6£ºINTRODUCTION TO NEGOTIATION

¡¡µÚÁùÕÂ̸ÅнéÉÜ

¡¡¡¡Ì¸ÅÐÊÇÀûÒæÏà¹ØµÄÈËÃÇΪÁ˽â¾ö³åÍ»¡¢Âú×ãË«·½ÐèÒª¶ø½øÐÐЭÉ̵Ĺý³Ì¡£È¨Á¦¡¢×Ô×ðºÍÃæ×ÓÊÇ̸ÅеÄÊôÐÔ¡£ÐÅÓá¢Çé¸ÐºÍ¹«ÕýÊÇ̸ÅеĺËÐÄÒªËØ¡£Î§ÈÆÕâЩÄÚÈÝ£¬±¾Õ½«ÏòÄú½éÉÜ̸ÅеĶ¨Òå¡¢ÊôÐÔºÍÒªËØ¡£

¡¡

¡¡Definition of Negotiation̸ÅеĶ¨Òå

¡¡¡¡Negotiating is part of everyday life. You negotiate far more than you realize. In a business or an administrative position, you do so when you¡¯re dependent upon others for getting your ideas accepted, your goals accomplished or your problems solved. You also negotiate on how tasks, rights and responsibilities, resources and risks, and monetary gains and losses should be assigned or divided up.

¡¡¡¡Negotiation is a cooperative undertaking, in which you and the opposing party attempt constructively to find solutions that satisfy both your needs. Successful cooperation results in solutions that are more cost-effective and involve less risk. The needs of others and the needs of the environment are more likely to be given consideration.

¡¡

¡¡Negotiator of Two ExtremesÁ½ÖÖ¼«¶ËµÄ̸ÅÐÕß

¡¡¡¡We not only negotiate to solve problems, but also how to divide up responsibilities and work, as well as the distribution of costs, risks, profits and gains. Accomplishing this successfully places special demands on you as a negotiator. You need to be businesslike. This requires your finding a happy balance between two extreme behaviors, that of being na¡¯i¡¯ve, and that of being greedy.

¡¡¡¡A na¡¯i¡¯ve negotiator gives away too many advantages and too much potential profit. He accepts too much of the work and responsibility, and too many of the risks. Thus, a na¡¯i¡¯ve negotiator is expensive for the organization. He is easily taken advantage of. Even the parties he negotiates for many have little trust in him.

¡¡¡¡A greedy negotiator wants to get everything without being willing to give. He is unable to accept the idea of the other party gaining anything. He wants to threat the other party and defeat it. A greedy negotiator is also expensive for the organization. No one wants to deal with him. People avoid him if they can. Those he has victimized are likely to seek revenge. A greedy negotiator, just like the na¡¯i¡¯ve one, fails to gain trust and support.

¡¡¡¡

Dynamics of Negotiation̸ÅеÄDZÔÚÁ¦Á¿

¡¡¡¡The negotiation process is about power, ego, and saving face.

¡¡¡¡Power: At the core, every negotiation is a power struggle, no matter how small. It is one side¡¯s attempt at primacy over the other side¡¯s point of view or position. And, no one ever wants to feel powerless. Even police hostage negotiators know as a first tactic to create the illusion of power or control in the mind of the hostage-taker. If he feels powerless, the situation could erupt. The same is true in even more calm surroundings. In a broad sense, people have power when they have the ability to bring about outcomes they desire or the ability to get things done the way they want them to be done. However, a person could also be described asshavingsinfluence, being persuasive, or being a leader.

¡¡¡¡Ego: Ego also drives many negotiations and lies at the heart of many disputes. Negotiators of all shapes, and sizes, and levels of sophistication have enormous amounts of ego invested in their proposals. Also, people like winning, however they might define it. To lose is a blow to the ego, and no one wants that. Negotiations grow more difficult the more the negotiators are owed to their proposals, to their way of seeing the world.

¡¡¡¡Saving Face: Also tied up in ego and power is the concept of saving face. No one wants be taken advantage of at the end of the day, both parties must be able to save face. The more high-level the dispute, the harder this is, which is one reason why mediators attempt to institute¡°media blackouts¡±in very public cases. The greatest decisions are made when no more than two people are in a room. Even mediators must sometimes clear out and let the parties talk directly to one another, because they¡¯ve been busy posturing for the mediator as well. They need to save face even with the mediator.

¡¡¡¡As a negotiator, it is very easy to become caught up in your own point of views and to grow increasingly averse to the point of views of your counterpart. This is natural because you are an advocate after all. In difficult or prolonged negotiationsswherespersonalities clash, it is easy for each negotiator to want unconditional surrender from the other. However, the best negotiators understand that it is their job to make sure their counterpart saves face. You need to give your counterpart a¡°back door,¡±a way out, a way to claim even partial victory. If you do, it makes it easier to reach a deal on your terms, which, presumably, is your goal.

¡¡

¡¡Key Elements of Negotiation̸ÅеĹؼüÒªËØ

¡¡¡¡Trust

¡¡¡¡Many researchers have explored trust in negotiation. As one might expect, the research has generally shown that higher levels of trust make negotiation easier, while lower levels of trust make negotiation more difficult. Similarly, integrative processes tend to increase trust, while more competitive processes are likely to decrease trust.

¡¡¡¡There is a three-stage developmental mode of trust: calculus-based trust, knowledge-based trust, and identify-cationbased trust.

¡¡¡¡Calculus-based Trust. Calculus-based trust has to do with assuring consistency of behavior: It holds that individuals will do that they say because (a) they are rewarded for keeping their word and preserving the relationship with others, or (b) they fear the consequences of not doing what they say. Trust is sustained to the degree that the punishment for not trusting is clear, possible, and likely to occur. Thus, the threat of punishment is likely to be a more significant motivator than the promise of reward.

¡¡¡¡How to Increase Calculus-based Trust

¡¡¡¡1. Create and meet the other party¡¯s expectation. Be clear about what you intend to do and then do what you say.

¡¡¡¡2. Stress the benefits of creating mutual trust. Point out the benefits that can be gained for the other, or both parties, by maintaining such trust.

¡¡¡¡3. Establish credibility. Make sure your statements are honest and accurate. Be believable.

¡¡¡¡4. Keep promises. Make a commitment and then follow through on it.

¡¡¡¡5. Develop a good reputation. Help others believe that you are someone who has a reputation for being trusted and acting trustworthily.

¡¡¡¡Knowledge-based Trust. The second form of trust, knowledge-based trust, is grounded in knowing the other sufficiently well so that you can anticipate and predict his or her behavior. Knowledge-based trust relies on information about the other rather than the management of rewards and punishment. It develops over time, largely because the parties develop a history of experience with each other that allows them to predict the other, which contributes to trust. The better you know the other party, the more accurately you can predict what he or she will do.

¡¡¡¡Consider the example of two friends who agree to meet at a restaurant at 6 p.m. Alan fails to show up until 6¡Ã30 and Beth is kept waiting. To the degree that their friendship is based simply on calculus-based trust, Beth will be angry at the high costs she must incur for being¡°stood up.¡±She might be upset at Alan¡¯s unreliability, and may be angry enough to terminate the relationship. If they are operating more on knowledge-based trust, however, Beth will tolerate Alan¡¯s behavior to the degree that she can muster some adequate explanation for his behavior-¡°He must have gotten stuck at work,¡±or¡°He is always running behind and that doesn¡¯t bother me because I know he will get here eventually.¡±

¡¡¡¡How to Increase Knowledge-based Trust

¡¡¡¡1. Have frequent interaction with the other. Meet often. Get to know the other and tell him or her about yourself.

¡¡¡¡2. Build familiarity with the other. See him or her in a variety of situations and context. Learn each other¡¯s thoughts and reactions, likes and dislikes, reasons for doing what you do.

¡¡¡¡3. Be predictable. Help the other understand how you will respond to certain situation, and then act in that manner.

¡¡¡¡Identification-based Trust. The third type of trust is based on identification with the other¡¯s desires and intentions. At this level, trust exists because the parties effectively understand and appreciate each other¡¯s wants; this mutual understanding is developed to the point that each can effectively act for the other. Identification-based trust thus permits a party to serve as the other¡¯s agent in interpersonal transactions. The other can be confident that his interests will be fully protected, and that no monitoring of the actor is necessary.

¡¡¡¡How to Increase Identification-based Trust

¡¡¡¡1. Develop similar interest. Try to be interested in the same things.

¡¡¡¡2. Develop similar goals and objective. Try to develop similar goals, objective, scenarios for the future.

¡¡¡¡3. Act and respond similar to the other. Try to do what you know he or she would do in the same situation.

¡¡¡¡4. Stand for the same principles, values, and so on. Hold similar values and commitments.

¡¡¡¡Emotions

¡¡¡¡A second factor that plays a significant role in negotiation within long-term relationships is emotions. While emotions can certainly be a factor in market-transaction negotiations - parties express delight at another¡¯s offer, parties express anger and outrage at the other¡¯s tactics - emotion is much more of a critical factor when negotiators have an ongoing relationship.

