My mid-term score was a disaster to me. Therefore, when the professor suggested that we have a chance to make a proposal to him about what should be done for the present result and the future test, I was eager to participate… ready to collaborate. Though we had less than 50 minutes, and the professor requested that we need 100% agreement for the proposal, there seemed to be hope. Most of my classmates looked anxious to make the best one too.
However, I soon realized that getting 100% class agreement would be impossible. The time constraint was one obstacle. In addition to it, the score difference between the highest and the lowest was very wide, and the preference of the test structure varied. As a result, what each individual wanted from the proposal was different from each other, which made us fail to get the total agreement before the class ended. Moreover, some proposals seemed too unreasonable to propose, such as 25 points extra-credit. That is why, during the class decision process, I chose the “avoidance” method. Especially, when I noticed the fact that some opinions were ignored, it made me sure that there’s “no chance of winning.”
Obviously, we needed 100% agreement for a proposal. According to the characteristics of some of my classmates who are very outspoken and assertive, I do not think “compete to win” would have worked. “Accomodation” sounds idealistic, but considering some classmates’ attitudes who did not listen to others, saying “That’s stupid.”, I doubt it would have worked. Also, “collaborating” would have been a good idea, but I do not think we had enough time to implement the method.
If I could choose a way with the same constraint of time and 100% agreement, from my perspective, the best way to get a more desirable result would be to “compromise.” Our interest was similar in a broad level, but there were some who insisted to get what they wanted without caring about others’ positions and listening to them. If every single person insists on what he or she wants, how can we achieve total agreement? We need to balance our self-interest somewhere in-between where everyone can be satisfied. To reach the goal, we should not assert our own points as if they are the only way, give in to the possible benefits of others’ suggestions to some extent, and try to understand others’ opinions. If we had used the “compromise” method from the beginning, we would have gotten the proposal before the class ended, and the chaotic situation would not have happened.
However, I soon realized that getting 100% class agreement would be impossible. The time constraint was one obstacle. In addition to it, the score difference between the highest and the lowest was very wide, and the preference of the test structure varied. As a result, what each individual wanted from the proposal was different from each other, which made us fail to get the total agreement before the class ended. Moreover, some proposals seemed too unreasonable to propose, such as 25 points extra-credit. That is why, during the class decision process, I chose the “avoidance” method. Especially, when I noticed the fact that some opinions were ignored, it made me sure that there’s “no chance of winning.”
Obviously, we needed 100% agreement for a proposal. According to the characteristics of some of my classmates who are very outspoken and assertive, I do not think “compete to win” would have worked. “Accomodation” sounds idealistic, but considering some classmates’ attitudes who did not listen to others, saying “That’s stupid.”, I doubt it would have worked. Also, “collaborating” would have been a good idea, but I do not think we had enough time to implement the method.
If I could choose a way with the same constraint of time and 100% agreement, from my perspective, the best way to get a more desirable result would be to “compromise.” Our interest was similar in a broad level, but there were some who insisted to get what they wanted without caring about others’ positions and listening to them. If every single person insists on what he or she wants, how can we achieve total agreement? We need to balance our self-interest somewhere in-between where everyone can be satisfied. To reach the goal, we should not assert our own points as if they are the only way, give in to the possible benefits of others’ suggestions to some extent, and try to understand others’ opinions. If we had used the “compromise” method from the beginning, we would have gotten the proposal before the class ended, and the chaotic situation would not have happened.
1 comment:
I completely agree on the ward as compromise. No one seemd to compromise and they were just eager to achieve what they want.
I was seating with silient through out the whole time and just wanted to leave the class so bad.
Collaboration and cooperation is needed and important on this kind of matter but fighting and arguing against each other was not favoruable thing to do.
I was thinking that there is any other way to come up with solution without shouting.
Post a Comment