Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Survey: Final Report · Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Survey: Final Report Presented to the Park Scholarship Program Administration by the The

Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Survey: Final Report

Presented to the Park Scholarship Program Administration by the

The Park Program Review and Development Team (PPRD) Samuel B. Pond, III

Torrey E. Rieser April R. Cantwell

October 2002

Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Survey, 2002

ii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary Park Scholar Freshmen Retreat

Orientation Week/Freshmen Orientation Week The Raleigh Experience The Blue Ridge Assembly Experience Terminology

Background Information Project Facilitation Workshop

Data Collection Surveys Survey Methodology Survey Instruments Focus Groups

Facilitator Survey: Results and Discussion Overview of Facilitator Results Section I: Facilitator Workshop Retreat Effectiveness Facilitator Satisfaction

Freshman Survey: Results and Discussion Overview of Freshman Results The Raleigh Experience The Blue Ridge Assembly Experience Satisfaction with the Blue Ridge Assembly Experience

Review of Key Implications Section I: Workshop Section II: Retreat

Appendices

1

33333

444

55566

999

1011

1414141617

191920

22


iii

List of Tables Table 1. Mean Scores for Facilitator Workshop Survey Items Table 2. Mean Scores for Retreat Survey Items Table 3. Mean Scores for Facilitator Satisfaction items Table 4. Mean Scores for Raleigh Experience Survey Items Table 5. Mean Scores for Freshman Blue Ridge Assembly Survey Items Table 6. Mean Scores for Freshman Satisfaction Survey Responses

Appendices Appendix A. Description of Retreat/Orientation Activities

A.1. Retreat Schedule A.2. Description of Raleigh Experience Activities A.3. Description of Blue Ridge Assembly Experience Activities

Appendix B. Facilitation Workshop Materials

B.1. Facilitator Team Assignments B.2. Facilitator Workshop Handouts B.3. Workshop Activities

Appendix C. Survey Instruments

C.1. Facilitator Retreat Evaluation C.2. Freshman Retreat Evaluation

Appendix D. Facilitator Survey Results Appendix E. Facilitator Survey Results: Open-Ended Items Appendix F. Freshmen Survey Results Appendix G. Freshmen Survey Results: Open-Ended Items

Executive Summary

23242526

29303245

515155

58

67

69

80

9

10

12

15

17

18


4

In August 2002, upper class Park Scholars served as facilitators for the first-year Retreat. A Facilitation Workshop was developed for the upper-classmen by the Park Scholarships Office and the Park Scholarships Program Review and Development (PPRD) team to teach facilitation skills and define Park Program criteria. The Park Scholar facilitators served in roles previously handled by the staff at the Y-camp. The facilitators met regularly throughout the Retreat activities with small groups of eight Scholars to process activities and connect these activities with their upcoming Park Scholar and NC State college experience. In order to assess the effectiveness of this new activity the facilitators and first-year Park Scholars were asked to complete a survey. In addition, focus groups were held to gather more feedback from the facilitators and freshman. This data was used to fill in the survey information. The results indicate that this was a wonderful new way to involve Park Scholars with the incoming Scholars. For example, answers from one of the survey questions ‘how the retreat had changed the way they thought about Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character’ provided telling answers.

“I think the retreat taught me that I do have the abilities to succeed in all those areas, that they are all intertwined and that I’m surrounded by people who will make a nourishing environment for such success.”

“Made me less apprehensive.”

“I assumed I’d have amazing expectations solely in academia. Now I see that I am to be enhanced as a person while giving back to my community.”

“Made me more excited about performing service.”

“I think that having facilitators helped the freshmen grasp the concepts from the activities better than our class did.” (This was a comment made by a facilitator who attended last year’s retreat.)

Info here More specifically the full report lists implications for the Retreat activities and Facilitator Training. The results address issues related to:

• the selection and training of facilitators. • how to prepare the Workshop. • how to conduct effective debriefing sessions. • how to improve new student understanding and application of the Park

Scholarship Program criteria.


5

Park Scholar Freshmen Retreat Orientation Week/Freshman Retreat Each year, incoming Park Scholars take part in the Freshman Retreat, or Orientation Week. The purpose of these several days of structured activity is to socialize new students to the Park Scholarships Program and NC State University. This includes exposing them to service opportunities in the Raleigh community and introducing the criteria they should consider to assess their own performance in the program. Formal orientation activities begin during the week immediately preceding the first day of classes at NC State. Students arrived on campus this year on a Tuesday morning and met formally for the first time at lunch. Lunch was held on the NC State campus. Orientation Week, or Freshmen Retreat, had two main sections this year, the Raleigh Experience and the Blue Ridge Assembly Experience. The Raleigh Experience During the first day on campus, the Freshman Park Scholars gathered for lunch. During this time, several key individuals were introduced to the scholars, and the individual who provided lunch also spoke to the group about his life experiences. After lunch, the Park Scholars spent the day in Raleigh. More detail on the activities that took place during the Raleigh Experience is found in Appendix A. The Blue Ridge Assembly Experience On the following morning, the group took a trip to the YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly in western North Carolina. This portion of the trip lasted for three days and two nights, and involved a wide variety of activities and experiences. The scholars participated in several team-building, leadership, and self-awareness activities. On the last day, the scholars traveled to Mount Mitchell, toured the top of the mountain and had lunch before their return trip to Raleigh. More detail on the activities that took place during the Blue Ridge Assembly Experience is found in Appendix A. Terminology Throughout this report, the terms ‘Orientation Week’ and ‘Freshmen Retreat’ or ‘Retreat’ will be used interchangeably to refer to all activities held for Park Scholars during the week before the Fall Semester began. The term ‘Raleigh Experience’ refers to the first Tuesday of the Retreat and the term “Blue Ridge Assembly Experience’ refers to the trip to the mountains. Additional information on the specific activities that occurred during the Retreat are described in greater detail in later sections of this report.


6

Background Information Project During the 2001-2002 academic year, the PPRD team recommended that upper-class Park Scholars play a greater role in the orientation activities for new Park Scholars. Specifically, it was recommended that upper-classmen become involved in the conduct and debriefing of Retreat activities. To this end, the PPRD team developed a workshop covering group facilitation skills and the Park Scholarship criteria. Thirteen upper-class Park Scholars attended this workshop. Sections of the workshop were presented and led by members of the PPRD team and the Park Scholarship Office. This workshop was held on the day before the Raleigh experience. During the workshop, upper-classmen redesigned retreat activities (e.g. the Cook-out Activity), designed new activities, and prepared to facilitate the debriefing sessions that were held after each retreat activity. In addition to conducting the workshop, two members of the PPRD team were available during the Retreat to provide additional advice and follow-up training. Facilitation Workshop An invitation to participate in the Facilitation Workshop was sent by email to all upper-class Park Scholars. This invitation was from a senior Park Scholar and included mention of the required dates of availability. A second email invitation was then sent from the Park Scholarship Office. A third email, that included a brief agenda, 2 articles on facilitation, and a brief description of the facilitator role, was sent to the final list of upper-class Park volunteers. Upper-class volunteers were identified and all who could participate, 13, were selected as Facilitators. These 13 upper-class Park Scholars attended the Facilitation Workshop. Included in the workshop were three students from the Class of 2003, four from the Class of 2004, and six from the Class of 2005. All students were recruited by the Park Scholarship Office and agreed to attend the Facilitation Workshop, the Raleigh experience, and the Blue Ridge Assembly experience. The Facilitator Workshop was held from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, on Monday, August 12, 2002, the day before the Raleigh Experience. The Workshop included lectures on facilitation, listening and communication skills, handling challenging interpersonal situations, and reviewing Park Scholarship criteria. The workshop also included facilitation exercises and retreat activity planning. All facilitators were given two articles provided by the PPRD team prior to attending the Facilitation Workshop. These articles served as an introduction to facilitation and debriefing. Upon arrival at the Workshop, facilitators were given five handouts and an agenda. All articles, handouts, and the agenda can be found in Appendix B.


7

Data Collection Surveys In order to gather information on the activities conducted during the orientation week (Facilitation Workshop, the Raleigh experience, the Blue Ridge Assembly experience), surveys were completed by the Class of 2006 and the Facilitators on the bus ride home from the retreat. The main topics that were addressed to facilitators included:

• Effectiveness of the Facilitation Workshop. • Effectiveness of the Retreat. • Overall satisfaction with the Facilitation Workshop and the Retreat.

The main topics that were addressed to the Class of 2006 included:

• Effectiveness of the Raleigh experience. • Effectiveness of the Blue Ridge Assembly experience. • Overall satisfaction with the Retreat.

The data gathered from this effort will contribute to the continued development of the Facilitation Workshop, and the Retreat, including the Raleigh experience objectives and activities, and the Blue Ridge Assembly activities. In addition, the information reported here may be useful in refining the roles of Facilitators and may help in the development of future Retreat surveys. Survey Methodology Park Scholar Facilitators: The population for the Facilitator Survey included the same 13 upper-class Park Scholar students that participated in the Facilitation Workshop. At the end of the Park Scholarships Retreat all facilitators were asked to complete anonymous surveys concerning both the Facilitation Workshop and the Retreat. Survey responses were collected from all 13 of the facilitators. Park Scholar Freshman Survey: The population for the Freshman Survey included 64 students. At the end of the Park Scholarships Retreat, all freshmen were asked to complete anonymous surveys concerning the Raleigh experience and the Blue Ridge Assembly experience. Ninety-two percent (58 out of 64) of the new Park Scholars responded to the survey.