¡¡¡¡At the negotiating table, you¡¯re likely to encounter surprisingly bad behavior. People take negotiations personally and invest a lot of emotion and energysintosthem. Don¡¯t be surprised if people behave irrationally or don¡¯t seem to play by any logical set of rules. The most familiar example of an irrational negotiation emerges in a personal relationship. People have so much invested and so much history with each other that the negotiation is rarely about the purported topic.

¡¡¡¡¡°So I think California would be a great vacation.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°You would! I think Florida would be much better.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°But California has everything that Florida has - seafood, ocean, sun - and it has the wind region. We could drive down to Mexico, we could go hiking in the mountains-¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°It¡¯s not Florida. I like the water in the Atlantic much better than the Pacific.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°The water is just about the same.¡±¡°Not true! You just don¡¯t want to go to Florida because I suggested it.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°That¡¯s not true. I just think that California is like Florida plus more stuff. I think it¡¯ll make a better vacation spot.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°I don¡¯t. I guess we have to agree to disagree.¡±

¡¡¡¡When the negotiation heads down a personal path, you have to find a way to steer it back to the issues at hand without aggravating the personal issues that are already at stake. Again, the use of the question is immensely valuable here. Use questions to open the discussion up.

¡¡¡¡¡°So I think California would be a great vacation.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°You would! I think Florida would be much better.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°But California has everything that Florida has - seafood, ocean, sun-and it has the wind region. We could drive down to Mexico, we could go hiking the mountains-¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°It¡¯s not Florida. I like the water in the Atlantic much better than the Pacific.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°What do you like about the water?¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°It¡¯s not as salty.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°You don¡¯t like salty water?¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°No, not really.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°What do you want out of a vacation?¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°I don¡¯t know, sun, relaxation, some interesting thing to see.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°How about Arizona? It¡¯s warm, there are freshwater streams, there are the desert and Death Valley and all the spots out there.¡±

¡¡¡¡¡°Sounds interesting.¡±

¡¡¡¡By asking questions, one party opens up the discussion and can change the entire negotiating mindset. In emotional situations you have to acknowledge the emotional state of the other party. If you don¡¯t, you are going to runsintosthe illogical negotiator problem, which almost always leads to the end of discussion.

¡¡¡¡Emotions shouldn¡¯t be simply dismissed - after all, even the person you¡¯re negotiating with is human. Take his feelingssintosconsideration. Behave as if you want to make him comfortable. By thinking about the things that drive you crazy, you can avoid driving him crazy. Before you walksintosthat room, think of all the things people have asked you to stop doing, from picking your nose to whistling in an elevator, and make sure you don¡¯t do then during the negotiation.

¡¡¡¡Negotiations create both positive and negative emotions. As we noted above, both the negotiation process and the outcomes create positive and negative feelings. Positive emotions can result from being attracted to the other party, feeling good about the development of the negotiation process and the progress that the parties are making, or liking the results that the negotiations have produced. Thus, a cognitive assessment of a¡°good outcome¡±leads parties to feel happy and satisfied. Conversely, negative emotions can result from being turned off by the other party, feeling bad about the development of the negotiation process and the progress being made, or disliking the results.

¡¡¡¡Justice

¡¡¡¡The third key element in negotiation is the question of what is fair or just. Justice has been a major issue in the organizational sciences; individuals in organizations are often debating whether their pay is fair, or whether they are being fairly treated, or whether the organization might be treating somesgroupsof people like women, minorities, or people from other cultures in an unfair manner.

¡¡¡¡Many negotiations will also require a negotiation about which fairness principles should apply to a particular situation. For example, two boys have agreed to paint a neighbor¡¯s garage together and to split the money they get paid. One boy winds up doing about two-thirds of the work. The boy who worked harder will probably argue that he should receive two-thirds of the money; the boy who worked less hard may argue that their initial agreement was to split their pay evenly, and that the rule should not be changed. Many negotiations over the tough issues described above focus on which outcome-distribution rules should apply in a given situation.

¡¡

¡¡Summary×ܽá

¡¡¡¡Negotiation is a cooperative undertaking, in which you and the opposing party attempt constructively to find solutions that satisfy both your needs. Power, ego and saving face are the dynamics of negotiation, while trust, emotions and justice are the key elements of negotiation.

5£ºON THE PROCEDURES OFsgroupsDISCUSSION

¡¡µÚÎåÕÂС×éÌÖÂÛ²½ÖèµÄÒ»¸öÍêÕûÀý×Ó

¡¡¡¡ÎªÁËÍêÕûµØ³ÊÏÖС×éÌÖÂ۵Ļ­Ã棬ÎÒÃǽ«Ð¡×éÌÖÂÛµÄÈ«¹ý³ÌÈںϵ½Ò»¸ö¾ßÌåµÄÀý×ÓÖÐÈ¥²ûÊÍ¡£±¾Õ½éÉÜÁËС×éÌÖÂÛµÄÖ÷Òª²½Öè¡£

¡¡

¡¡Procedures ofsgroupsDiscussionС×éÌÖÂ۵IJ½Öè

¡¡¡¡The framework of discussion consists of sequential phases of interaction through whichsgroupsleaders lead their members insgroupsto attain objectives. This framework provides discussion with additional structure that the leader uses as a guide to plan for and implement discussion. A sequence of four phases can be generalized as follows.

¡¡¡¡Entry

¡¡¡¡The entry to a discussion generally serves the purpose of focusing participants¡¯attention on the topic, concept, issue, or problem to be discussed, and informing them of the objectives and rationale for the upcoming discussion. Every discussion has an entry although some are more purposeful than others. Some entries, in fact, are hardly discernible as such. A discussion entry should serve as a springboardsintosinteraction by arousing participants- interest.

¡¡¡¡Clarification

¡¡¡¡The second phase may or may not be necessary depending on the extent participants are familiar with the leader¡¯s procedures for conducting discussions. The purpose of clarification is to inform participants of the guidelines for participating insgroupsdiscussions.

¡¡¡¡Another purpose for the second phase is to clarify terms, concepts, or other knowledge related to the problem, issue, or topic under discussion.

¡¡¡¡Investigation

¡¡¡¡The most important phase ofsgroupsdiscussion in terms of accomplishing the objectives of thesgroupsis the investigation. This phase is considered to be the main body of a discussion. In many respects, entry and clarification, if effectively implemented, have served to prepare participants for the investigation phase. Up to this point, participants- interest should have been stimulated and focused, the purpose for the discussion directly or indirectly provided, and any potentially ambiguous or confusing terms or concepts clarified.

¡¡¡¡Closure

¡¡¡¡The closure to a discussion wraps up what the entry initiated. Both phases are essential to effective discussions and complement one another. The leader provides focus and direction for what is to be discussed in the entry; during the closure the discussion is reviewed, and the integration and application of discussions are encouraged. Also, just as the entry serves as a transition from the previous lesson, the closure serves as a transition to the next discussion.

¡¡

¡¡An Integrated ExampleÒ»¸öÍêÕûµÄÀý×Ó

¡¡¡¡Entry

¡¡¡¡T1: What comes to mind when you hear the term¡°dirty election campaign?¡±(several students raise their hands)

¡¡¡¡S1: (calls out) Name calling.

¡¡¡¡T2: Andy, you had your hand up.

¡¡¡¡S2: Candidates lying about their experiences and positions on issues. Or making up things about their opponents that they know are false.

¡¡¡¡T3: Okay. Of the campaigns and elections we have Recitation studied up to the 1880¡¯s which do you think was the dirtiest? Leslie (hand raised).

¡¡¡¡S3: If I remember right the text said the dirtiest election was Andrew Jackson¡¯sswhereshis opponent attacked his wife, family and everything else about him.

¡¡¡¡T4: You remember well. It was Jackson¡¯s first election. Pat, who was his opponent in that election and their political parties£¿

¡¡¡¡S4: (Reading from the presidential election chart in the appendix of his textbook.) In the election of 1828 Jackson was the Democratic candidate running against John Quincy Adams. He was a National Republic. I think Adams was the incumbent.

¡¡¡¡T5: Fine. Today I want to spend some time with you discussing what appears to be an old American election tradition-the emphasis of the campaigns on the candidates themselves rather than issues. It seems that the more elections focus on personalities, the dirtier the elections become as evidenced by the extent of name calling maliciousness, scandalous gossip, dirty tricks and lies.Clarification

¡¡¡¡T6: Before we open up the discussion to share our points of view on this issue£¬I want to briefly review the election presented in the chapter you read for today because it is a good example of negative campaigning. Some historians have referred to the election of 1884 as one of the dirtiest elections in presidential politics. Who were the candidates and their political parties? (several students raise their hands) Eric?

¡¡¡¡S5: I think it was Chester Arthur for the Republicans and Grover Cleveland for the Democrats.

¡¡¡¡T7: Not quite. Arthur was President at that time but the party passed him over for someone else.

¡¡¡¡S6: (calls out) James G. Blaine-¡°The continental liar from the state of Maine.¡±

¡¡¡¡T8: And what was one of the campaign slogans used by the Republicans against Cleveland? Bob (raised hand)?

