation to complete the work before the class deadline was creditable.

Analysis

The choice to divide the work amongst the group members was worthwhile in that every person chose the part that they would complete satisfactorily. This option was driven by the fact that dividing tasks was convenient for every person and often consumed less time due to faster decision making.

However, this choice cost the group more time in that there was a need to rewrite the work for continuity purposes. Additionally, some parts were wrongly done and completed out of the topic. This situation was facilitated by the fact that the group members failed to prioritize the group work as a result of poor time and group management. Working as a group would be helpful in that, effective teamwork and cooperation assists in the identification of individual weaknesses and strengths while increasing the chances of study through brainstorming and discussion (Cohen & Lotan, 2014). Additionally, we should have considered the theory of groupthink (Johnson & Johnson, 2008) that states that groupwork introduces different opinions that increase individual understanding of a particular lesson.

Conclusion

This activity helped me to understand that students should adhere to the provided instructions to avoid converting group work into individual work. In the event that we decide to divide the work, it is important to come up with a plan of how every part should be completed to avoid the disconnection of the presented information.

Action Plan

In the future, I will encourage the group members to consider the advantages of group work as explained by Johnson and Johnson (2008) and Cohen and Lotan (2014). In addition, I will ensure that the provided work is completed by all members to ensure that individual strengths and weaknesses are shared. This will also help to improve group management and time management which is a major problem when doing group assignments.

References

Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (2014). Designing groupwork: strategies for the heterogeneous classroom third edition. Teachers College Press.

Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (2008). Active learning: Cooperation in the classroom. The annual report of educational psychology in Japan, 47, 29-30.  https://doi.org/10.5926/arepj1962.47.0_29