8

Survey Instruments Park Scholar Facilitator Survey: This survey was divided into four major sections and contained 32 items to measure student perceptions of the facilitation workshop effectiveness, Raleigh experience effectiveness, Blue Ridge Assembly experience effectiveness, and satisfaction with the Facilitation Workshop and Retreat activities. This instrument also included several open-ended questions about the strengths and weaknesses of the Facilitation Workshop and Retreat. Park Scholar Freshman Survey: This survey was divided into four major sections and contained 34 items to measure student perceptions of the Raleigh experience effectiveness, Blue Ridge Assembly experience effectiveness, and satisfaction with the Retreat activities. This instrument also included several open-ended questions to provide more information about the effectiveness of the Retreat. Survey Format: Both the Facilitator and Freshman Surveys were created in paper-and-pencil format. Though both surveys did not contain identical content, they were formatted similarly. All respondents filled out the survey by circling their responses to the items and writing in responses to open-ended questions. Most surveys were completed in approximately 15 minutes. A copy of each survey instrument can be found in Appendix C. Focus Groups Separate focus groups were held with Facilitators and members of the Class of 2006 during the four weeks after the Retreat. The purpose of these group discussions was to gather additional and supplementary data based on the preliminary findings of the Facilitator and Freshmen Survey. Park Scholar Facilitator Focus Groups: The first facilitator focus group was held on August 29, 2002 with six facilitators in attendance. The second facilitator focus group was held on September 10, 2002 with three facilitators. Each focus group lasted approximately 90 minutes. The purpose of the facilitator focus groups was to expand upon and clarify questions, concerns, and recommendations for future Park Scholars Retreats and Facilitator Workshops. Questions and comments concerned recommendations on how to improve facilitator training and facilitation activities during the Blue Ridge Assembly Retreat. Feedback was given on how the members of the Class of 2006 perceived the facilitators, what the


9

favorite and least favorite activities were for both freshmen and facilitators, and summaries of survey comments made by the freshmen. Park Scholar Freshmen Focus Groups: The Freshmen focus groups were held on Tuesday, September 3rd from 3:00 to 4:00 pm, Thursday, Sept. 5th from 5:00 to 6:00 pm, and on Thursday, Sept. 12 from 5:00 to 6:00 pm. A total of 19 freshmen (29.6% of the class) contributed to one these discussions. Each focus group lasted approximately one hour. The purpose of the freshmen focus groups was to hear feedback on their perceptions of the Park Scholars Program, the Raleigh Experience and the activities during the Blue Ridge Assembly Retreat. Questions and comments concerned recommendations on how to better describe the Raleigh Experience and how to improve facilitation discussions. Freshmen were also given the opportunity to comment on what activities they enjoyed the most and why. Feedback was given on freshmen survey comments and the favorite and least favorite activities reported.


10

Facilitator Survey: Results and Discussion

Overview of Facilitator Results The survey items were analyzed to identify general trends in facilitator responses. Survey questions for the first two sections, Facilitation Workshop effectiveness and Blue Ridge Assembly Experience, were evaluated on the following scale:

1= Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither Agree Nor Disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

Survey questions for the third section, satisfaction with Facilitation Workshop, Raleigh Experience and Blue Ridge Assembly Experience, were evaluated on the following scale:

1= Very Dissatisfied 2= Dissatisfied 3= Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied 4= Satisfied 5= Very Satisfied

The summary data for all facilitator survey items, including means, standard deviations, and frequencies, for the Results and Findings of Facilitator Survey can be found in Appendix D. Responses to the open-ended items can be found in Appendix E. Section I: Facilitator Workshop Effectiveness

The following question was asked for each of the activities listed below: How well did the following orient you to debriefing and facilitation? Presenters

Lecturers Planning Sessions

Articles Handouts

Practice Sessions Working Lunch


11

Survey All of these aspects of the Facilitator Workshop were rated relatively high, with the possible exception of the working lunch, which was rated lowest and below the scale mid-point.

Table 1

Mean Scores for Facilitator Workshop Survey Items

Topic Mean Rating

Presenters 4.08 Lectures 4.00 Planning Sessions 4.00 Articles 3.92 Handouts 3.92 Practice Sessions 3.77 Working Lunch 2.50

Focus Groups The Facilitators reported that it would have been helpful to have additional:

facilitator planning sessions. performance feedback from Workshop administrators. information about the Retreat. opportunity to develop facilitation questions.

Most facilitators agreed during the focus group session, that a one-day Facilitator Workshop provided sufficient information, and that the articles and handouts provided to them were appropriate. The Facilitators reported a need to spend time developing application-type or transfer questions during the workshop. These types of questions are intended to make the connection between what is learned in an activity how that learning may be applied to real life situations. Preparing additional application and transfer questions would help the facilitators lead debriefing discussions in such a way that new Park Scholars may understand how to apply what they have learned from various retreat activities to real life situations that are challenging, or those that require leadership or teamwork. The facilitators reported that they might be more successful in leading such discussions if additional sample questions are provided and more practice sessions are held during the workshop. The Facilitators also expressed the desire for performance feedback.


12

Most facilitators believe that they did not focus on the task they were asked to do during their working lunch, but rather, treated the time as a social hour. And, because it was a long day, a break should be scheduled in place of the working lunch. Section II: Retreat Effectiveness The following question was asked for each of the activities listed below: How well did the following activities help the freshmen get to know each other, learn basic teambuilding skills, and become oriented to the expectations of the Park Program and NCSU?

Laying Facilitation Group Discussion Ground Rules Get-to-know-you Activities Criteria Definitions Presentation of the Allegory of the Cave Group Discussion about the Allegory of the Cave Tower, Wall, Swing Discussion of Tower, Wall, Swing Low Ropes Activity Discussion of the Low Ropes Activity Cookout Planning Ms. Lunsford’s Talk Campfire

Survey All aspects of the Retreat were rated highly with the possible exception of laying the ground rules, which was rated at exactly the scale midpoint. The average ratings for all of these items are presented in Table 2.

Table 2

Mean Scores for Retreat Survey Items_________

Topic Mean Rating Discussion of the Cave 4.92 Tower, Wall, Swing 4.69 Allegory of the Cave 4.58 Low Ropes Activities 4.46 Discussion of Tower, Wall, Swing 4.31 Get-to-know-you Activities 4.23 Cookout Planning 4.23 Ms. Lunsford’s talk 4.15 Discussion of Low Ropes 3.69 Criteria Definitions 3.67 Campfire 3.67 Laying Ground Rules 3.00


13

Focus Groups The Facilitators who participated in focus group discussions reported that the time spent laying the discussion ground rules felt awkward and could have been achieved in fewer than 30 minutes, but that this activity served as a good starting point for getting to know their groups. The facilitators agreed that although laying down the ground rules was awkward, it should be done at the beginning of the first small group discussion rather than omitted or done at some other point during the retreat. The Facilitators had modified the five-group cookout task to an eight-group cookout task, so that the incoming Park Scholars would remain in intact groups. However, the Facilitators agreed that that there should be fewer than eight task groups for the cookout. Using a five-group division of tasks has worked well in the past and, perhaps, should continue to be used. In addition, this activity was not debriefed due to time constraints, and the facilitators believe that it should have been. One Facilitator mentioned that it may be possible to do this debriefing early in the semester during the Park First Year Seminar course. A few facilitators brought up the concern of Christian references during the Retreat. For instance, during the Raleigh Experience, the Salvation Army tour included a video about the center with very strong Christian views presented, dinner and the Montagnard talk were at a Lutheran Church and the common area at the YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly featured an image of Jesus over the fireplace. The general consensus among all facilitators was that it should be made clear that the Park Program does not endorse any particular faith. Section III: Facilitator Satisfaction The following question was asked for each of the activities listed below: What was your general level of satisfaction with each of the following?

Being a Facilitator Size of facilitation group

Your retreat responsibilities Amount of time spent in discussions

Retreat schedule Perceived impact on new Park Scholars

Group Facilitation Workshop


14

Survey All aspects of the workshop and retreat were highly rated. The average ratings for each of these activities is presented in Table 3.

Table 3

Mean Scores for Facilitator Satisfaction items______

Topic Mean Rating

Being a facilitator 4.69 Size of facilitation group 4.54 Your retreat responsibilities 4.38 Amount of time in discussions 4.31 Retreat schedule 4.23 Perceived impact on new Parks 4.08 Group Facilitation Workshop 3.92 Focus Groups A few of the facilitators commented that it would have been better to have been recruited prior to the summer before the Retreat so that they could plan their summers and their return to campus more thoroughly. The Facilitators reported that having eight students in each freshman group worked well. This number of students in each group was large enough to include a variety of views and also allowed open participation for all group members. The Facilitators believed that they helped the new students grasp the concepts well, and that the time allowed for discussion of each activity was adequate. In addition, the Facilitators indicated that they would like to include an additional debriefing session, for the Cookout Activity. The Facilitators also reported their preferences for having two facilitators per group rather than ‘floating’ facilitators. The original goal in recruiting facilitators was to have two facilitators per group, and this was the arrangement for four of the eight freshman groups. However, as only 13 facilitators volunteered, ‘floating’ facilitators were employed for the four of the freshman groups. For these groups, one facilitator was assigned to each group permanently and a second facilitator was assigned to two groups and floated between them, spending approximately half of their time facilitating with each group. A majority of the facilitators agreed that having ‘floating’ facilitators interrupted discussions, and that having two permanent facilitators per discussion group would be best. In addition, those facilitators that ‘floated’ between groups felt that they


15

didn’t experience the same depth of discussion, or get to know each group as well as did the groups assigned two permanent facilitators.


16

Freshman Survey: Results and Discussion

Overview of Freshman Results The survey items were analyzed to identify general trends in freshman responses. Survey questions for the first two sections and Blue Ridge Assembly effectiveness, were evaluated on the following scale:

1= Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither Agree Nor Disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

Survey questions for the third section, overall satisfaction with the Raleigh Experience and the Blue Ridge Assembly Experience, were evaluated on the following scale:

1= Very Dissatisfied 2= Dissatisfied 3= Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied 4= Satisfied 5= Very Satisfied

The summary data, including means, standard deviations, and frequencies, for the Results and Findings of Freshman Survey can be found in Appendix F. The responses to the open-ended items can be found in Appendix G.

Section I: The Raleigh Experience The following question was asked for each of the activities listed below: How well did the following orient you to campus, Raleigh and various service opportunities?

Raleigh Rescue Mission tour Lutheran Family Services and Montagnard talk and music

ArtSpace Women’s Center tour

NC Museum of Natural Sciences tour Welcoming lunch


17

Survey All aspects of the Raleigh experience were rated highly. The average ratings for each activity are presented in Table 4.

Table 4

Mean Scores for Raleigh Experience Survey Items

Topic Mean Rating Raleigh Rescue Mission tour 4.12

Lutheran Family Services and Montagnard talk and music 4.12

ArtSpace 3.89

Women’s Center tour 3.88

NC Museum of Natural Sciences tour 3.71

Welcoming lunch 3.65

Focus Groups The Freshmen focus group discussions revealed that Freshmen believe the Raleigh experience was a good starting point as an introduction to Service opportunities, but that the they were expecting to go on a tour of Raleigh and NC State’s campus. They reported that if they wanted to return to that downtown area, they would not know how to get there because, for instance, they do not know about bus routes. They reported that, although they appreciated the message that they are part of the Raleigh community, they would have preferred a practical orientation to their new surroundings such as a tour of NC State’s campus, information on how to get to downtown Raleigh on their own, and a tour of the city. Comments from the open-ended items of the survey and from those attending the focus group discussions also revealed that many Freshmen believed that the Raleigh Experience seemed disconnected from the rest of the Orientation. They agreed that clarifying the objectives for the Raleigh experience would help them to prepare for the day. Many freshmen agreed that the “get-to-know-you” activities should be conducted before the Raleigh Experience so that students are more familiar and comfortable with each other. They believed that knowing their fellow Park Scholars would have helped them feel more at ease in their new surroundings and with their classmates. This probably would have allowed them to focus more attention on the various locations and purpose of the Raleigh Experience as well.