¡¡¡¡S7:¡°Ma! Ma! Where¡¯s my pa?¡±

¡¡¡¡T9: Catchy rhymes get votes many times! Yes, the election focused mostly on mudslinging about the professional and private lives of both the candidates. Can you do as well with identifying the campaign¡¯s issues? Mary (hand raised).

¡¡¡¡S8: I think the major issue was civil service reform.

¡¡¡¡T10: Yes, and also protectionism. We¡¯ll be talking more about these issues later. We know that Grover Cleveland barely wins the election with the vote from New York being essential for his victory. But the critical issues of the day were clearly overshadowed by the dirt, some of which was truthful, that was dug up and used by both parties. By the way, most of the same personal attacks on Cleveland also came up during his reelection campaign in 1888 and some new ones including beating his wife during fits of drunken rage. Even though his wife refuted this rumor, the lie cost him many votes and perhaps the election.

¡¡¡¡Investigation

¡¡¡¡T11: I want to shift gears slightly and have you think about the presidential election we just had. 100 years later. How would you compare the 1884, and to some extent the 1888, and 1988 election campaigns in terms of general dirtiness? (3 second pause) John (hand raised).

¡¡¡¡S9: Both seemed to emphasize personalities rather than issues. Some name calling. I think both candidates also tried to deceive the public.

¡¡¡¡T12: What do you mean?

¡¡¡¡S10: I think they lied about each other in their television ads.

¡¡¡¡S11: (joins in) I don¡¯t think there was much lying. What Bush and Dukakis said about each other was basically true from what I understand. I remember the television ad with Dukakis riding an army tank. In it Bush said Dukakis opposed most of four defense systems and he did.

¡¡¡¡T13: Let¡¯s look at this ad a little more closely as an example of campaign dirtiness. What was Dukakis¡¯s stand on defense systems? David (hand raised).

¡¡¡¡S12: I know Dukakis favored some of our submarine and missile systems because I did a report on his position on the issues. I think he also favored the Stealth Bomber. That ad was completely untrue.

¡¡¡¡T14: Yes. This video ads was a good example of a falsehood. Other Bush ads inferred that nuclear pollutants were in Boston Harbor and Dukakis furloughed hundreds of first-degree murders. These were clearly falsehoods because the information presented was contrary to the facts. Can you think of any examples of Dukakis ads lying about Bush?

¡¡¡¡S13: (calls out) I remember my mother saying that the Dukakis ad claiming that Bush cut social security benefits with his vote in the Senate was not true. I think she said Bush only voted against an increase in benefits.

¡¡¡¡T15:You have provided plenty of evidence that the recent campaign was dirty particularly in terms of falsehoods created by the candidates. Some of the televised ads of both candidates, reaching millions of people every day, were lies designed to influence you to vote against one candidate and for another. Why do you think both parties were allowed to get away with blatant lies? (4 second pause) Vanessa (hand raised).

¡¡¡¡S14: Maybe its because very few knew they were lies. I don¡¯t think the average person on the street knew the issues and candidates- positions.

¡¡¡¡S15: (joins in) That doesn¡¯t make sense to me. Certainly Dukakis knew they were lies. Why didn¡¯t his campaign people do something about them?

¡¡¡¡T16: Good question. They did counteract the false ads and other Bush distortions but not until late October when it was too late. The attitudes of the electorate had already been influenced. It was a case of too little, too late.

¡¡¡¡The other point Vanessa made is even more important. People are not informed about the issues and many just don¡¯t care. Therefore, they are more willing to accept as truth what is being said by the candidates. I think one of the problems is that many of the elections have been focusing on the candidates themselves rather than the issues. Because the emphasis has been on people, and not ideas, they have been more prone to attacks. People are more vulnerable than ideas. This seems to be the case in the two elections we have studied, over 100 years apart.

¡¡¡¡T17: The cornerstone of democracy is an informed public - one that understands the issues confronting them and can use this information to compare the candidates- positions and make a thoughtful decision as to who is most deserving to lead the country for the next four years. Do you agree or disagree with me? (5 second pause) Bob (hand raised).

¡¡¡¡S16: I agree. I think there¡¯s more of an emphasis on the personalities than the issues because of what Vanessa said. Many people don¡¯t understand the issues and are not willing to learn about them except through ads on television. It seems like people are pretty lazy about something so important as a presidential election.

¡¡¡¡S17: (joins in) You know, I think my parents are a little like that. They talked more about the way Bush and Dukakis looked and acted than they did about their stands on issues.

¡¡¡¡S18: (joins in) Mine£¬too. But I have to admit I wouldn¡¯t know about the issues unless we had studied them in class.swheresdoes that put me?

¡¡¡¡T18: Anyone care to react to Andy¡¯s concern? (3 second pause) Chris (raised hand)?

¡¡¡¡S19: It means he was better qualified to vote in the presidential election than many parents. Too bad you¡¯re only 16 years old, Andy.

¡¡¡¡S20: I also agree with you Mr. Mitchell, but I am not sure how you change things. You can¡¯t require candidates to address issues and you can¡¯t require adults to know the issues before voting. Looks like we¡¯re left with things as they are.

¡¡¡¡T19: Do you think we can improve this situation and, if so, how? (5 second pause) Leslie (hand raised)?

¡¡¡¡S21: Why couldn¡¯t at least one of the social studies, classes, during the next presidential election, serve as a sort of campaign watchdog for our community to make sure that the candidates address the issues and are truthful about what they say in their ads. Students could watch all of the candidates- appearances on television and in the ads and judge whether they are being truthful in what they are saying about themselves and each other.

¡¡¡¡S22: Great idea, Leslie! And if they are being dishonest or misleading the class could send letters to the editors of our local newspapers correcting their lies.

¡¡¡¡T20: Don¡¯t forget the school newspaper. (5 second pause) Clair (raised hand)?

¡¡¡¡S23: The class could do a weekly newsletter for parents reporting the candidates- positions on issues and any misleading information by the candidates.

¡¡¡¡S24: (joins in) How about calling it¡°The Inquirer¡±to emphasize the need to search long and hard for the truth? Come to think of it, it is the opposite of what The Enquirer stands for.

¡¡¡¡S25: (joins in) They could also call local radio talk shows.

¡¡¡¡Closure

¡¡¡¡T21: I am very impressed with your ideas! Since we are coming to the end of the period, what I would like to do is write up a summary of your ideas for your review and approval tomorrow. Then I want to save this kind of position paper for the class that will be sitting in your seats four years from now to see if they would be interested in carrying out your suggestions during that presidential campaign.¡°The Inquirer¡±could become your legacy to the school¡¯s social studies program!

¡¡¡¡We have been discussing the problems associated with candidate-oriented campaigns as opposed to issue-oriented campaigns. We have also examined falsehoods in presidential campaign television ads and how people may be relying on them too much for information. Most importantly we have concluded that many people are not informed about campaign issues and proposed some practical approaches we as students and teacher can take as citizens concerned with improving election campaigning. Tomorrow I want to look at civil service reform starting to take place in the 1880s and discuss one of the issues facing the civil service system today. We had an interesting discussion today. Thanks.

4£ºHOW TO BECOME A SUCCESSFULsgroupsMEMBER

¡¡µÚËÄÕÂÈçºÎ³ÉΪ³É¹¦µÄС×é³ÉÔ±

¡¡¡¡¸ßЧµÄС×éÌÖÂÛ¶Ô×鳤Ìá³öÁ˺ܸߵÄÒªÇó£¬Í¬Ê±Ò²ÒªÇóÿ¸öÌÖÂ۵IJÎÓëÕß¾ßÓнϸߵÄËØÖÊ¡£ÔÚÐÄ̬·½Ã棬ÕâЩËØÖÊ°üÀ¨ÈÈÇé¡¢²ÎÓë¡¢ÈÏÕ桢ǫÐé¡¢ÐÀÉͺÍÏ£Íû£»ÔÚÆäËû·½Ã棬»¹ÒªÇóËûÃDZ£³Ö¶ÔÓïÑÔµÄÃô¸Ð¡£

¡¡¡¡

Elements to Be a Successful

¡¡

¡¡Group Member

¡¡

¡¡³ÉΪ³É¹¦µÄС×é³ÉÔ±µÄÒªËØ

¡¡¡¡If discussion-based groups are to be crucibles for democratic processes and mutual growth,sgroupsmembers need to practice certain dispositions. There are many such dispositions worth considering. Those that are particularly important for us are hospitality, participation, mindfulness, humility, mutuality, appreciation, hope, and verbal sensitivity.

¡¡¡¡Hospitality

¡¡¡¡Parker Palmer writes about hospitality as one of the foundations for good dialogue. By hospitality he means an atmosphere in which people feel invited to participate.

