Working together with a class of 75+ students proved to be more chaotic than expected. There were many ideas and recommendations that were more harmful than beneficial to our grade that unfortunately became the end result of what we received. With the average grade being in a D range, it was easy to decide that we all needed a curve and an extra credit assignment. But, with an unstructured format of making the next possible test format, many decision leadership styles emerged, with mine being a compromiser.
I chose being a compromiser because i initially had ideas that would benefit pretty much everyone. All we needed was to make the entire exam multiple choice, with only one question. THAT'S IT. From there it would have been an exact test that we have been taking throughout college. However, some people thought that it would be a good idea to put up "other options" for partial credit, which I think the professor stated himself makes the test much more complicated. I am not being negative because i did bad. I actually received a 71, with a possible curve to a 90. I am just saying that i do not want the same situation to occur when it could have been avoided.
Most of the methods i noticed was the avoidance stage. People gradually gave up and did not want to contribute their opinions when every single opinion mattered. I think my role as a compromiser benefitted everyone. The test seems a lot easier, but there was still a lot more ways to make it direct and straightforward. It does not matter to me since what's done is done, but I am sure the results of the exam will still cause a lot of poor grades and just as many complains. However, if everyone collaborated with one another, i know that we would have succeeded into getting what we wanted. The lack of time and planning caused a panic, and we tended to drift off on the ideas of certain students. It was still a very interesting assignment; it accomplished what the professor expected.