18

Section II: The Blue Ridge Assembly Experience The following question was asked for each of the activities listed below: How well did the following help you get to know each other, learn basic teambuilding skills, and orient you to the expectations of the Park Program and NCSU?

Laying Facilitation Group Discussion Ground Rules Get-to-know-you Activities Criteria Definitions Presentation of the Allegory of the Cave Group Discussion about the Allegory of the Cave Tower, Wall, Swing Discussion of Tower, Wall, Swing Low Ropes Activity Discussion of the Low Ropes Activity Cookout Planning Ms. Lunsford’s Talk Campfire

Facilitator for your group Professor Bruck’s talk Discussion at Mt. Mitchell Survey All of the above-listed Retreat activities were rated highly. The debriefing after Dr. Kessler’s discussion of the Cave was the highest rated small group discussion, scoring 4.50 out of a possible 5.00. The average rating assigned by Freshman Park Scholars for each of the above-listed activities are presented in Table 5. Focus Group The focus group discussions revealed that freshmen enjoyed being in small groups for discussion and that they enjoyed having facilitators. The Freshmen thought that it was not necessary to lay the ground rules because that they believe that they already understood how to have respectful group discussions. Some of the focus group attendees commented that everyone could not hear Professor Bruck’s talk on Mount Mitchell. They agreed that if Professor Bruck’s talk could take on a discussion format, everyone would have been more able to take part and understand what was being communicated to them. Most freshmen felt that the time and place of the small group discussions held at Mt. Mitchell were inconvenient. The students reported that were confused about where they were to meet, and because it was raining, felt the location was not an ideal place to discuss Learning Labs or Mt. Mitchell.


19

Table 5 Mean Scores for Freshman Blue Ridge Assembly Survey Items

Topic Mean Response

Tower, Wall, and Swing 4.83 Facilitator for your group 4.66 Ms. Lunsford’s talk 4.60 Low Ropes 4.52 Discussion of the Cave 4.50 Allegory of the Cave 4.43 Discussion of the Tower, Wall, and Swing 4.34 Cookout Planning 4.28 Get-to-know-you activity 4.19 Discussion of the Low Ropes 4.12 Definitions of the criteria 4.11 Campfire and S’mores 4.07 Professor Bruck’s talk 4.07 Discussion at Mt. Mitchell 3.62 Laying the ground rules 3.48 __________________________________________________

Section III: Satisfaction with the Blue Ridge Assembly Experience

What was your general level of satisfaction with each of the following? Retreat Overall Cookout Lunch at Mt. Mitchell Free time at the YMCA Check-in process Suggested packing list Meals at the YMCA Letter-writing activity Survey Freshmen were generally satisfied with all of these aspects of the Retreat. The average ratings made for each of the above-listed activities are presented in Table 6. Focus Group Focus group discussions revealed that the freshmen were very pleased with the Retreat overall, and that they now have a better understanding of Park Scholar expectations. Survey comments as well as focus group discussions revealed that many freshmen believe that the packing list should include more shirts, an alarm clock, and a raincoat. Most focus group attendees also agreed that the letter writing activity was too rushed and would have been better if more time had been allotted for it and if it had been


20

accompanied by greater explanation regarding what they were to write or the purpose of the activity. Focus group discussions also revealed that many freshmen would like more free time, for unstructured activities to meet their personal needs, while at the Blue Ridge Assembly. Several students reported that they did not have time for a shower between activities, for instance. Many expressed the idea that an extra day at the Blue Ridge Assembly would allow for both more time for scheduled activities as well as leisure time. Table 6

Mean Scores for Freshman Satisfaction Survey Responses

Topic Mean Response

Retreat Overall 4.69 Cookout 4.31 Lunch at Mt. Mitchell 4.29 Free time at the YMCA 4.22 Check-in process 4.12 Suggested packing list 3.68 Meals at the YMCA 3.45 Letter-writing activity 3.45


21

Review of Key Implications

Section I: Workshop Training Materials The articles and handouts provided to the Facilitators were helpful and should be used in future training workshops. The Facilitators request that they be provided with a detailed Retreat schedule so that they can plan their time on the retreat, and be a better source of information to the Freshmen Park Scholars. It was reported specifically that they did not know when or where breaks were scheduled during the time at the Blue Ridge Assembly. Training Processes One day of facilitation training seems to be sufficient to prepare facilitators, given that they have received and reviewed training materials (articles, etc.) before the training. A mixture of lecture and practice sessions was found very effective in preparing the facilitators for their roles. However, in future training sessions you may want to emphasize practice and feedback rather than lecture. An increase in the number of productive practice debriefings and performance feedback sessions may help the facilitators prepare to hold debriefing discussions during the Retreat. During the Workshop, the Facilitators should work to develop more discussion questions targeted at getting students to apply the knowledge gained during the Retreat. Research and practice has shown that these are the most difficult questions to create. Effort spent developing additional sample questions would help create a sense of confidence among the facilitators. The Facilitators request free time during lunch to give them a break and so that they will be more productive during the afternoon session. Workshop Logistics The Facilitation Workshop seems to have been quite effective, and should be required of facilitators, so that they will understand and be prepared for their duties during the Retreat. Advance recruiting of Facilitators, before the end of the Spring semester, may achieve increased interest and participation among upper-class Park Scholars. The Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Schedule time requirements are intensive, and so require advanced planning. Perhaps the Facilitators should participate more in first-year student activities beyond the Retreat. As the Facilitators will already be familiar with the new students and their


22

orientation experiences, they may be in the best position to assist the Freshmen Park Scholars in the application of the lessons learned during the Retreat. Section II: Retreat The Raleigh Experience You may want to clarify the objectives for the Raleigh experience. The Freshmen seemed to misunderstand the purpose of spending the day in Raleigh. They expected a tour of Raleigh and the NCSU campus. They reported that the day seemed disconnected from the rest of their Orientation activities. Small group activities, including “get-to-know-you” activities, may be a positive addition to the Raleigh Experience so that students may become better acquainted with each other more quickly. The Freshmen expressed that this would help them to ease into their new surroundings and would allow them to focus their attention on the purpose of the Raleigh Experience. The Blue Ridge Assembly Experience It was discussed during the Facilitator and Freshmen focus groups that many of the places visited during the Retreat have religious, particularly Christian, connections. Further, the Facilitators reported that several Freshmen approached them to ask about religious expectations of the program. You may want to assure the Freshmen that the Park Program does not endorse any particular expression of faith so that they do not feel uncomfortable about their own religious faith or the requirements of the Park Program. If Freshmen Park Scholars are to participate in the letter-writing activity again, students should understand that it is an important activity meriting their time and attention. Also, the goal of this activity should be clearly articulated and appropriate time designated to it. You may want to schedule more free time during the Blue Ridge Assembly because the students report that there was not much unstructured time to allow them to socialize or take care of personal needs during the Retreat. You may want to revise the packing list to include more particular items such as raincoats, and alarm clock, and extra shirts. It seems that many of the students took the packing list literally, meaning that they had to have everything on it and nothing more. A statement indicating that the list is not literal may also address this issue. You may want to revert to the original five-group format for the cookout task because it was reported that the eight-group format seemed difficult to manage. The facilitators, particularly, did not believe that the division of the tasks was fair to all groups.


23

Professor Bruck’s talk at Mount Mitchell may not have been as effective as it could have been because many students could not hear him speaking. A discussion following the tour may prove helpful so that students can participate and ask questions of Dr. Bruck. Small Group Discussions The Facilitators agreed that having two facilitators assigned to each group was the most productive format for the debriefing sessions. The Facilitators who ‘floated’ from one group to another reported feeling disconnected from the students and their conversations. The Freshmen from groups who had a ‘floating’ Facilitators reported that the ‘floaters’ were somewhat disruptive to their small group discussions. So, you may want to consider having two facilitators assigned to each discussion group. In assigning Facilitators to teams in coming years, you may want to have one experienced and one inexperienced upper-class Park facilitate the debriefing sessions for each group. In this way, the experienced facilitator can lead discussions and the inexperienced facilitator can learn how facilitation is done more readily from hands-on experience. Eight students per discussion group seems to have been an appropriate group size, allowing in-depth discussions with everyone’s participation. We recommend that this Freshman group size be maintained in coming years. The time allowed for the activity debriefing sessions seems to have been adequate as all participants reported that relevant information was effectively covered without having to rush. An exception to this may have been the discussion of the Allegory of the Cave, as many Freshmen and Facilitators reported they could have talked about this all night in their groups. In addition, you may want to add time for a debriefing session after the cookout in order to process this problem-solving activity. This might be appropriate to do as a large group during Ms. Lunsford’s Laura’s talk during the cookout activity, on the following morning, or early in the semester during the Freshman Seminar. You may want to cluster the discussions for the Tower, Wall, Swing, and Low Ropes into one discussion since these activities deal with similar skills and knowledge. In this way, the second discussion of these activities will not duplicate the first discussion. You may want the ground rules to be given as an advisory to the entire group before the first small group discussion. There is no strong need to have a separate discussion for laying ground rules because new students report that they already understood the basic ground rules and how to apply these during group discussions. Having only an advisory of ground rules will still be useful for directing discussions in case a ground rule is broken.


24

Appendices

Appendix A. Description of Retreat/Orientation Activities Appendix B. Facilitation Workshop Materials Appendix C. Survey Instruments Appendix D. Facilitator Survey Results Appendix E. Facilitator Survey Results: Open-Ended Items Appendix F. Freshman Survey Results Appendix G. Freshman Survey Results: Open-Ended Items


25

Appendix A. Description of Retreat/Orientation Activities

A.1. Retreat Schedule A.2. Description of Raleigh Experience Activities A.3. Description of Blue Ridge Assembly Experience Activities


26

A.1. Retreat Schedule Tuesday, Aug 13 12:30-2:00 Lunch and discussion. 2:30-5:00 Artspace, Women’s Center and Salvation Army Mission 5:00-6:00 Visit NC Museum of Natural Sciences 6:30-8:00 Pizza dinner with the Montagnards. Wednesday, Aug 14 7:30 Load busses 12:30 Arrival and lunch 1:15-1:45 Welcome and check-in

- Break into groups - Introductions between group and facilitator.