¡¡¡¡Hospitality implies a mutual receptivity to new ideas and perspectives and willingness to question even the most widely accepted assumptions. There is nothing soft about hospitality. It does not mean that standards are lowered or that heightened concern for one another is taken as an end in itself. Hospitality does not make learning easier or less burdensome, but it does¡°make the painful things possible, things without which no learning can occur - things like exposing ignorance, testing tentative hypotheses, challenging false or partial information, and mutual criticism of thought.¡±Taking hospitality seriously also means balancing seriousness of purpose with lightness of tone and employing self-deprecating humor, particularly when the tension becomes too great.

¡¡¡¡Participation

¡¡¡¡In any strong democratic community, everyone is encouraged to participate in significant ways on as wide a range of issues as possible. In other words, democratic discussions work best when a large percent ofsgroupsmembers participate, when they do so on many different occasions and with respect to many different issues, and when what they contribute adds depth and subtlety to the discussion. When a wide variety of members express themselves, other participants are challenged to consider and digest a diverse range of views. This results in a richer and more memorable learning experience for all.

¡¡¡¡Mindfulness

¡¡¡¡In general, mindfulness is a crucial component of any really good discussion. Without learners who are willing to listen carefully and patiently to what others have to say, discussion cannot proceed beyond the most superficial level. Teachers must model a high level of attentiveness to convey the importance of being mindful. When the two of us lead discussions, we strain to hear and to understand, fully and correctly, what is being said. We often ask follow-up questions to make sure that we understand a comment and to affirm that all our attention and our energy are focused on what each student is expressing.

¡¡¡¡Humility

¡¡¡¡Related to mindfulness is humility. Humility is the willingness to admit that one¡¯s knowledge and experience are limited and incomplete and to act accordingly. It means acknowledging that others in thesgroupshave ideas to express that might teach us something new or change our mind about something significant. It is being willing to see all others in thesgroupsas potential teachers. Humility also implies an inclination to admit errors in judgment. Palmer reminds us that acknowledging our own ignorance is simply the first step in the pursuit of truth. Humility helps us remember that learning is always an uncertain, even uneasy quest. If we admit the limits of our knowledge and opinions, we are more likely to work authentically to create greater understanding amongsgroupsmembers.

¡¡¡¡Appreciation

¡¡¡¡Appreciation was mentioned briefly as one of a number of important¡°emotional¡±factors in dialogue. Few of us take enough opportunities in everyday life to express appreciation to one another for a thoughtful comment, a powerful insight, or a wise observation. Because democratic situations stress respect, mutuality, and civility, a logical extension of these notions is finding space and time to express our appreciation to one another. When a helpful observation clarifies a key point or an intriguing comment excites further curiosity, the disposition of appreciation inclines us to express our gratitude openly and honestly. Like many of the attitudes already mentioned, appreciation brings people closer together and raises the level of trust. But even more important, openly expressing our appreciation for one another engenders a kind of joyous collaboration that is characteristic of the most productive and most democratic of communities.

¡¡¡¡Hope

¡¡¡¡Without the hope of reaching new understanding, gaining a helpful perspective, or clarifying the roots of a conflict, there is little reason to go on talking and learning. Hope sustains us when we encounter seemingly insurmountable problems or when the amount of time needed to work through a particularly challenging issue grows longer and longer. Hope provides us with a sense that all of the time, effort, and work will benefit us in the long run, even if only in a small way.

¡¡¡¡Verbal Sensitivity

¡¡¡¡As you select your words, remember that language is ambiguous. Meanings are in people, not in the words. When listeners try to understand a message, they may reach a different meaning from what was intended. For instance, if asgroupsmember tells you that she had a big breakfast, what does¡°big¡±means? For people who don¬ðt eat breakfast,¡°big¡±might translate as coffee, juice, and toast. For someone who eats more,¡°big¡±might mean bacon, eggs, sausage, and pancakes. As you listen to messages, be aware that you hear the words and interpret them according to your definitions and experiences - which may or may not match those of the speaker. Ask questions and be sure to clarity meaning. When speaking yourself, be as concrete and specific as possible when you choose your words.

¡¡¡¡You can prepare statements in the following categories:

¡¡¡¡You may make categorical statements:¡°The facts are ...¡±¡°The way I see it is ...¡±¡°I believe that ...¡±

¡¡¡¡You may make process statements:¡°I think we agree that ...¡±¡°Aren¡¯t we ready to move to the next point?¡±¡°The definition appears complete to me.¡±

¡¡¡¡You may criticize:¡°I don¡¯t think that description of the facts is quite complete. May I add ...¡±¡°Are we all sure the authority that was just quoted is unbiased?¡±¡°Seems to me there were some flaws in the research on which that study was based.¡±

¡¡¡¡You may question:¡°Do you believe that for the same reasons he does?¡±¡°What evidence does he offer for his position?¡±¡°If we added this idea, would you still support the solution?¡±

¡¡¡¡You may argue:¡°I believe that ... for the following reasons ... and I do not think that ... is correct because ...¡±

¡¡¡¡You may reason:¡°If this is so, then we are obligated to take either this or that, but if that is flawed, then this is our only alternative despite its limitations.¡±

¡¡¡¡The following samplesgroupsconversations highlight language ambiguity and reveals verbally sensitivity in a comparative way.

¡¡¡¡Insensitive:¡°I think the problem is worded all wrong.¡±

¡¡¡¡Sensitive:¡°The statement¡®How can we prevent students from doing vandalism in schools?¡¯targets a particular population. With that wording, I think we rule out the chance that vandals might not be students at the school. I suggest we reword the question as¡®how can we detect who school vandals are and what steps are necessary for prevention?¡¯¡±

¡¡¡¡Insensitive:¡°You¡¯ve got to be kidding. Only a person who doesn¡¯t know the facts would say that the students weren¡¯t vandals.¡±

¡¡¡¡Sensitive:¡°I never thought that there might be anyone other than kids who vandalize schools. Do we have any evidence about this?¡±

¡¡¡¡None of us can control completely how others see us. They may get upset by what we say or do, or they may like us in spite of what we say or do. Since we can control only our minds and our mouths, the best we can do is make intelligent guesses about the possible effects of our actions and think about what we say and how we say it. By thinking carefully about our audience as we choose our words, we are being verbally sensitive.

¡¡

¡¡An Example as Summary: the Confession of asgroupsMember

¡¡

¡¡¾ÙÀý×ܽ᣺һ¸öС×é³ÉÔ±µÄ×Ô°×

¡¡¡¡I am not here to waste my time, to make idle chatter, or to solve my personal and emotional problems. I am not here to make friends or do combat with enemies. I am here for a purpose, and I suspect that the others here have a purpose as well. I do not expect them to agree with me or to support me in all things I do, but I expect them, like me, to be reasonably dedicated to the accomplishment of thesgroupstask that brought us here in the first place.

¡¡¡¡I know I cannot handle this problem alone. If I could have I would have, because I know that working with asgroupstakes time and effort, and like all other human beings, I would prefer to do the best job I can in the easiest possible way. We all have strengths and weaknesses; together we can pool our strengths and overcome our weaknesses.

¡¡¡¡I have the obligation to speak up, to make my point of view known. If I just sit here, I will waste my time and the time of others. I must present my ideas clearly so that others can understand them well enough to criticize them sensibly, and I must listen to the ideas of others in a critical but not hostile way. It is my job to analyze what is said and to report the results of my analysis.

¡¡¡¡I understand thatsgroupsproblem-solving is not a haphazard enterprise. I am prepared to curb my enthusiasm and impatience and to follow the steps that will raise our chances of reaching a logical, effective, and well-reasoned solution.

¡¡¡¡I have the obligation to defend my point of view when necessary. I have no right to be truculent, to polarize the group, or to attack other members. Furthermore, I am not compelled to curb my own personal moral commitments or understanding. Still, I cannot be dogmatic; I cannot demand my way and concede nothing to others. Although I know that agreements are generally imperfect, I must do my share in forging agreements. When I am wrong I must concede it, and I must understand that my ideas may need modification just as must as the ideas of other members. Still, controversy is often useful, and I must respect it and learn from it even though it may take a great deal of time. If we become irrevocably divided, I will recognize that division itself may be an¡°answer¡±for us.

¡¡¡¡I have the obligation to embrace diversity in my group. I know that people are different from me; they have different beliefs, different values, and different attitudes. I will fight against thinking of others as wrong when they do not share my beliefs, attitudes and values. I will strive to keep an open mind at all times so that I can listen to what others say. When I still disagree, I will advance my position politely. I will remain rhetorically sensitive as I speak; I will look to find ways to value the diversity in mysgroupsrather than to alienate it.

¡¡¡¡I know that sometimes groups fail. They fail because individuals get impatient, unreasonable, distracted, or bored, I must take care to avoid these particular¡°deadly discussion sins.¡±If we do fail, I have the obligation to try to discover what went wrong, but I also know that nothing is gained from accusation and recrimination. We shall simply learn from failure and do better the next time. By the same token, if we succeed I must fight against feeling of overconfidence. Each new group, each new problem, is its own challenge. There is nothing in history or science that will predict the outcome.

¡¡¡¡And that is the pleasure I take in the process, for I know that I can contribute, and to do so makes me feel more of a human being.

