Answerable Question How does offensive behavior (as defined by the sessional contract) affect cohesion of the group?
Operationalize Variables Cohesive as defined by the Merriam Webster dictionary is closely united or causing people to be closely united. Group cohesion is defined as the level of overall consistency among group members in their social interaction profiles with peers (Shi, B., & Xie, H. 2014). In a cohesive group members are more likely to have a greater influence on one another than in a non-cohesive group. One way in which a group becomes cohesive is through the development of group norms. Group norms are the standards of behavior and attitudes to which the group abides, these can be defined in the sessional contract. The …show more content…
The search engines used for this paper are Google, and the Simmons Library.
Macgowan's Hierarchy of Rigor and Merit According to Macgowan's Hierarchy of Rigor and Merit the evidence collected for this assignment is pulled from peer reviewed, juried journals. These hold a fairly high level of rigor as in the article on Cohesion from Conflict. Benard researched and implemented a study to view the impact of conflict on group cohesiveness. He formulated an answerable question and defined his search terms. In regards to this particular article it does not hold as much merit, because the focus of the article was conflict rather than offensive behavior.
Bring it back to …show more content…
I would want to know when the group as a whole felt that it was working as a cohesive unit. If the feedback suggested that the group began to feel like a cohesive unit around week 5, I would then want to begin monitoring group members participation. I would also monitor body language, such as attentiveness and eye contact. This would give me a baseline for each member. After that point if a member engaged in offensive behavior I would be able to again monitor member participation and body language. The results from before and after offensive behavior occurred can be analyzed to describe how the group engaged. It may suggest that some members participation went down or that people were less engaged based on body language. If this were the case a conclusion could be formed that for this instance offensive behavior hurt the groups feeling of cohesion.
Points when data is collected and analyzed For this topic a proximal assessment may be most important. A proximal assessment is when data and information are collected during the group or as the group is happening. This would be important to know, because the topic or study is on group cohesion. If the group worker only looks at cohesion at the end of the group or when the group is over as would happen in a distal study the findings would only be helpful for the next group. Whereas if you proximally assess cohesion as the
Operationalize Variables Cohesive as defined by the Merriam Webster dictionary is closely united or causing people to be closely united. Group cohesion is defined as the level of overall consistency among group members in their social interaction profiles with peers (Shi, B., & Xie, H. 2014). In a cohesive group members are more likely to have a greater influence on one another than in a non-cohesive group. One way in which a group becomes cohesive is through the development of group norms. Group norms are the standards of behavior and attitudes to which the group abides, these can be defined in the sessional contract. The …show more content…
The search engines used for this paper are Google, and the Simmons Library.
Macgowan's Hierarchy of Rigor and Merit According to Macgowan's Hierarchy of Rigor and Merit the evidence collected for this assignment is pulled from peer reviewed, juried journals. These hold a fairly high level of rigor as in the article on Cohesion from Conflict. Benard researched and implemented a study to view the impact of conflict on group cohesiveness. He formulated an answerable question and defined his search terms. In regards to this particular article it does not hold as much merit, because the focus of the article was conflict rather than offensive behavior.
Bring it back to …show more content…
I would want to know when the group as a whole felt that it was working as a cohesive unit. If the feedback suggested that the group began to feel like a cohesive unit around week 5, I would then want to begin monitoring group members participation. I would also monitor body language, such as attentiveness and eye contact. This would give me a baseline for each member. After that point if a member engaged in offensive behavior I would be able to again monitor member participation and body language. The results from before and after offensive behavior occurred can be analyzed to describe how the group engaged. It may suggest that some members participation went down or that people were less engaged based on body language. If this were the case a conclusion could be formed that for this instance offensive behavior hurt the groups feeling of cohesion.
Points when data is collected and analyzed For this topic a proximal assessment may be most important. A proximal assessment is when data and information are collected during the group or as the group is happening. This would be important to know, because the topic or study is on group cohesion. If the group worker only looks at cohesion at the end of the group or when the group is over as would happen in a distal study the findings would only be helpful for the next group. Whereas if you proximally assess cohesion as the