2:00-5:30 Facilitate scavenger hunt and other get-to-know-you activities 6:00 Dinner 7:00-8:00 Facilitate cookout project in groups. 8:00-9:00 Faculty talk by Sandy Kessler 9:00-until Break into groups to discuss the Allegory of the Cave, scholarship, service

and character based on the talk by Sandy Kessler. Thursday, Aug 15 8:00-8:45 Breakfast 9:00-12:00 Tower or low-ropes activity. 12:15-1:15 Lunch 1:30-4:30 Tower or low-ropes activity. 4:45 – 5:45 Break into groups to discuss Tower and Ropes 5:45 – 6:00 Letter-writing 6:00-8:00 Cookout (7:00 – Laura’s talk, Rafaela’s talk) 8:00-9:00 Bonfire by the lake

- Friday, Aug 16 8:00-8:30 Breakfast 8:30 Check-out 9:00 Depart for Mt. Mitchell 10:00-11:30 Tour Mt. Mitchell State Park with Bob Bruck 11:45-1:00 Working lunch 1:00 Depart for NC State 6:00 Arrive at NC State


27

A.2. Raleigh Experience Activity Descriptions Welcoming Lunch The initial group gathering of the Park Scholars Class of 2006 was held at lunch on the NC State campus on Tuesday, August 13, 2002. Following lunch, a speaker from Lebanon [???] discussed his life story. ArtSpace, Women’s Center and Mission Tours After lunch, the Class of 2006 were taken to downtown Raleigh. There, they broke into three groups, of approximately 20 students each, and toured three sites: Artspace, Women’s Center and Salvation Army Mission. At ArtSpace, students were given some background information about the center by a tour guide, and then they toured the artists studios individually or in small groups. At the Women’s Center and the Salvation Army, the Class of 2006 was introduced to various service opportunities that are available to them at each center. NC Museum of Natural Science The whole group rejoined and went to the North Carolina Museum of Natural Science. At the museum, the Deputy Mayor of Raleigh welcomed them, and the scholars toured the Presidential Portraits exhibit. Lutheran Church and Montagnard Talk/Music The Park Scholars then traveled to Christ the King Lutheran Church in Cary, NC for dinner. Following dinner, they were introduced to the story of the Montagnard people, as told by a Montagnard man living in North Carolina, and a film artist who made a documentary about the Montagnard people and their experiences.


28

A.3. Blue Ridge Assembly Activity Descriptions Upon arriving at the Blue Ridge Assembly, the scholars had lunch, checked into their rooms and then assembled in a gymnasium to begin their structured activities for the day. All scholars sat in a large circle and introduced themselves to the whole group. Laying the Ground Rules The freshmen were then assigned to groups of eight, and one or two upper-class facilitators was assigned to each group. These group assignments were consistent throughout the Blue Ridge Experience. Each facilitator took their group to a different location and had members of the group introduce themselves. In addition, this time was used to lay the ground rules for group discussions for the rest of the retreat. This activity was meant to ‘break the ice’ among group members and to introduce the debriefing discussion format in which they would participate for the remainder of the retreat. Get-to-Know-You Activities The entire Park Class of 2006 reconvened the gymnasium to take part in two additional ‘Get-to-know-you’ activities. These activities were created by the upper-class facilitators during the Facilitator Workshop. In the first activity, everyone was asked to imagine the gymnasium was a map of the United States, and the scholars had to arrange themselves by where they were born in the US. The second activity required scholars to arrange themselves in a line, alphabetically by the strangest food they had ever eaten. After these activities, the students again went out for discussion in their smaller groups. They discussed the activities of the day and participated in a Scavenger Hunt activity. Cookout Activity After dinner, the students met and were introduced to the Cookout Activity. This is a group problem-solving activity that requires individuals to work with their teams, and teams to work with other teams to accomplish a complex and ambiguous task. Each of the eight groups of students was assigned one task. The groups took approximately an hour to make plans for a cookout they were to host on the following evening. The eight group assignments were as follows: Money Shopping Set up Cooking Serving Early Entertainment Late Entertainment Clean up


29

Allegory of the Cave The Faculty Talk, by Dr. Sandy Kessler, was an interpretation and discussion of the Allegory of the Cave. All students were asked to read the Allegory of the Cave before this discussion took place. Discussion of the Allegory of the Cave Following Dr. Kessler’s presentation, the students separated into their groups and discussed the Allegory of the Cave in greater detail with their upper-class Facilitators. This activity allowed all students to participate in a significant way in the conversation, which centered on service, leadership, service, and character. Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall and Swing and Discussion of the Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall AND Swing The Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall and Swing are ‘healthy risk-taking’ activities that are intended to foster leadership and feelings of self-efficacy in those who attempt them. These activities are physically challenging and exciting. The Park Scholars spent several hours in the morning or afternoon tackling these challenges. In the evening after this event took place, facilitation groups discussed these activities in light of the challenges that await the new Park Scholars in college and in life. Low Ropes Activities and Discussion of the Low Ropes Activity The Low Ropes Activities involve a series of Leadership and Teambuilding exercises. The Class of 2006 took part in these exercises in their facilitation groups, and their facilitators participated with them. These activities took place in a field and involved games, trust activities, problem solving and ‘get-to-know-you’ type activities. Immediately after each activity, a debriefing of its purpose was facilitated jointly by the Blue Ridge Assembly staff members and the upper-class Park Facilitators. These activities were processed further during the discussion of the Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall and Swing. Letter-writing Activity Immediately before the Cookout, the Facilitators asked each member of their group to write a letter to themselves reflecting on their retreat experiences. This activity was intended to give students time to reflect on what they had learned about themselves and others in the program. Each freshman placed his or her letter in an envelope and sealed it. Envelopes were collected by the facilitators and given to a PPRD staff member. The letters will be delivered back to the Class of 2006 at the end of the Fall 2002 semester. Although this activity intended to provide formal time for reflection, it was administered poorly and the purpose of the activity was not well explained.


30

Ms. Lunsford’s Talk During the Cookout, Ms. Lunsford addressed the Class of 2006. She explained the requirements of the program, her expectations for the Class of 2006 and other general Park Scholarship program information. Campfire and S’mores Following the Cookout, a Bonfire was lit and S’mores were served. During this time, there were no structured activities. Dr. Bob Bruck’s Talk and Tour of Mount Mitchell On the final day of the Retreat, the group traveled to Mount Mitchell. Dr. Bob Bruck gave a tour of the top of the mountain and explained the significance of the mountain and the environmental phenomena that are altering its ecosystem. This activity is intended to give the incoming students a first glimpse of a Learning Lab and to provide students with additional information about North Carolina. Working Lunch at Mount Mitchell Although it was planned that the Park Scholars would meet and discuss the trip to Mount Mitchell and the Learning Labs after lunch, there were logistical problems with the restaurant that prohibited this. So, following lunch, facilitation groups met on the deck area behind the restaurant and had a discussion about these things.


31

Appendix B. Facilitation Workshop Materials This appendix contains all of the handouts and activities that the upper-class Park Facilitators received or participated in during the Facilitation Workshop. The only material presented to them that is not presented here is the actual PowerPoint presentation on which the lecture notes were provided. A copy of this presentation is available from the PPRD team upon request.

Appendix B Contents: B.1. Facilitator Team Assignments B.2. Facilitator Workshop Handouts

Workshop and Retreat Schedule

Facilitator Hints and Questions Sample Ground Rules Listening and Communication Skills Group Problem-solving Processes: Facilitators’ Tools Goals for a Good Meeting List of Desirable Characteristics of Facilitators Criterion Behavior List: Scholarship, Leadership, Character and Service

B.3. Workshop Activities

Working Lunch Activity Description Write an Ad For Yourself Activity Description Practice a Debriefing Activity

Get to Know You Activity Planning Cookout Activity Planning References for Pre-workshop Reading Assignments for Facilitators


32

B.1. Facilitator Team Assignments

Group Nickname LastName Gender Ethnic College Curr

Region pState HSName

1 Kapish Aggarwal M D COE CPU OOS FL Coral Gables Sr High School 1 Jennifer Crutchfield F A CALS BCH SPD NC Myers Park High School 1 Stacey Frederick F A COT TXM MTN NC Charles D. Owen High School 1 Candice Jacobsen F A COM BUS OOS VA Atlee High School 1 Maggie Linak F A COE CHU EPD NC Southeast Raleigh High School 1 William Lintner M A FYC FYC OOS TX Coppell Senior High School 1 Don Warren M A PAMS MA REG1 NC John T. Hoggard High School

1 Erica Wilson F A COE EU EPD NC North Carolina School of Science & Math

1 Dave Carbonell Class of 2005 1 Steve Thompson Class of 2003 2 Ben Avery M A CALS BLS CST NC Ayden-Grifton High School 2 Crystal Conway F A COM BUS OOS WA Central Catholic High School 2 Yasmin Farahi F A FYC FYC SPD NC Northwest Cabarrus High School 2 Ryan Garrett M A COE MEU EPD NC Lee Christian School 2 Emmita Lyford F A COD BLA OOS LA University Laboratory School 2 Michael Mayo M A COE CHU REG1 NC E. A. Laney School 2 Julie Smith F B CHASS LAP REG1 NC Lakewood High School 2 Ryan Thompson M A COE TEU SPD NC Ashbrook Senior High School 2 Kathleen Powers Class of 2005 2 Brian Ferris Class of 2003

3 Dani Brockington F C COD BGD SPD NC Myers Park High School

3 Nate Derbinsky M A COE CPU EPD NC Green Hope High School

3 Carrie Goodson F A CALS SMB OOS LA Louisiana School for Math, Science & the Arts

3 Robby Moorefield M A COE CHU OOS GA The Marist School 3 Holly Moye F A FYC FYC CST NC Arendell Parrott Academy 3 Brice Nielsen F A CALS BLS REG1 NC White Oak High School 3 Peter Smith M A CHASS L EPD NC Raleigh Charter High School

3 Beth Washington F A COE BEU OOS SC Chapin High School

3 Billy Askey Class of 2005 3/4 Keriann Paul Class of 2004 4 Luke Bilbro M A PAMS PY EPD NC William G. Enloe High School 4 Georgia Davis F A CNR PRT CST NC Southern Nash Senior High School 4 Steve Hussar M A CHASS LTH OOS PA Bethel Park Sr High School 4 Lindsey Jones F A CALS BCH OOS VA King William High School 4 Diana Proffit F A COE EU SPD NC Myers Park High School 4 Suzanne Rhodes F A FYC FYC CST NC Rocky Mount Senior High School 4 Ligaya Roque F D COE CHU OOS MD Beall Sr-Jr High School