Student 1: I guess I didn¡¯t notice what you¡¯re talking about, but I was really impressed with what he says on page 222 about being hopeful and assuming that good teaching can make a big difference for students.

¡¡¡¡Teacher: Yes, that¡¯s important, but almost the whole chapter that includes the quote you cite shows Rose going back and forth between practice and policy. Let me show you what I mean. (Reads about a page of material.) Isn¡¯t that impressive? One of the things that makes this book great is that the implications for reform emerge from the particulars of everyday teaching. Anybody want to comment on that?

¡¡¡¡Student 2: I think Rose is a great teacher, but does he really think that every student can learn?swheresdid he get that faith in everybody?

¡¡¡¡Student 3: I have the same question, and I¡¯m also disturbed by the fact that this is a story, that it necessarily has a plot. Doesn¡¯t the need to have a plot affect the incidents Rose relates and how they get resolved? How much does this really help us understand the messy world of day-in, day-out teaching?

¡¡¡¡Teacher:I think you are all missing the point. This is a great story about one person¡¯s successes and failures in teaching. It has a plot, sure, but that plot can still be translatedsintosproposals for reform. I mean, what do you think Rose¡¯s reform proposals would look like?

¡¡¡¡Student 4: I don¡¯t know about school reform, but could we talk about the episode when Rose helps that student make sense of the standardized test she took? With just a little help, she¡¯s able to figure most of it out. How often do you think that happens with our students who regularly do poorly on achievement tests?

¡¡¡¡Teacher:Let¡¯s take a look at that a little. I still want to know what you think Rose can teach us about school reform. (Long silence.)

¡¡¡¡The teacher in this excerpt is much too dominant and controlling. He insists on sticking to his own agenda despite his students- resistance. Moreover, he ignores the excellent questions his students raise, each of which could have led to a productive exchange. The teacher clearly likes the book and wants his students to like it£¬too. He is also intent on exploring the¡°big¡±issues of policy and reform. His students are much more interested in discussing and questioning its specifics. The potential for enlightening discussion is enormous here; students are taking a lot of initiative, and there is a great deal of participation. Unfortunately, the teacher is just too self-absorbed to see it.

¡¡¡¡Scenario 2: Too Little Teacher Participation

¡¡¡¡Teacher: What do you think of the last section of Rose¡¯s Lives on the Boundary?

¡¡¡¡Student 1: I liked it, especially what he says on page 222 about remaining hopeful and using good teaching practices to help even the most poorly prepared students.

¡¡¡¡Student 2: I¡¯m not sure why he¡¯s so hopeful.swheresdoes that faith come from? I¡¯ve been in lots of situationsswhereseven the best and most dedicated teachers couldn¡¯t help their most difficult students.

¡¡¡¡Student 3: I have£¬too. Also, even though I liked the way Rose tells his story. I¡¯m not sure there¡¯s much to learn from it. Stories are not like day-to-day teaching. There¡¯s no plot of climax in real-life teaching. Just plugging away and trying to make the best of it.

¡¡¡¡Student 4: But aren¡¯t some of the incidents revealing? What about the example of the student who at first does poorly on the achievement test and then does much better with little coaching from Rose?

¡¡¡¡Student 5: I think Rose knows about underachieving students because he was there once himself.

¡¡¡¡Student 6: But he also became a scholarship student. I don¡¯t think he does know what it¡¯s like to struggle with poor preparation, limited skills, and especially racial discrimination.

¡¡¡¡Student 7: Does he still teach writing to students at UCLA, or is he doing something else now?

¡¡¡¡Teacher: He still teaches writing, but he also has an appointment in the School of Education.

¡¡¡¡This scenario seems, superficially, an improvement. Seven rather than four students have spoken, so the level of participation is higher. However, although there is enormous potential for discussion in the issues students raise, there is almost no continuity, no attempt to build on individual comments. Instead, the teacher responds to only one question - the one that is the least interesting and least likely to go anywhere. If the teacher had intervened just once or twice, each of the issues raised by students could have been considered and developed much more fully.

¡¡¡¡For instance, the teacher could have asked the first two students, who appear to disagree, to talk to each other about the citation from page 222. Questions she could have posed are¡°Does page 222 give any clues to the source of Rose¡¯s hope and faith?¡±and¡°Where else would we look in the text to support one view or the other?¡±The whole issue of plot and story also seems rich. The teacher could ask.¡°In what ways do stories help us understand everyday experiences and practices?¡±and¡°In what ways are stories a flawed source?¡±The point here is not for the teacher to give her own views but for her to ask a question or raise an issue that gets students talking to one another.

¡¡¡¡Scenario 3: A Better Balance

¡¡¡¡Teacher: The assignment for today was to read the conclusion of teacher Mike Rose¡¯s autobiography, Lives on the Boundary. Rose not only concludes his story with some concrete examples of how to cross cultural and class boundaries but also shows us some of the implications of these examples for shaping educational policy. Could you comment on some of these examples and their value for promoting educational reform?

¡¡¡¡Student 1: The quote on page 222 was especially important. We must assume that students have potential and ability and then act accordingly. That should be the basis for all educational change.

¡¡¡¡Student 2: Maybe, but what makes him so hopeful?swheresdoes that faith come from? I¡¯ve seen lots of situationsswhereseven the best and most dedicated teachers couldn¡¯t help their most difficult students.

¡¡¡¡Student 3: I have£¬too. Although I like the way Rose tells his story. I¡¯m not sure there¡¯s much to be learned from it. Stories are not like day-to-day teaching. There¡¯s no plot or climax in real life teaching. Just plugging away and trying to make the best of it.

¡¡¡¡Student 4: But aren¡¯t some of the examples revealing? What about the student who at first does poorly on the achievement test and then greatly improves with a little coaching from Rose?

¡¡¡¡Student 5: I think Rose knows about underachieving students because he was there himself.

¡¡¡¡Student 6: But he also became a scholarship student at UCLA. He may have lost touch with those roots. I don¡¯t think he knows what it¡¯s like to struggle with poor preparation, limited skills, and especially racial discrimination.

¡¡¡¡Student 7: Is he still teaching writing to students at UCLA, or is he doing something else now?

¡¡¡¡Teacher: He¡¯s still teaching writing, but now he has an appointment in the School of Education. But I want to get back to the other point. Can Rose teach us some valuable things about educational reform, or is his stance too idealistic, too removed from the realities of real classrooms?

¡¡¡¡Student 5: I still think his background as a student who was mistakenly put in the vocational track gives him a valuable perspective on injustice and on the failure to realize the promise of educational opportunity.

¡¡¡¡Student 6: You know, I forgot about that incident. It probably still has an important impact on his thinking and practice.

¡¡¡¡Student 3: I just don¡¯t trust the story format. He makes it all come out so neatly in the end.

¡¡¡¡Student 1: Does he? I think he¡¯s quite realistic about how much can he accomplish with students who have been neglected and oppressed. All those years of bad education are a great burden, but progress can be made, especially when we retain hope.

¡¡¡¡Student 3: But his determination to create a narrative of hope frees him of the obligation to recount all the failures, all the partial successes.

¡¡¡¡Student 2: And why be so hopeful? What¡¯s the reason for keeping the faith?

¡¡¡¡Teacher: I think there may be at least two reasons for doing so, both of which are in Rose.

¡¡¡¡Student 5: May I?

¡¡¡¡Teacher: Please, go ahead.

¡¡¡¡Student 5: Rose is hopeful because there is no other choice. Despair is not a good basis for change.

¡¡¡¡Student 2: What about revolution?

¡¡¡¡Student 5: Perhaps, but while we wait for the revolution. Rose shows that if you¡¯re patient and try hard to cross boundaries, if you keep looking for abilityswheresothers have only seen deficiency, great strides can be made.Teacher: Rose is like Dewey in a way. He can¡¯t imagine being anything but faithful, but it is not a blind faith. It emerges from experience.

¡¡¡¡Student 2: Well, could we talk about some of those experiences specifically? What are the concrete bases for his educational faith?

¡¡¡¡Teacher: Let¡¯s do that.

¡¡¡¡Perhaps the thing that most clearly distinguishes this scenario from the others is that here the discussion builds. At first students aren¡¯t really conversing, but with a little prompting from the leader, they begin talking and responding to each other. There is clear disagreement, which is tolerated and even encouraged, but with assistance from the teacher, there is also some basis for agreement. The teacher makes six brief comments in this dialogue, but all but two (first and second to last) are intended to foster increased interaction and continuity. The scenario ends with the promise of much more discussion based on close attention to the text. This probably wouldn¡¯t have happened without the teacher¡¯s contributions.

¡¡¡¡Of course, this scenario may come across as a bit too idealistic; good discussions don¡¯t materialize as effortlessly as this one seems to. But it is surprising what a difference a few well-placed questions and comments can make. This scenario shows thatsgroupsleaders don¡¯t have to intervene constantly or absent themselves entirely to make discussion work.

