I think that most groups, whether they work out well or not, are somewhat difficult to leave. However, it is harder to leave long term groups and groups that have been successful in doing what they set out to do. In these groups, it is more likely that relationships have been established, and these relationships may have to end when the group work ends. There is then a sense of loss of people and of loss of an important factor in ones life.
Being in a group becomes something we become accustomed to in life, and leaving a group leaves a void - even if the group consists of people one has never met in person. It will be difficult to leave the masters group. Even though I have never met the people in the group, I have developed an affinity for several of them.
I think that the best way to end a group is to have a culminating event. The group can celebrate their successes and their friendships and have a proper goodbye. I think this especially important in classrooms coming to an end.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Conflict Resolution
A conflict often comes up at my job because I work for a state funded program called Illinois Action for Children while the school also has a federally funded program called Early Reading First. The conflicts arise because each of these grants is based on a different philosophy of education. Preschool for All follows The creative Curriculum and The Project Approach which promotes teaching skills through allowing children to follow their own interests and through research projects. Early Reading First, on the other hand, is a very scripted, curriculum led program that focuses directly on literacy skills. For instance, I might have children writing lists of ingredients they need for a recipt they want to make whild Early Reading First has them naming the first sound in a prescribed list of words.
These differences, in general, are manageable, but there are times when the two programs butt heads. One of these times was when the Early Reading First coach was using flashcards with the children. This is not allowed in Preschool for All. We had discussed this, but she felt strongly that the flashcards were essential. Well, the conflict escalated when my Project Manager came in to see her doing flashcards with the children and held me responsible for allowing this in a Preschool for All classroom.
The most recent conflict is regarding choice time in the classroom. during this time, according to Preschool for All, all of the areas of the classroom are open and the children choose where they would like to work. The Early Reading First coach wants particular popular areas to be closed during this time because she is having a difficult time coaxing particular children away from these areas so that she can work with them. She also wants particular children to be required to work with her rather than go to the areas of their choice. This, again, goes against the mandates of The Preschool for All grant as well as going against my personal philosophy of education. I have suggested that she go to the areas where the children choose to be and work with them there, but she insists that she needs a table at which to work. Often, when these conflicts occur, she simply claims that her grant trums my grant because her funding is Federal and mine is State. I have found it very difficult to compromise in these situations.
Compromise, however is what is needed. I have learned this week that sometimes all people really want is to be heard. A good approach might be to simply hear out her feelings and needs without arguing, and then stating my needs and wants without invoking the grants or their mandates. Another thing to keep in mind is that we should be looking for a solution that allows us both to win. We should be looking for a way to merge the two approaches rather than viewing them as completely different.
These differences, in general, are manageable, but there are times when the two programs butt heads. One of these times was when the Early Reading First coach was using flashcards with the children. This is not allowed in Preschool for All. We had discussed this, but she felt strongly that the flashcards were essential. Well, the conflict escalated when my Project Manager came in to see her doing flashcards with the children and held me responsible for allowing this in a Preschool for All classroom.
The most recent conflict is regarding choice time in the classroom. during this time, according to Preschool for All, all of the areas of the classroom are open and the children choose where they would like to work. The Early Reading First coach wants particular popular areas to be closed during this time because she is having a difficult time coaxing particular children away from these areas so that she can work with them. She also wants particular children to be required to work with her rather than go to the areas of their choice. This, again, goes against the mandates of The Preschool for All grant as well as going against my personal philosophy of education. I have suggested that she go to the areas where the children choose to be and work with them there, but she insists that she needs a table at which to work. Often, when these conflicts occur, she simply claims that her grant trums my grant because her funding is Federal and mine is State. I have found it very difficult to compromise in these situations.
Compromise, however is what is needed. I have learned this week that sometimes all people really want is to be heard. A good approach might be to simply hear out her feelings and needs without arguing, and then stating my needs and wants without invoking the grants or their mandates. Another thing to keep in mind is that we should be looking for a solution that allows us both to win. We should be looking for a way to merge the two approaches rather than viewing them as completely different.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Communication Styles
Interestingly, my husband and mother, who rated me on the communication scales gave me what I would consider to be more positive ratings than I gave to myself. I did find the scales somewhat difficult to answer completely honestly because I communicate differently with different people in different situations. For instance, I communicate much more professionally and in a more businesslike manner with people at my job than I do with friends and family outside of the workplace.
Regarding The Communication Anxiety Inventory, I rated myself a 35 which is mild, meaning that I " feel a bit uneasy in some communication situations and somewhat more confident in other contexts. Communication does not seem to be something that you worry about a great deal." My family members rated me as Low, meaning that i "feel comfortable communicating in most situations and feel confident in anticipating such encounters." what this tells me is that even though I sometimes feel uncomfortable, it must not be obvious to others.
In the area of Listening Styles, my results put me in Group 1 meaning that i am people oriented, and that I am "empathetic and concerned with the emotions of others. This listening style helps you to build relationships, but it can interfere with proper judgment because you tend to be very trusting of others.". My family put me in Group 2, which is action oriented, meaning I "might be described as "business like" and I prefer clear, to-the-point communication that outlines a plan of action. My efficiency is respected but may intimidate more sensitive listeners." while I care about the feelings of others, I do feel more comfortable in Group 2. I do prefer to get to the point of a conversation without allowing emotional reactions to blur the true issue.
As far as the Verbal aggressiveness scale, I gave myself a score of 58, which is moderate. This means that I "maintain a good balance between respect and consideration for others viewpoints, and the ability to argue fairly by attacking the facts of a position rather than the person holding that position.". My family saw me as low, meaning that I am "respectful of the viewpoints of others, and attempt to change their minds with gentle, inoffensive suggestions that do not attack their self concept.". My family members, apparently, see me as kinder than I see myself.
Regarding The Communication Anxiety Inventory, I rated myself a 35 which is mild, meaning that I " feel a bit uneasy in some communication situations and somewhat more confident in other contexts. Communication does not seem to be something that you worry about a great deal." My family members rated me as Low, meaning that i "feel comfortable communicating in most situations and feel confident in anticipating such encounters." what this tells me is that even though I sometimes feel uncomfortable, it must not be obvious to others.
In the area of Listening Styles, my results put me in Group 1 meaning that i am people oriented, and that I am "empathetic and concerned with the emotions of others. This listening style helps you to build relationships, but it can interfere with proper judgment because you tend to be very trusting of others.". My family put me in Group 2, which is action oriented, meaning I "might be described as "business like" and I prefer clear, to-the-point communication that outlines a plan of action. My efficiency is respected but may intimidate more sensitive listeners." while I care about the feelings of others, I do feel more comfortable in Group 2. I do prefer to get to the point of a conversation without allowing emotional reactions to blur the true issue.
As far as the Verbal aggressiveness scale, I gave myself a score of 58, which is moderate. This means that I "maintain a good balance between respect and consideration for others viewpoints, and the ability to argue fairly by attacking the facts of a position rather than the person holding that position.". My family saw me as low, meaning that I am "respectful of the viewpoints of others, and attempt to change their minds with gentle, inoffensive suggestions that do not attack their self concept.". My family members, apparently, see me as kinder than I see myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)