33

4 Robert Sebald M A COE CPU REG1 NC Scotland High School 4 Matt Spence Class of 2004 5 Laurel Childress F A PAMS ESG REG1 NC Topsail High School 5 Julie Gentry F A COT TC MTN NC East Wilkes High School 5 Allison Hurwitz F A COD EDA OOS MD Middletown Senior High School 5 Shelton Jones M C COE CPU EPD NC Hillside High School 5 Sarah Miller F A CALS BCH REG1 NC John T. Hoggard High School 5 Tyler Pool F A FYC FYC MTN NC McDowell High School 5 Robby Richter M A COE EU OOS SC Spring Valley High School 5 James Wallace M A CHASS LAP CST NC West Carteret High School 5 Adam Rush Class of 2005

5/6 Reeves Anderson Class of 2003 6 Jeffrey Brumbaugh M A COE TEU REG1 NC John T. Hoggard High School 6 Alexis Corbitt F C CALS SMB OOS VI St Croix Educational Complex H 6 Lonnie Coulter M A FYC FYC MTN NC Fred T Foard High School 6 Brian Lopatka M A COT TC REG1 NC New Hanover High School 6 Danielle Proffit F A COE EU SPD NC Myers Park High School

6 Tamara Rucker F A PAMS MA OOS LA Louisiana School for Math, Science & the Arts

6 Walt Sharpton M A COM BUS OOS TN Montgomery Bell Academy 6 Hannah Whitaker F A CHASS ANY MTN NC Watauga High School 6 Gio Seawood Class of 2005 7 Danny Cavanaugh M A CALS BCH TRD NC John Motley Morehead High School 7 Walker Grossell M A COE BEU CST NC Junius H. Rose High School 7 Matthew Pender M A COE MEU OOS WA Jesuit High School 7 Ellison Sieck F A COD EDA CST NC John A. Holmes High School 7 Courtney Simmons F C FYC FYC OOS GA Westminster Schools The 7 Jacqueline Smith F A FYC FYC OOS FL Walter L Sickles High School 7 Kelly Smith F A CHASS PSY TRD NC Northwest Guilford High School

7 Katie Watlington F A COE CHU EPD NC North Carolina School of Science & Math

7 Mike Gusefski Class of 2004 7/8 Brian Tavener Class of 2004 8 Nichol Brewer F B COE BEU REG1 NC St. Paul's High School 8 MC Garrison F A CALS BLS EPD NC Cary High School 8 Shannon Gillespie F A FYC FYC TRD NC Northwest Guilford High School 8 Haddon Kirk M A COE CPU OOS NC McCallie School 8 Matthew Latrick M A CHASS LAP OOS MD Chesapeake Senior High School 8 Mary Milan F A CNR PRT TRD NC Southwest Guilford High School 8 Ashley Tharrington F A COT TT OOS VA Park View Senior High School

8 Jason Wong M D COE CPU CST NC North Carolina School of Science & Math

8 Anna Edens Class of 2005


34

B.2. Facilitator Handouts

Handout 1

Facilitator Training Schedule

Monday, August 12, 2002 9:00-9:45 Introduction 9:45-10:15 Discuss the retreat schedule and where they fit in. 10:15-10:45 Park Scholarships – Expectations of the program for

upperclassmen involvement 10:45-11:00 Break 11:00-11:45 What facilitation means to us 11:45-12:00 Break 12:00-12:15 Exercise: Write an ad. 12:15-12:30 Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character 12:30-1:30 Working Lunch

12:40-12:55 – Discuss the tower. 12:55-1:10 – Discuss the ropes. 1:10-1:25 – Discuss the cave. 1:30-2:15 Practice a debriefing. 2:15-2:45 Handling Challenging Situations 2:45-3:00 Break 3:00-3:45 Plan cookout task. 3:45-4:30 Getting-to-know-you tasks. 4:30-5:00 Conclusion

Retreat Schedule for Facilitators Tuesday, August 13, 2002 11:00-12:00 Meet with Bob, April and Chaffee (Sullivan or behind Nelson Hall)

- discuss this day’s activities - answer any other questions about the week or about facilitating. - Discuss roles for the day (volunteers to tour, remain at each site)

12:30-2:00 Attend and observe lunch and discussion. 2:30-5:00 Artspace, Women’s Center and Mission

- Tour these places with each group or stay in one place with all groups. 5:00-6:00 Visit NC Museum of History – one group 6:30-8:00 Pizza dinner with the Montagnards.


35

Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:30 Load busses 12:30 Arrival and lunch

- Eat with Bob and April to prepare and review for afternoon’s activities. 1:30-2:00 Welcome and check-in

- Break into groups - introductions between group and facilitator.

2:00-5:00 Facilitate scavenger hunt and other get-to-know-you activities - Videotape students

5:00 - 6:00 Free Time 6:00 Dinner 7:00-8:00 Facilitate cookout project in groups. 8:00-9:00 Allegory of the Cave – talk by Dr. Sandy Kessler 9:00-until Break into groups

- Take groups somewhere - Facilitate scholarship, service and character based on the talk by

Sandy Kessler. Thursday, Aug 15 8:00-8:45 Breakfast 9:00-12:00 Observe tower or low-ropes activity. 12:15-1:15 Lunch 1:30-4:30 Observe tower or low-ropes activity.

- Switch! 4:45 – 6:00 Break into groups

- facilitate debriefing of tower and ropes 5:45 – 6:00 Letter-writing 6:30-8:00 Cookout (7:30 – Laura’s talk, Rafaela’s talk) 8:30 Bonfire by the lake 9:00-10:00 Meet with Bob and April

- talk about what you’ve learned and what you would like to do differently

- review next day’s activities and prepare for Bob Bruck’s talk Friday, Aug 16 8:00-8:30 Breakfast 8:30 Check-out 9:00 Depart for Mt. Mitchell 10:00-11:25 Tour Mt. Mitchell State Park with Bob Bruck

- talk about how leaders make decisions - introduce learning lab concept

11:30-12:15 Lunch 12:13 – 1:00 Facilitate tour of Mt. Mitchell and introduction of learning lab 1:00 Depart for NC State 6:00 Arrive at NC State


36

Handout 2

Facilitator Hints and Questions Facilitating Hints:

Keep out of the limelight; don’t tell them what you think they should learn. If a question is working, keep asking it over and over. Respect and use silences – be still and wait. Help those who dominate be more sensitive other others’ need to participate, and

those who tend to withdraw to express themselves. Do not be threatened if someone questions the value of the activity itself – accept

it as an insight and ask others what they think about it. Affirm everyone who contributes, and state your understanding of what they said. Remember your active listening and communication skills. Avoid giving advice.

Facilitating Questions:

What happened in the experience? What were your greatest frustrations/successes? What was the principal challenge? Did you overcome it? Did what you were thinking change during the experience? What real life situations did the experience remind you of? What does the experience suggest about what to do when you are in a real life

situation like this one? What does____ mean? What was missing from the experience? What will be your next important real-life experience where you might apply your

learnings from this one? What experiences do you want to have in that situation? What can you do to increase the probability of having such experiences? What is the single most important thing you learned from this experience?


37

Handout 3

Sample Ground Rules

Test assumptions and inferences.

Share all relevant information.

Focus on one’s interests rather than positions.

Be specific and use examples.

Agree on the meanings of words used in discussions.

Explain reasons for one’s statements, questions and actions.

Feel free to disagree with others.

Make statements and ask for questions and comments.

Work together to test disagreements and solutions.

Discuss issues that are considered controversial.

Keep discussions focused.

Don’t distract others or take cheap shots.

Make sure that everyone participates in all phases of the activities.

Make decisions by consensus.

Critique oneself and the group.


38

Handout 4 Listening and Communicating Skills

Listening: Attending Skills: A posture of Involvement Appropriate body motion Eye contact Nondistracting environment Following Skills: Door openers Minimal Encourages Infrequent questions Attentive silence Reflecting Skills: Paraphrasing Reflecting feelings Reflecting meanings Summative reflections Communicating: Judging: Criticizing Name-calling Diagnosing Praising evaluatively Sending Solutions: Ordering Threatening Moralizing Excessive/Inappropriate questioning Advising Avoiding the Other’s Concerns: Diverting Logical argument Reassuring


39

Handout 5

GROUP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS: FACILITATOR’S TOOLS

Perceptions: acceptance by the group to address a problem

• Ask group members what they are seeing, experiencing and feeling. • Encourage group members to listen attentively to each other. • Assure people that it is OK to raise problems. • Encourage group members to accept that different people see things differently. • Ask the group to discuss the worst, best and most probably outcomes if they

addressed the issue.

Analysis: group understanding of the problem • Ask for details about the situation: who, what, when, where, how, and why. • Ask the group to clarify the needs of the different people affected by the situation. • Invite the group to break the problem into smaller parts. • Ask the group to diagram the problem. • Ask the group to clarify key terms. • Ask: What is keeping the problem from getting any worse? From getting better? • Ask if any kinds of experts could provide useful insights.

Definition: a common goal for improving the situation • Ask if anyone can state the problem as an open-ended question. • Encourage the group to define the problem in terms of people’s needs and

interests. • Ask if anyone can state the problem as a question that bridges all the main

concerns: “How to satisfy X and Y while also satisfying Z.” • Ask if anyone can suggest an over-arching goal that everyone would work

toward.

Options: alternative ways to reach the group’s goal • Ask the group to research what others have done to achieve similar goals. • Encourage the group to solicit ideas from people with no stake in the issue. • Ask if any experts could provide useful insights. • Ask the group to brainstorm. Explain and enforce the rules:

o Don’t judge anyone’s ideas. o Be free (unfettered, crazy, funny, creative) with ideas. o Build on each other’s ideas. o Make up lots of ideas.


40

Evaluation: group preference for some options over others

• Ask the group to compare their options to their goal. • Ask the group to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the options. • Ask the group to rank-order their options. • Take a non-binding straw poll. • Ask the group what standards usually apply in similar situations. • Ask the group to generate and apply new criteria to fit the particular situation.

Decision Making: group commitment

• Encourage group members to combine alternatives instead of choosing. • Ask of group members can improve any of the alternatives to make them more

acceptable. • Ask group members to create a new alternative from the strengths of the existing

options. • Ask group members if they can eliminate the lease popular alternatives. • Ask if all group members would abide by the outcome of a vote. • Ask if the group can delegate the decision (to a committee, expert, or higher

authority). • Suggest that the group return to an earlier stage of the problem solving process.


41

Handout 6

GOALS FOR A GOOD MEETING

From M. Doyle & D. Straus, How to make meetings work. (1976). New York: Jove Books. Participants concentrate on one subject at a time:

• Get group agreement in advance on desired outcomes and agenda. • Keep agenda in view during the meeting. • Get permissions in advance to keep the discussion focused. • Keep record of meeting discussion in full view of group. • Summarize and confirm agreements and next steps. • Remind group of the subject it agreed to discuss. • Ask group to defer new issues.