¡¡

¡¡Summary×ܽá

¡¡¡¡A designated leader is expected to perform a variety of administrative, structuring, and developmental activities on behalf of the group. A democratic designated leader encourages members to enact a variety of leadership functions while serving as a completer for functions not being supplied by other members. A leader has great influences on the discussion process and also has many responsibilities to take.

3£ºHOW TO BECOME A SUC-CESSFULsgroupsLEADER

¡¡µÚÈýÕÂÈçºÎ³ÉΪ³É¹¦µÄС×éÁìÐä

¡¡¡¡Ð¡×éÖеÄ×éÔ±Ïñש¿é£¬Ð¡×éÖеÄ×鳤Ïñ»ÒÄ࣬ש¿éÊÇÕûÌå²»¿É»òȱµÄ²ÄÁÏ£¬µ«ÊÇûÓлÒÄà¾Í²»Äܽ«ËüÃÇÕûºÏÔÚÒ»Æð¡£±¾Õ½«¼¯ÖÐÂÛÊöÔÚС×éÌÖÂÛÖÐ×鳤µÄÓ°ÏìºÍ¹¦ÄÜ¡£

¡¡

¡¡Introduction½éÉÜ

¡¡¡¡Accepting a position of designated leader means taking on special responsibilities and duties to serve the good of the group, as well as the larger organization of which it is a part. This, we believe, should be the central principle of any philosophy of smallsgroupsleadership.

¡¡¡¡The metaphor we suggest is that the members are the bricks and the leader is the mortar that binds them together, the bricks provide the support and substance of the group, but the mortar allows the wholesgroupsto hold its shape - completes the structure, so to speak. This concept of the leader as completer, as articulated by Schutz , suggests that¡°... the best a leader can do is to observe what functions are not being performed by a segment of thesgroupsand enable this part to accomplish them¡±or, if necessary, perform them.

¡¡¡¡

Influences of asgroupsLeaderС×éÁìÐäµÄÓ°Ïì

¡¡¡¡Effectiveness in achievingsgroupsgoals grows out of leader¡¯s action choices, which influence four dimensions of problem solving: members- perceptions of the leader; members- perceptions of themselves and of each other; members- perceptions of thesgroupsas a whole; members- judgment on substantive issues. True to the systems perspective, these four dimensions interact.

¡¡¡¡Influencing Members- Perceptions of the Leader

¡¡¡¡Consciously or unconsciously, leaders influence how members perceive them. The most effective leaders do this at a conscious level insgroupsto control how they appear and thus how they influence others. Leaders who act informally and socialize with members promote perceptions of themselves as relaxed, unassuming, and part of the team. This can be helpful in putting members at ease and in minimizing status differences between leaders and members. It may also be appropriate when an appointed leader first takes charge and wants to show members he or she is not stiff and does not intend to run the whole show. The leader should be careful, however, not to act so informally that it is not possible to tighten up later if the need emerges.

¡¡¡¡Influencing Members¡¯Perception of Themselves and of Each Other

¡¡¡¡Leader¡¯s actions influence how members perceive themselves and what they regard as appropriate orientations tosgroupswork. Through references to each member¡¯s participation, achievement, and skill, a leader contributes to role development in the group. By appointing people to record, present position papers, a leader enhances their visibility. Punctuality and attendance are encouraged by leadership actions that censor violations. If a member starts dragging in late or skipping meeting, the leader should indicate disapproval quickly before members conclude it is acceptable to miss meetings. Norms form quickly, so a leader must act with dispatch. By putting individuals on the spot, the leader can enforce discipline without resorting to heavy penalties. Also, the leader demonstrates to other members that lateness and absenteeism are not condoned. Remember, the leader is a prime setter ofsgroupsnorms.

¡¡¡¡Influencing Members¡¯Perceptions of the Group

¡¡¡¡The leader can also promote the perception of thesgroupsas a whole by encouraging themes, slogans, or logos for the group. We generally encourage class groups to come up with a name. Slogans help asgroupsto see their purpose as a group.

¡¡¡¡Influencing Subjective Judgments of the Group

¡¡¡¡Generally leaders should try to avoid acting as advocates, because they have strong influence over members. Sometimes, however, advocacy is necessary. When it is, the leader should distinguish between personal views and those associated with the positions of leader - for example,¡°The executive committee will never accept the plan we¡¯re discussing. They¡¯ve turned down every committee proposal that restricts executive privileges. If we want to have any impact on corporate policy, we¡¯ll need to find the next best plan.¡±This comment reflects the role of a leader. By contrast, the following is a personal stance, unlikely to win support,¡°I don¡¯t believe in that, and I want an alternative.¡±

¡¡

¡¡Functions of asgroupsLeaderС×éÁìÐäµÄ×÷ÓÃ

¡¡¡¡Designing the Agenda

¡¡¡¡An effective leader understands the issues that must be discussed and will organize them in a way that facilitatessgroupsprogress. Leaders who have solid overviews of the task and who distribute a logical agenda to thesgroupsusually provide effective guidance.

¡¡¡¡Competent leader often prepare two outlines: one that is private and one that is distributed to members. The private outline identifies key issues and the leader¡¯s questions or concerns about each. Specific questions or comments may be noted and potential resources may be penciled in. The second outline, known as the public agenda, is for members and should be distributed in advance. The purpose of the public agenda is to inform members of what will be covered at a particular meeting so that they can prepare for productive, informed discussion. Leaders who distribute public agendas in advance of meeting close the door for excuses:¡°I didn¡¯t know we were going to work on that tonight, so I¡¯m not prepared to report.¡±

¡¡¡¡The public agenda need not be lengthy; its purpose is to inform every one of the topics that will be covered. Here, for example, is a public agenda for an initialsgroupsmeeting:

¡¡¡¡Agenda for the Opening Meeting

¡¡¡¡1. Why was thissgroupsset up?

¡¡¡¡2. What are we charged to produce or do and for whom?

¡¡¡¡3. How were the members of thissgroupsselected? Do we have special talents, experiences, etc., pertinent to the task?

¡¡¡¡4. How do we want to run this group? What do you expect from me as the leader? What kind of schedule is reasonable for meeting dates and times?

¡¡¡¡Please come prepared to discuss four items at the opening meeting at 4¡Ã00 p.m. on Monday, November 12, in 107 Memorial Hall.

¡¡¡¡Members who receive an agenda like this are more likely to come prepared for productive discussion.

¡¡¡¡Promoting Teamwork and Cooperation

¡¡¡¡Establishing a climate of trust will do more than anything else to develop cooperation and teamwork among members. In addition toshavingsclear, inspiring goals and trust, there are specific things a designated leader can do to promote teamwork.

¡¡¡¡1. Speak of¡°us¡±and¡°we¡±£¬rather than¡°I¡±and¡°you.¡±

¡¡¡¡The leader should convey, verbally and in various other ways, that he or she is a full-fledged, committed member of the group. The designated leader also should ask what it means if another member consistently refers to thesgroupsas¡°you.¡±

¡¡¡¡2. Create symbols ofsgroupsidentification.

¡¡¡¡A sense of unity can be fostered by inside jokes, shared fantasies, logos, a name for the group, slogans, T-shirts, and so on.

¡¡¡¡3. Watch for and challenge any hidden agenda item that seems to conflict withsgroupsgoals.

¡¡¡¡If you suspect a hidden agenda item is interfering withsgroupsfunctioning or goal achievement, promptly bring this to the attention of the group:¡°Roger, you have rejected the suggestion thesgroupshas proposed without examining it fully. As a result, members are becoming frustrated and angry. Is there something going on that we should know about?¡±Avoidance makes such problems worse.

¡¡¡¡4. Share all rewards with the group.

¡¡¡¡Designated leaders often receive praise from authority figures of a group¡¯s parent organization. Wise leaders give credit to the group, they comment about what thesgroupshas done, express pride in being a part of the group, and acknowledge the service of all members.

¡¡¡¡5. Keep arguments focused on facts and issues, not personalities.

¡¡¡¡Step in at once if any member starts an attack on another¡¯s personality, ethnicity, or character. However, recognize also that members may have strong feelings about some issues, so don¡¯t squelch expressions of feeling, as long as those expressions do not denigrate others.

¡¡¡¡6. Don¡¯t let the discussion get so serious that members cannot enjoy themselves.

¡¡¡¡Humor may help reduce the tensions generated when people work hard together at the job of hammering out ideas. Good task leaders may have trouble with humor. Lee observed, for instance, that many of the most efficient leaders lacked human warmth, but groups need both efficiency and satisfying interactions. If you are not skilled at tension release, enlist the help of members who are. Bring thesgroupsback to task after the joke is over or the fantasy has chained out.

¡¡¡¡7. When asgroupsseems to be deadlocked, look for a basis on which to compromise.

¡¡¡¡Perhaps you can synthesize parts of several ideassintosa consensus solution or you can suggest a mediation procedure. However, to do so you must have been even-handed as the leader. Remaining somewhat detached from the fray, while listening, observing, and maintaining perspective.

¡¡¡¡Keeping the Balance

¡¡¡¡Balance is one of the keys to good discussion. When one or two people dominate the exchange of ideas, the benefits for the wholesgroupsare greatly diminished. Similarly, when groups identifiable by gender, race, class, or ideology completely withdraw from the discussion, the range of ideas being explored is greatly reduced. Of course, perfect balance is impossible, but attention to who¡¯s speaking and who isn¡¯t is one of the crucial elements in making discussion work.

¡¡¡¡We would illustrate this through three scenarios happened during class discussions led by the teacher.

¡¡¡¡Three Scenarios of Balance and Imbalance

¡¡¡¡What follows are three short discussion scenarios that focus on how the leader¡¯s role affects the course of events. They show a teacher who exerts too much control over the discussion, a teacher who is too aloof, and a teacher who comes close to striking roughly the right balance.

¡¡¡¡Scenario 1: Too Much Teacher Control

¡¡¡¡Teacher: The assignment for the day was to read the conclusion of teacher Mike Rose¡¯s remarkable autobiography, Lives on the Boundary. Rose not only concludes his story with some very concrete examples of how to cross cultural and class boundaries but shows us as well the implications of these examples for shaping educational policy. One of the strengths of the book is Rose¡¯s ability to move back and forth between the worlds of classroom practice and national policymaking. What do you think of the way Rose handles this?

2£ºQUESTIONING AND LISTENING

¡¡µÚ¶þÕÂÌáÎʺÍÇãÌý

¡¡¡¡ÓÐЧµÄС×éÌÖÂÛÒªÇó²ÎÓëÕß¾ßÓÐÎÊÎÊÌâµÄ¼¼ÇɺÍÌý±ðÈ˽²»°µÄÄÍÐÄ¡£Ö»ÓÐÌá³öºÏÀíµÄÎÊÌ⣬²ÅÄÜÍƶ¯ÌÖÂ۵ĽøÕ¹£»Ö»ÓÐÄÍÐĵØÌýÈ¡±ðÈ˵Ĺ۵㣬²ÅÄÜÀí½â±ðÈ˵ÄÁ¢³¡ºÍ̬¶È£¬´Ó¶øʵÏÖС×éµÄÄ¿±ê¡£±¾Õ½«ÌÖÂ۲μÓÕ߸ÃÈçºÎ»ý¼«ÇãÌý±ðÈ˵ÄÒâ¼û²¢Ìá³ö½¨ÉèÐÔµÄÎÊÌâ¡£

¡¡

¡¡Effective QuestioningÓÐЧÌáÎÊ

¡¡¡¡Questioning

¡¡¡¡An important focus of democratic discussion should be on getting as many people as possible deeply engaged in the conversation. Whatever being said and done should facilitate and promote this level of engagement. As a number of commentators have pointed out, at the heart of sustaining an engaging discussion are the skills of questioning and listening. Of the three, learning to question takes the most practice and skill. Although it is certainly true that the kinds of questions one asks to begin a discussion set an important tone, it is equally true that subsequent questions asked by both thesgroupsleader and the members can provide a powerful impetus for sustaining discussion. Indeed, how we ask questions can make the difference between a discussion that goes nowhere and one that turnssintosa¡°complex communal dialogue that bounces all around the room.¡±

¡¡¡¡Types of Questions

¡¡¡¡Once the discussion is moving along, several kinds of questions are particularly helpful in maintaining momentum.

¡¡¡¡Questions That Ask for More Evidence

¡¡¡¡These questions are asked when participants state an opinion that seems unconnected to what¡¯s already been said or that someone else in thesgroupsthinks is erroneous, unsupported, or unjustified. The question should be asked as a simple request for more information, not as a challenge to the speaker¡¯s intelligence. Here are some examples:

¡¡¡¡How do you know that?

¡¡¡¡What data is that claim based on?

¡¡¡¡What does the author say that supports your argument?

¡¡¡¡What evidence would you give to someone who doubted your interpretation?

¡¡¡¡Questions That Ask for Clarification

¡¡¡¡Clarifying questions give speakers the chance to expand on their ideas so that they can be understood by other members in the group. Here are some examples:

¡¡¡¡Can you put that in another way?

¡¡¡¡Would you give us an example on what you are talking about?

¡¡¡¡What do you mean by saying that?

¡¡¡¡Can you explain the term you just used?

¡¡¡¡Could you give a different illustration of your point?

¡¡¡¡Open Questions

¡¡¡¡Questions that are open-ended, particularly those beginning with how and why, are more likely to provoke others- thinking and problem-solving abilities. Here are some examples of open questions:

¡¡¡¡Savage says that when facing moral crises, people who agonize don¡¯t act, and people who act don¡¯t agonize. What does he mean by this?

¡¡¡¡Racism pervaded American society throughout the twentieth century. What are some signs that things are as bad as ever? What are other signs that racism has abated significantly?

¡¡¡¡Why do you think many people devote their lives to education despite the low pay and poor working conditions?

¡¡¡¡Linking or Extension Questions

¡¡¡¡An effective discussion leader tries to create a dialogical community in which new insights emerge from prior contributions ofsgroupsmembers. Linking or extension questions actively engage members in building on one another¡¯s responses to questions. Here are some examples of such questions:

¡¡¡¡Is there any connection between what you¡¯ve just said and what Patrick was saying a moment ago?

¡¡¡¡How does your comment fit in with John¡¯s earlier comment?

¡¡¡¡How does your observation relate to what thesgroupsdecided last week?

¡¡¡¡Does your idea challenge or support what we seem to be saying?

¡¡¡¡How does that contribution add to what has already been said?

¡¡¡¡Hypothetical Questions

¡¡¡¡Hypothetical questions ask others to consider how the circumstances of a case is changing might alter the outcome. Because such questions encourage highly creative responses, they can sometimes cause members to veer offsintosunfamiliar and seemingly tangential realms. But with asgroupsthat is reluctant to take risks or that typically answers in a perfunctory, reutilized manner, the hypothetical question can provoke flights of fancy that can take asgroupsto a new level of engagement and understanding. Here are some examples of hypothetical questions:

¡¡¡¡How might World War¢òhave turned out if Hitler had not decided to attack the Soviet Union in 1941?

¡¡¡¡In the video we just saw, how might the discussion have been different if the leader had refrained from lecturing the group?

¡¡¡¡Cause-and-Effect Questions

¡¡¡¡Questions that provoke members to explore cause-and-effect linkages are fundamental to developing critical thought. Here are some examples:

¡¡¡¡What is likely to be the effect of raising the average salary from 300 hundred pounds to 500 hundred?

¡¡¡¡How might the salary raise affect production?

¡¡¡¡Summary Questions

¡¡¡¡Finally, one of the most valuable types of questions that can be used invites others to summarize or synthesize what has been thought and said. These questions call on participants to identify important ideas and think about them in ways that will aid recall. For instance, the following questions are usually appropriate and illuminative.

¡¡¡¡What are the one or two most important ideas that emerged from this discussion?

¡¡¡¡What remains unresolved about this topic?

¡¡¡¡What do you understand better as a result of today¡¯s discussion?

¡¡¡¡Based on our discussion today, what do we need to talk about next time if we¡¯re to understand this issue better?

¡¡¡¡What key word or concept best captures our discussion today?

¡¡¡¡Summary

¡¡¡¡By skillfully mixing all the different kinds of questions outlined above,sgroupsleaders or members can control or follow the pace and direction of conversation, keeping others alert and engaged.

¡¡

¡¡Effective ListeningÓÐЧÇãÌý

¡¡¡¡What Is Listening

¡¡¡¡Listening comprises the steps of hearing and interpreting. Hearing is a physiological process that involves the reception of sound waves by the ear. It is only the first element of listening, which also includes the interpretation of those sound waves (and other signals) to determine what the sender meant. A person with acute hearing may be a poor listener who does not interpret others¡¯statements accurately or respond appropriately. In contrast, someone with considerable hearing loss may be a good listener who is motivated to understand others the way they want to be understood. Suchsgroupsmembers attend closely to the interaction, ask others to speak up, and check the accuracy of their interpretations.

¡¡¡¡How to Be a Good Listener

¡¡¡¡Roach and Wyatt suggest four important things to remember if you want to be a good listener. First, good listeners pay attention to the context of what is said. Have you ever been quoted¡°out of context?¡±If so, you know that context can change the entire meaning of what is said. Suppose Mary says she¡¯s not sure the president of your organization will read your group¡¯s entire report right away because she¡¯s in the middle of performance reviews with all the committee heads. Saying¡°Mary said the president won¬ðt bother to read our report¡±seriously distorts what Mary said and ignores the context of the president being too busy at the moment to give the report full attention.

¡¡¡¡Second, good listeners pay attention to the feelings of the speaker. Remember the affective component of a message? When Tom says,¡°Yes, that idea is fine¡±in a resigned, flat tone of voice, he¡¯s probably expressing a negative feeling about the idea, without actually saying so. A good listener will verify that interpretation:¡°Tom, you said you like it but you don¡¯t sound too enthused. Would you share your concerns with us?¡±

¡¡¡¡Third, when the organizational pattern a speaker uses is confusing, good listeners help speakers make themselves clear by asking questions to clarify. For example, Shanda is a statistics whiz who completed all the computer analyses for your group¡¯s project. She knows her stats so well that she skips steps in explaining them to the rest of you, who are lost. You can help her communicate more clearly by asking her questions that encourage her to fill in the gaps.