Participants follow a clear and agreed upon process:

• Get permission in advance to keep group using a clear and agreed upon process.

• Get agreement on a way to proceed before proceeding. • Remind group of the process it agreed to use. • Try one approach; if it doesn’t work then try something else. • Educated the group about the process. • Offer a suggestion on how to proceed.

Conversation is open and balanced:

• Set up the room: all meeting participants on one level; participants can make eye contact and hear each other speak.

• Get group agreement on ground rules: e.g. “Listen attentively,” “One person speaks at a time,” “Share the floor.”

• Keep the ground rules in view during the meeting. • Get permission in advance to help foster an open and balanced conversation. • Model excellent listening skills. • Be positive to encourage participation. • Thank people for contributing ideas. • Establish a queue when several people want to speak. • Ask for reactions to people’s ideas. • Go around the room asking each person to speak. • Ask the quieter people what they think. • Ask people who speak a lot to give others a chance. • Float a trial balloon: “I haven’t heard anyone mention… yet, is that relevant

here?”


42

Roles are clearly defined and agreed upon:

• Clarify roles in advance of meetings. • Include role definitions as part of ground rules. • Get permission to keep people in their roles. • Ask the group to establish a process for rotating some roles. • Offer reminders when people step out of role. • Ask the group to deal with questions about roles when they arise.

Participants’ feelings and ideas are taken into consideration:

• Calm yourself. • Model courtesy. • Explicit and agreed-upon ground rules:

o “It is OK to disagree, but do so respectfully.” o “Attack the problem, not the person.” o Understand before disagreeing.”

• Get permission to enforce the ground rules. • Acknowledge people’s feelings when they are expressed. • Diffuse intense emotions by looking at the speaker, accepting their feelings as

legitimate, paraphrasing to ensure you understand. Do not try to minimize, joke, or resolve the feelings.

• Listen to and watch the group for any evidence of discomfort. • Offer your perceptions of the group’s moods/dynamics. • Ask the group to deal with questions about safety and respect when they arise. • Call for breaks/caucuses.


43

Handout 7

List of Desirable Characteristics of Facilitators

Ability to improvise Accountability Assertiveness Balance Belief in participants’ value Confidence Consistency between word and deed Continuous Learning Creativity Efficiency Emotional detachment Emotional Resiliency Empathetic listening skills Enthusiasm Flexibility Impartiality Inclusiveness Integrity Interpersonal intelligence Intuitive and rational techniques Long-term focus Neutrality Objectivity Open-mindedness Playfulness Preference for diversity Process expertise Qualitative and quantitative techniques Realism Respect Self-awareness Self-esteem Self-sufficiency Sense of humor Sense of priorities Service mentality Simplicity Sincerity

Spirit of adventure Technical expertise

Tolerance for ambiguity Tolerance for lack of closure

Truth Truthfulness

Versatility Willingness to share responsibility


44

Handout 8

Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character

Ever wonder what exactly we mean by Scholarship, Leadership, Service and

Character? Over the years, the most successful Park Scholars have excelled in all of these areas. We’ve developed the information below to help you better understand how you too can get the most out of your experiences as a Park Scholar.

Scholarship 1. Perform Academically

Get good grades • The official rule is that students meet the following minimum GPA

requirements: 2.5 for 1st year, 2.75 for 2nd year, 2.9 for 3rd year, and 3.0 for 4th year. However, most students will excel beyond these minimum requirements.

Make appropriate progress towards degree • Take the required 15 hours per semester for a total of 120 semester

hours over 8 semesters.

2. Manage Personal and Professional Development

Explore outside learning experiences • Seek, apply for, and participate in research, special programs,

projects, or conferences outside of class that will enhance learning and goal achievement.

Pursue broad training in area of interest • Take a variety of classes that support long term goals

State career objectives clearly • Write a well thought-out personal plan of development (PPD) that

outlines specific plans to clarify and reach career goals. Develop resources

• Find and work with faculty mentors who can assist in reaching and/or defining goals

Display and cultivate special interests and aptitudes


45

3. Think Critically Develop intellectual curiosity (a burning desire to learn)

• Ask questions and explore new interests, talents, and ideas Make connections

• Integrate existing knowledge with new ideas • Consider alternative perspectives

Demonstrate intellectual awareness and perseverance • Be aware of when you do not know something and take steps to learn • Ask questions in class • Ask for help from appropriate sources

Leadership 1. Build Leadership Skills

Listen and communicate well Develop diplomatic and cooperative relationships with and between others Handle conflict appropriately and appreciate differences Be comfortable in novel or unstructured social settings and modify behavior

depending on the situation Take risks and champion new ideas Balance personal goals with those of the group

Think big and be able to negotiate the world Persuade and encourage others

2. Take Leadership Roles Lead formally, by pursuing and accepting formal leadership roles Lead informally, by influencing and supporting others and setting a good example

Service 1. Demonstrate a commitment to public service

Participate in meaningful service activities every semester Work with others to make a positive difference in their lives Develop skills needed to serve on a board of a nonprofit group upon graduation View service as a personally rewarding experience


46

2. Heightened awareness of community needs

Be able to identify a community need and develop a plan to work with community members, to address the need.

Character 1. Develop Self-awareness

Know your strengths and weaknesses Understand the ramifications of choices and manage self and resources well Find balance in activities, engage in activities “just for fun,” and engage in

physical activity

2. Be Responsible Know the rules, assess situations, and use good judgment

3. Integrity Be Honest

• Do not cheat or steal or help others do so and be true to word Be Conscientious

• Go out of the way to deliver products as promised Stand up for values and for what is right

• Assist fellow students, or others, who are being badly-treated

4. Be Adaptable and Resilient Profit from experience

• Recognize the lessons from difficult situations • Show improvement over time in areas of weakness

Develop coping skills • Do not fall apart when faced with failure, difficulty, or change • Regroup with minimal disruption and distress • Use a social network • Handle separation from family appropriately

Tolerate ambiguity

5. Presence Have self–confidence

• Adhere to views and values and be able to back them up Be sincere, well mannered, and humble Be sociable

• Get along well with others • Look out for classmates

Show respect for self and others


47

B.3. Workshop Activities

Working Lunch: Planning to Debrief the Tower, Ropes and Allegory of the Cave

Objective: To get facilitators to work in their teams to prepare for debriefing three retreat activities, the Tower, Ropes and Allegory of the Cave.

Time: 1 hour Instructions: Lunch will be served at 12:30. Each of the 4 groups (composed of two intact teams) will spread out in the room so that they have privacy to work through these activities. Each group will be instructed to take 15 minutes to discuss each of the following activities that they will have to debrief/facilitate on the retreat. To keep them on schedule, they will be reminded when to switch the topic of conversation to the next retreat activity. The schedule is as follows: 12:40 – 12:55 Discuss the Tower 12:55 – 1:10 Discuss the Ropes 1:10 – 1:25 Discuss the Cave The groups should know that after lunch, each group will have to run a practice debriefing in front of the whole group in order to practice their new facilitation skills. In order to do this, the groups will most likely want to consider (among other questions) the following:

- What Park scholar criteria are we trying to demonstrate through each of the activities?

- What sort of questions may you want to ask to prompt the group to make links to these criteria?

- Do the questions address all three levels of debriefing discussed earlier? - What problems might arise? How will you handle these problems?


48

Write an Advertisement for Your Facilitation Group Objective: To identify desirable characteristics of facilitators Time: 5 - 10 minutes Debriefing Time: 5 - 10 minutes Instructions: 1. Form 4 Groups: Group 1 = Team 1 + Team 2 Group 2 = Team 3 + Team 4 Group 3 = Team 5 + Team 6 Group 4 = Team 7 + Team 8 2. Tell them: Pretend that your group is a professional facilitation team. You haven’t had work in awhile and really need to get facilitation work to pay the bills. You have 5 minutes to write a brief advertisement for your group to sell your services as professional freelance facilitators. Please refer to the Handout ‘List of Desirable Characteristics of Facilitators’ for information that may be helpful to you in writing your ad. 3. After 5 minutes, ask each team to read their ads to the rest of the team. 4. Debriefing: for remaining time, ask the whole group questions such as the following:

1. What factors did you emphasize in writing your ad?

a. Why did you choose these factors? 2. What factors did you ignore?

a. Are these factors less important? b. Why?

3. Are there any important characteristics that are not on the list? 5. At the end of the activity (15 minutes total), collect the facilitators’ advertisements. They won’t know it, but these will be used again later (following their debriefing exercise after lunch.) Practice a Debriefing Activity Objective: To provide an opportunity to practice debriefing. Each group will take a

turn debriefing one of the activities they prepared for during the working lunch.


49

Part 1 – Practice Debriefing

Practice debriefing #1 1:30 – 1:35 One group will volunteer to go first. Two members of this group will volunteer to co-facilitate a mock debriefing of the Tower climbing exercise. They will work together during the debriefing. A second group will act as the participants in the tower debriefing group. Everyone else present will observe the debriefing. Practice debriefing #2 1:35 – 1:40 A second group will volunteer. A single member of this group will facilitate a mock debriefing of the Ropes activity. A second group will act as participants in the ropes debriefing. Everyone else will observe the debriefing. Practice debriefing #3 1:45 – 1:50 A third group will volunteer. One or two members of this group will debrief the allegory of the cave. A second group will act as the participants in the debriefing. Everyone else will observe the debriefing. Practice debriefing #4 1:50 – 1:55 The last group will volunteer. For this group, we need sleeper volunteers to act as ‘problems’ – someone that is obviously disengaged and someone who over-participates. The group who is facilitating should not be aware of this situation. This group will choose which of the three activities they wish to debrief and they may use one or two facilitators. A second group with two secret ‘problem’ volunteers will act as the participants in this debriefing session. Everyone else will observe the debriefing.

Part 2 - Debriefing the Debriefing 1:55 – 2:15 Pull out the advertisements for that each group wrote in the earlier “Write an Ad” activity. Remind each group that they had written an ad for their facilitation services. You may want to read each ad aloud. Ask each group questions such as:

- Did you deliver what you had promised? Why or Why Not? - If you were to have it to do over, how would you rewrite your ad? - What insight did you gain from this activity? - What did you learn from others that will be useful to you on the retreat?


50

Get to Know You Activities

On Wednesday of the retreat, the facilitators will have from 2:30 until 5:00 pm to facilitate “Get to Know You” exercises. Objectives: To develop plans for two “Get to Know You” activities and to make plans

for facilitating and debriefing these activities. - A schedule for these activities must be developed. (30 minutes) - To share plans for these activities will everyone else, and make

additional plans for gathering supplies, etc. (15 minutes) Groups: The facilitators will form two large groups (one of 6 and one of 7 members)

- One group will be assigned to plan the Sort X activity. - One group will be assigned to plan the Scavenger Hunt Activity.

The following are just ideas that are open to change should the groups come up with ‘better’ activities that meet the objectives.

Sort X

This activity, or something similar to it, will be run first. The activity will involve all 64 Parks at the same time. Basically, in a large room or outside, the Parks will be asked to sort themselves into a line based on criteria (to be determined). For instance, you may want to ask them to sort themselves by the location of their birth from East to West. This will mean that all Parks need to communicate with each other in order to line themselves up properly. Then, the Parks will be asked to line themselves up based on some other criteria, such as date of birth, and so on for several rounds. This can be done for many criteria, and the criteria can be more creative and fun than those mentioned here. In fact, we hope that the criteria will be fun and creative. After the final sort, the Parks will be asked to count off by 8. All 1’s will form a group, all 2’s will form a group, etc., so that there will be a total of 8 groups. These groups will be joined by a facilitator, or facilitators, for the Scavenger Hunt part of the day. Plans for debriefing this activity should also be made.

Scavenger Hunt

The facilitators for this group should start their planning from the time the groups are formed based on the final round of the Sort X activity.


51

A creative way should be designed for the members of each group to learn something interesting about all of the other members assigned to that group. They may be asked to share something funny, or interesting about themselves. Or, they may want to ask each other questions in turn, or the facilitator may prompt the whole group to answer interesting questions. Then, each member of the group will be asked to go out on a Scavenger Hunt, and find or make something that represents every other member of the group. You may want to have them work in teams, or individually. You may have materials for them to create something, or plan for them to go out and find something. Its up to you. Plans for debriefing this activity should also be made. Sharing Plans

Following the planning session, the entire group will reconvene and each group will present their planned activities to the other group. The Sort X plans will be shared first. Additional plans for gathering the materials and making other arrangements necessary for the conduct of the games must be made. Cookout Activity

15 minutes – Describe the activity Describe the purposes of the cookout activity

To give new Parks an opportunity to engage in collaborative problem-solving To develop teamwork/leadership skills Dinner!

Describe the parameters of the activity

Game rules Ground rules & limits (money, transportation, facilitator roles for the actual activity, etc. should be discussed)

Assign task at hand to the facilitators

Design the activity for 8 groups Anticipate facilitation needs Anticipate debriefing needs


52

Reading Assignment References

Smith, C. (2000). Effective facilitation. Manage (Feb/Mar), 16 – 17.

Steinwachs, B. (1992). How to facilitate a debriefing. Simulation and Gaming, 23 (2), 186 – 196.


53

Appendix C. Survey Instruments C.1. Facilitator Retreat Evaluation C.2. Freshman Retreat Evaluation


54

Park Scholarships CLASS OF 2006 RETREAT: FACILITATOR EVALUATION FORM We would appreciate your feedback on the Group Facilitator Workshop to aid us in planning it for next year. Please fill this evaluation out and add any comments on the reverse side. This evaluation is anonymous, so we appreciate your candor in answering the questions below.

INSTRUCTIONS: Please use the following scale for questions 1-22:

1 .............................2 ............................ 3.............................4 ............................ 5

Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Agree Strongly Disagree Nor Disagree Agree

A. The purpose of the training was to orient you to debriefing and facilitation. Please rate the

items below with regard to accomplishing the above purpose. 1. Handouts............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 2. Articles .............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 3. Lectures. ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 4. Planning sessions............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 5. Practice sessions ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6. Presenters........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 7. Lunch................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 8. Evening facilitator meetings at Camp ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 B. The purpose of the retreat Wednesday through Friday was to help the new Parks get to know

each other, learn basic team-building skills, and get oriented to the expectations of the Park Scholarships Program and NCSU. Please rate the items below with regard to how well you think they accomplished this purpose

9. First group meeting with facilitators “laying ground rules”... ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 10. Introductory “Get to Know Each Other” Activities .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 11. Definitions of Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character. ...................... 1 2 3 4 5 12. Low Ropes Activities. ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 13. Group discussion of the Low Ropes Activities ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 14. Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 15. Group Discussion of the Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing....................... 1 2 3 4 5 16. Cookout Planning Project ……………………................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 17. Campfire and S'mores……………………........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 18. Ms. Lunsford’s talk…………………….. ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 19. Allegory of the Cave – Dr. Kessler’s talk ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5


55

20. Group discussion of the Allegory of the Cave……………………................... 1 2 3 4 5 INSTRUCTIONS: Please use the following scale for questions 21-27 below:

1 .............................2 ............................ 3.............................4 ............................ 5 Very Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied Satisfied Very

Dissatisfied Nor Dissatisfied Satisfied C. Please rate the items below to indicate your general level of satisfaction with each: 21. Group Facilitation Workshop ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 22. Your retreat responsibilities………… .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 23. Being a facilitator.. ............................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 24. Size of the group you were facilitating.............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 25. Retreat schedule. ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 26. Impact on new Parks…………………….. ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 27. Amount of time spent in group discussions ...................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 D. Please complete the following with your comments: 28. Did you feel that the facilitator workshop, on Monday Aug 12, adequately prepared you for your retreat responsibilities? Please explain. _____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

29. If you were planning next years’ retreat, what would you do differently?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

30. Would you be willing to train next years’ retreat facilitators? (circle one) Yes No Maybe


56

31. What do you think were the strengths and weaknesses of the group discussions of the activities?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

39. Other comments?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________


57

Park Scholarships

CLASS OF 2006 FRESHMAN RETREAT EVALUATION We would appreciate your feedback on the retreat to aid us in planning it for next year. Please fill this evaluation out and add any comments on the reverse side. This evaluation is anonymous, so we appreciate your candor in answering the questions below.

INSTRUCTIONS: Please use the following scale for questions 1-22:

1 .............................2 ............................ 3.............................4 ............................ 5

Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Agree Strongly Disagree Nor Disagree Agree

E. The purpose of the retreat on Tuesday was to orient you to the campus, Raleigh and various

service opportunities. Please rate the items below with regard to accomplishing the above purpose.

28. Welcoming Lunch.. ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 29. Raleigh Rescue Mission Tour ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 30. ArtSpace. ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 31. Women’s Center tour.. ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 32. NC Museum of Natural Sciences tour.….......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 33. Lutheran Family Services and Montagnard talk/music ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 F. The purpose of the retreat Wednesday through Friday was designed to help you get to know

each other, learn basic team-building skills, and orient you to the expectations of the Park Scholarships Program and the University. Please rate the items below with regard to accomplishing the above purpose.

34. First group meeting with facilitators “laying ground rules”... ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 35. Introductory “Get to Know Each Other” Activities .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 36. Definitions of Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character. ...................... 1 2 3 4 5 37. Low Ropes Activities. ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 38. Group discussion of the Low Ropes Activities ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 39. Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 40. Group Discussion of the Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing....................... 1 2 3 4 5 41. Cookout Planning Project…………………….................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 42. Campfire and S’mores …………………….. .................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 43. Ms. Lunsford’s talk…………………….. ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 44. Allegory of the Cave – Dr. Kessler’s talk ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 45. Group discussion of the Allegory of the Cave……………………................... 1 2 3 4 5


58

INSTRUCTIONS: Please use the following scale for questions 19 - 29 below:

1 .............................2 ............................ 3.............................4 ............................ 5 Very Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied Satisfied Very

Dissatisfied Nor Dissatisfied Satisfied G. Please rate the items below to indicate your general level of satisfaction with each: 46. Retreat overall ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 47. Packing list………… ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 48. Check-in process.. ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 49. Meals at the YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly. ..................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 50. Cookout ............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 51. Free time at YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly …………………….. .................... 1 2 3 4 5 52. Letter-writing activity........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 53. Upper-class Park facilitator for your group…………………….. ..................... 1 2 3 4 5 54. Professor Bruck’s talk at Mt. Mitchell………………….. ............................... 1 2 3 4 5 55. Discussion Following Professor Bruck’s talk at Mt. Mitchell .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 56. Lunch at Mt. Mitchell State Park Restaurant …………………........................ 1 2 3 4 5 H. Please complete the following with your comments: 57. How did the retreat change the way you think about Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character? ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 31. Please describe your favorite part(s) of the Retreat. _____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________


59

32. If you were planning next years’ retreat, what would you do differently?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

33. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the group discussions of the activities?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

34. Other comments?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________


60

Appendix D. Facilitator Survey Results For each of the following tables, the response format for all questions ranged from 1 (low) to 5 (high). If none of the respondents endorsed a particular response category for a question, it is not presented in the table. Section I: Facilitator Workshop Effectiveness

The purpose of the training was to orient you to debriefing and facilitation. Please rate the items below with regard to accomplishing the above purpose.

Average Rating

Handouts Articles Lectures Planning

Sessions Practice Sessions Presenters Working

Lunch

Evening Facilitator Meeting

on Retreat

N 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 13

Mean 3.77 3.92 4.00 4.00 3.23 4.08 2.50 4.31

Std. Deviation 1.01 .86 .91 .91 1.09 .86 .90 .63

Handouts

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Disagree 2 15.4 15.4 15.4

Neither Agree Nor Disagree 2 15.4 15.4 30.8

Agree 6 46.2 46.2 76.9

Strongly Agree 3 23.1 23.1 100.0

Articles


Disagree 1 7.7 7.7 7.7


Agree 7 53.8 53.8 76.9



61

Lectures


Disagree 1 7.7 7.7 7.7


Agree 6 46.2 46.2 69.2


Planning Sessions


Disagree 1 7.7 7.7 7.7


Agree 6 46.2 46.2 69.2


Practice Sessions


Disagree 4 30.8 30.8 30.8


Agree 3 23.1 23.1 84.6


Presenters


Disagree 1 7.7 7.7 7.7


Agree 7 53.8 53.8 69.2



62

Working Lunch

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent Cumulative

Percent

Strongly Disagree 1 7.7 8.3 8.3

Disagree 6 46.2 50.0 58.3


Agree 2 15.4 16.7 100.0

Total 12 92.3 100.0

Evening Facilitator Meeting on Retreat



Agree 7 53.8 53.8 61.5



63

Section II: Blue Ridge Assembly Experience Effectiveness The purpose of the retreat Wednesday through Friday was to help the new Parks get to know each other, learn basic team-building skills, and get oriented to the expectations of the Park Scholarships Program and NCSU. Please rate the items below with regard to how well you think they accomplished this purpose.