¡¡¡¡Finally, it is important to interpret silence carefully. Silence can mean that people don¡¯t understand what was said, that they don¡¯t agree, that they are apathetic, or that they are hoarding information as a power play.sgroupsleaders often mistake silence for agreement when it is something else. Again, a well-timed question will help interpret silence correctly.

¡¡¡¡Pitfalls to Listening Effectively

¡¡¡¡Our listening is impaired when we are tired, preoccupied, or overloaded with information and noise. But even when we are not bothered by such concerns, we still may listen poorly as a result of bad habits we are not aware of. We either do not pay attention carefully to the speaker, or we pay too close attention-to the wrong things! The following are behaviors that interfere with good listening:

¡¡¡¡1. Pseudolistening.

¡¡¡¡Pseudolistening refers to faking the real thing. Pseudolisteners nod, smile, murmur polite responses, look the speaker in the eye, and may even give verbal support like¡°right¡±or¡°good idea.¡±But behind the mask, the pseudolistener has¡°zoned off¡±on a daydream, a personal problem, sizing up the speaker, or mentally preparing a response. When such behavior is challenged, most pseudolisteners blame the speaker (¡°That stuff he was saying was boring¡±) when they really hadn¡¯t given the speaker a chance.

¡¡¡¡2. Sidetracking.

¡¡¡¡Related to pseudolistening is sidetracking,swheresyou allow something another member said to send you offsintosyour own private reverie. Sometimes you sidetrack the conversation in a completely inappropriate direction, thereby wasting the group¡¯s time.

¡¡¡¡3. Focusing on irrelevancies and distractions.

¡¡¡¡Sometimes distractions such as background noises, furnishings, and the temperature make it difficult for us to concentrate on the speaker. At other time, undue attention to speaker characteristics such as dialect, appearance, or personal mannerisms interfere, causing us to miss important points.

¡¡¡¡4. Silent arguing.

¡¡¡¡Many people listen selectively for information that confirms views they already hold. When they hear information that contradicts their chosen positions, silent arguers carry on an internal argument that opposes what they think the speaker has said.

¡¡¡¡You cannot listen both to yourself and a fellowsgroupsmember. You cannot mentally rehearse a reply at the same time you are striving to understand another. If you listen primarily to find flaws and argue them in your mind, you are unlikely to understand the speaker, the context of the remarks, and the meaning the speaker intends. We are not saying,¡°Don¡¯t argue.¡±We are suggesting that you make sure you understand others first, well enough to be able to paraphrase their remarks to their satisfaction, before you argue.

¡¡¡¡5. Premature replying.

¡¡¡¡Similar to silent arguing, premature replying need not involve disagreement. Most commonly, a person prepares mentally to make a remark before fully understanding the speaker¡¯s comment or question. It is also common forsgroupsmembers who know each other well to think they know what others are going to say before they say it - but they aren¡¯t always right! Jumping to a conclusion before the other has finished speaking results in a disjointed discussionswheresthe subject keeps switching.

¡¡¡¡6. Listening defensively.

¡¡¡¡When we feel psychologically threatened, we don¡¯t listen well. Feeling vulnerable, we generally quit listening insgroupsto invent ways to defend ourselves and attack the perceived threat. This is called defensive listening.

¡¡¡¡Effective Listening in a Group

¡¡¡¡Smallsgroupsmembers must work at understanding each other while they keep thesgroupsdiscussion structured and organized. Two types of listening are especially helpful for accomplishing this: active and focused.

¡¡¡¡Active Listening

¡¡¡¡A good test of how well you have been listening is a technique called active listening. This technique virtually forces the listener to understand a speaker before replying or adding to a discussion. The main rule is that you must state in your own words, or paraphrase what you understood the previous speaker to mean, then ask for a confirmation or correction of your paraphrase. The following example illustrates the technique:

¡¡¡¡Sender: I don¡¯t know how I am going to solve this messy problem.

¡¡¡¡Receiver£ºYou¡¯re really stumped on how to solve this one.

¡¡¡¡Sender: Please, don¡¯t ask me about that now.

¡¡¡¡Receiver: Sounds like you¡¯re awfully busy right now.

¡¡¡¡Sender: I thought the meeting today accomplished nothing.

¡¡¡¡Receiver: You were very disappointed with our meeting.

¡¡¡¡Another example:

¡¡¡¡Daniel: If every college graduate were required to demonstrate some competence in using a computer, that might help right at graduation. But computers are changing so rapidly that graduates would be no better off in a few years than if they had no such training, unless they kept up to date or had to use a computer all along. (opinion)

¡¡¡¡Taylor: Do I understand you right? Are you saying that a computer science course should not be required to get a degree? (attempted paraphrase of Daniel¡¯s opinion)

¡¡¡¡Daniel: No, just that it should be more than just how to use a computer. You ought to understand computers, and what they do and don¡¯t do. (rejects the paraphrase and attempts to clarify)

¡¡¡¡Taylor: So you think there should be a requirement for a graduate to be able to explain what computers can and can¡¯t do, as well as be comfortable with a computer. (second attempt at paraphrasing Daniel¡¯s opinion)

¡¡¡¡Daniel: Yes, more than a course as such. (confirms Taylor¡¯s paraphrase)

¡¡¡¡Taylor: I agree with that idea, and think we should also have a requirement for ability to investigate, organize, and write a term paper. (His paraphrase was confirmed, Taylor is now free to add his opinion, on a new topic, to the discussion.)

¡¡¡¡Active listening slows the pace of interaction. If you are not used to listening actively, you may at first find yourself with nothing to say for a moment after the other finishes speaking. Keep practicing; soon you will find yourself making spontaneous responses instead of preplanned or irrelevant remarks. Above all, don¡¯t pseudolisten, which often damages trust and cooperation.

¡¡¡¡Becoming an active listener in a smallsgroupstakes practice, but the supportive climate you help create when you listen actively increases cohesiveness and cooperation in your group. You also will learn when this technique is needed, and when it will unnecessarily slow the group¬ðs progress.

¡¡¡¡Focused Listening

¡¡¡¡Group members often have problems recalling what was discussed. During the excitement of exploring a new idea, it is easy to forget vital information, even though that is the responsibility of each member. Focused listening helps members recall important information, ideas, and issues discussed during a meeting.

¡¡¡¡Effectivesgroupsmembers maintain their perspective on the discussion as a whole by focusing their listening on the main points of the discussion. They organize the details - specific facts and opinions - by issue. Ironically, focusing on the main points helps them remember details better. If you want to be a productive group£¬keep track of the main issues by using key words rather than complete sentences, so you can reorient thesgroupswhen someone switches topics before closure has been reached. Focused listeners can serve as process observers who readily keep track of the discussion. They often provide an internal summary, or brief review of what has transpired up to that point in the discussion, thus keeping the discussion orderly and easy for other members to follow. Thesgroupsbenefits greatly from focused listeners who help keep it on target.

¡¡¡¡Summary

¡¡¡¡Listening is a complex process that involves both hearing and interpretation. Many factors, including one¡¯s culture, can affect the interpretation process. Several specific pitfalls on listening include focusing on irrelevancies, pseudolistening, side-tracking, silent arguing, premature replying, and defensive listening. Mutual understanding is helped by active listening, during which a listener paraphrases what the speaker has said insgroupsto try to understand the speaker as he or she wants to be understood. Focusing on main issues and decisions helps members keep discussions structured and organized.

¡¡¡¡ExercisesÁ·Ï°

¡¡¡¡Ask a question or make a comment that shows you are interested in what another person has said.

¡¡¡¡Ask a question or make a comment that encourages someone else to elaborate on something that person has said.

¡¡¡¡Make a comment that underscores the link between two people¡¯s contributions.

¡¡¡¡Make this link explicit in your comment.

¡¡¡¡Use body language (in a slightly exaggerated way) to show interest in what different speakers are saying.

¡¡¡¡Make a comment indication that you found another person¡¯s ideas interesting or useful. Be specific as to why this was the case.

¡¡¡¡Contribute something that builds on or springs from what someone else has said. Be explicit about the way you are building on the other person¡¯s thoughts.

¡¡¡¡Make a comment that at least partly paraphrases a point someone has already made.

¡¡¡¡Make a summary observation that takessintosaccount several people¡¯s contributions and that touches on a recurring theme in the discussion.

¡¡¡¡Ask a cause-and-effect question-for example,¡°Can you explain why you think it¡¯s true that if these things are in place, such and such a thing will occur?¡±

¡¡¡¡At an appropriate moment, ask thesgroupsfor a minute¡¯s silence to slow the pace of conversation and give you and others time to think.

¡¡¡¡Find a way to express appreciation for the enlightenment you have gained from the discussion. Try to be specific about what it was that helped you understand something better.

¡¡¡¡Disagree with someone in a respectful and constructive way.