First Group Meeting with Facilitators "Laying the

Ground Rules"

Introductory Get-to-Know-You Activities

Criteria Definitions of Scholarship, Leadership,

Character and Service

Low Ropes Activities

Discussion of the Low Ropes

Activities

Alpine Tower,

Climbing Wall, Swing

N 13 13 12 13 13 13

Mean 3.00 4.23 3.67 4.46 3.69 4.69

Std. Deviation .91 .73 .65 .66 1.03 .48

Group Discussion of

the Alpine Tower,


Cookout Planning Project

Campfire and

S'Mores

Ms. Lunsford's

talk

Allegory of the Cave -

Dr. Kessler's

talk

Group discussion of the Allegory of the Cave

N 13 13 12 13 12 13

Mean 4.31 4.23 3.67 4.15 4.58 4.92

Std. Deviation .75 .60 1.37 .55 .67 .28

First Group Meeting with Facilitators "Laying the Ground Rules"


Disagree 4 30.8 30.8 30.8


Agree 2 15.4 15.4 92.3Valid



64

Introductory Get-to-Know-You Activities



Agree 6 46.2 46.2 61.5


Criteria Definitions of Scholarship, Leadership, Character and Service



Agree 6 46.2 50.0 91.7





Agree 5 38.5 38.5 46.2


Discussion of the Low Ropes Activities


Disagree 2 15.4 15.4 15.4


Agree 5 38.5 38.5 76.9



65

Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing


Agree 4 30.8 30.8 30.8


Group Discussion of the Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing



Agree 5 38.5 38.5 53.8


Total 13 100.0 100.0

Cookout Planning Project Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Agree 8 61.5 61.5 69.2


Campfire and S'Mores




Agree 6 46.2 50.0 75.0



66

Ms. Lunsford's talk



Agree 9 69.2 69.2 76.9


Allegory of the Cave - Dr. Kessler's talk



Agree 3 23.1 25.0 33.3




Agree 1 7.7 7.7 7.7

Strongly Agree 12 92.3 92.3 100.0


67

Section III: Facilitator Satisfaction Please rate the items below to indicate your general level of satisfaction with each:

Item Averages

Group Facilitation Workshop

Your retreat responsibilities

Being a facilitator

Size of the group you

were facilitating

Retreat schedule

Impact on new Parks

Amount of time spent in group

discussions

N 13 13 13 13 13 13 13

Mean 3.92 4.38 4.69 4.54 4.23 4.08 4.31

Std. Deviation .76 .51 .48 1.13 .73 .28 .63

Group Facilitation Workshop Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Dissatisfied 1 7.7 7.7 7.7

Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied 1 7.7 7.7 15.4

Satisfied 9 69.2 69.2 84.6

Very Satisfied 2 15.4 15.4 100.0

Your retreat responsibilities Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Satisfied 8 61.5 61.5 61.5


Being a facilitator Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Satisfied 4 30.8 30.8 30.8



68

Size of the group you were facilitating Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Very Dissatisfied 1 7.7 7.7 7.7

Satisfied 2 15.4 15.4 23.1

Very Satisfied 10 76.9 76.9 100.0

Retreat schedule Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Satisfied 6 46.2 46.2 61.5


Impact on new Parks Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Satisfied 12 92.3 92.3 92.3


Amount of time spent in group discussions Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Satisfied 7 53.8 53.8 61.5



69

Appendix E. Facilitator Survey Results: Open-Ended Items Did you feel that the facilitator workshop, on Monday Aug 12, adequately prepared you for your retreat responsibilities? Please explain. Practice sessions would have been better if facilitators had taken them

more seriously. All guidelines and ground rules were clear. Our role in the cookout preparation was vague. Try to shorten workshop time. Helped me understand debriefing and facilitating. Could have used more applied training. Helped in brainstorming ideas for group discussions. Needed more feedback during the practice session.

If you were planning next years’ retreat, what would you do differently? Encourage others to let the freshman be the center of attention, not the

facilitators. The Raleigh experience was very boring. Hand-pick facilitators whose personalities are more fit for this role. Give facilitators specific questions to ask. Facilitators should be allowed to move-in early. Recruit facilitators earlier so that they can plan ahead to help. Add a discussion session for the cookout and time for a shower before the

cookout. Get-to-know-you activity was great, but the first session was still a little

awkward. Needed more time for explaining and planning the cookout. No floaters – I couldn’t get fully involved in the discussion.

Would you be willing to train next years’ retreat facilitators? Yes: 6 responses No: 0 responses Maybe: 6 responses


70

What do you think were the strengths and weaknesses of the group discussions of the activities? Strengths: The freshmen really enjoyed getting to know the upperclassmen. The sessions went better than planned. Strategically placed. Flowed well with facilitator help. Great discussions! Laying down the ground rules at the beginning and reminding everyone of

the agenda for the debriefing proved to be successful. Small groups reinforces the activity. Even when discussions got off topic, they were still productive.

Weaknesses: The cave discussion didn’t transfer well. Not all of the debriefings took place right after the activity. Students wanted rotating groups so that they could have more exposure

to more people. Facilitators need to refrain from giving advice. Need more time for discussion. Sometimes people would withdraw more than others. We sometimes had to explain concepts that seemed obvious to the

Freshmen; trivializing the message. It was difficult to not jump-in on the conversations. Easy to get off topic.

Other comments. I think that having facilitators helped the freshmen grasp the concepts

from the activities better than our class did. I learned quite a bit. I had a great time.


71

Appendix F. Freshman Survey Results For each of the following tables, the response format for all questions ranged from 1 (low) to 5 (high). If none of the respondents endorsed a particular response category for a question, it is not presented in the table. Section I: Raleigh Experience Effectiveness The purpose of the retreat on Tuesday was to orient you to the campus, Raleigh and various service opportunities. Please rate the items below with regard to accomplishing the above purpose.

Item Averages

Welcoming Lunch

Raleigh Rescue Mission

Tour

ArtSpace. Women's Center tour

NC Museum of Natural

Sciences tour

Lutheran Family Services and Montagnard talk/music

N 57 57 57 57 52 58

Mean 3.65 4.12 3.89 3.88 3.71 4.12

Std. Deviation .94 .80 .99 .98 .85 .70

Welcoming Lunch



Disagree 6 10.3 10.5 12.3


Agree 27 46.6 47.4 84.2


Raleigh Rescue Mission Tour Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent



Agree 28 48.3 49.1 66.7

Strongly Agree 19 32.8 33.3 100.0


72

ArtSpace. Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Disagree 2 3.4 3.5 7.0


Agree 23 39.7 40.4 70.2

Strongly Agree 17 29.3 29.8 100.0

Women's Center tour Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Disagree 5 8.6 8.8 10.5


Agree 25 43.1 43.9 71.9

Strongly Agree 16 27.6 28.1 100.0

NC Museum of Natural Sciences tour Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Disagree 3 5.2 5.8 5.8


Agree 20 34.5 38.5 80.8

Strongly Agree 10 17.2 19.2 100.0


73

Lutheran Family Services and Montagnard talk/music


Disagree 1 1.7 1.7 1.7


Agree 32 55.2 55.2 70.7

Strongly Agree 17 29.3 29.3 100.0


74

Section II: Blue Ridge Assembly Effectiveness The purpose of the retreat Wednesday through Friday was designed to help you get to know each other, learn basic team-building skills, and orient you to the expectations of the Park Scholarships Program and the University. Please rate the items below with regard to accomplishing the above purpose.

Item Averages

First group meeting

with facilitators

"laying ground rules"...

Introductory "Get to Know Each Other"

Activities

Definitions of Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character

Low Ropes

Activities

Group discussion of the Low

Ropes Activities

Alpine Tower,


Group discussion

of the Allegory of the Cave

N 58 58 57 58 58 58 58

Mean 3.48 4.19 4.11 4.52 4.12 4.83 4.50

Std. Deviation 1.03 .74 .72 .78 .77 .42 .73

Cookout Planning Project

Campfire and

S'mores

Ms. Lunsford's

talk

Allegory of the

Cave - Dr. Kessler's

talk

Group discussion

of the Allegory of the Cave

N 58 58 58 58 58

Mean 4.28 4.07 4.60 4.43 4.50

Std. Deviation .83 .83 .56 .68 .73


75

First group meeting with facilitators "laying ground rules"...



Disagree 7 12.1 12.1 15.5


Agree 19 32.8 32.8 82.8

Strongly Agree 10 17.2 17.2 100.0

Introductory "Get to Know Each Other" Activities


Disagree 2 3.4 3.4 3.4


Agree 31 53.4 53.4 65.5

Strongly Agree 20 34.5 34.5 100.0

Definitions of Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Agree 27 46.6 47.4 68.4

Strongly Agree 18 31.0 31.6 100.0



Disagree 2 3.4 3.4 3.4


Agree 14 24.1 24.1 34.5

Strongly Agree 38 65.5 65.5 100.0


76

Group discussion of the Low Ropes Activities


Disagree 2 3.4 3.4 3.4


Agree 29 50.0 50.0 67.2

Strongly Agree 19 32.8 32.8 100.0

Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing



Agree 8 13.8 13.8 15.5

Strongly Agree 49 84.5 84.5 100.0

Group Discussion of the Alpine Tower, Climbing Wall, Swing



Agree 26 44.8 44.8 55.2

Strongly Agree 26 44.8 44.8 100.0

Cookout Planning Project Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Disagree 2 3.4 3.4 3.4


Agree 20 34.5 34.5 51.7

Strongly Agree 28 48.3 48.3 100.0


77

Campfire and S'mores


Disagree 2 3.4 3.4 3.4


Agree 24 41.4 41.4 65.5

Strongly Agree 20 34.5 34.5 100.0

Ms. Lunsford's talk



Agree 19 32.8 32.8 36.2

Strongly Agree 37 63.8 63.8 100.0

Allegory of the Cave - Dr. Kessler's talk


Disagree 1 1.7 1.7 1.7


Agree 24 41.4 41.4 48.3

Strongly Agree 30 51.7 51.7 100.0



Disagree 1 1.7 1.7 1.7


Agree 16 27.6 27.6 37.9

Strongly Agree 36 62.1 62.1 100.0


78

Section III: Satisfaction with the Retreat Please rate the items below to indicate your general level of satisfaction with each:

Item Averages

Retreat overall

Packing list

Check-in process

Meals at the YMCA Blue

Ridge Assembly

Cookout

Free time at YMCA Blue

Ridge Assembly

Letter-writing activity

N 58 58 58 58 57 58 58

Mean 4.07 3.62 4.66 4.69 3.68 4.12 3.45

Std. Deviation .67 .75 .61 .50 .98 .65 .94

Upper-class Park facilitator for your group

Professor Bruck's talk

at Mt. Mitchell

Discussion Following

Professor Bruck's talk at Mt. Mitchell

Lunch at Mt. Mitchell State

Park Restaurant

N 56 58 58 58

Mean 3.45 4.22 4.31 4.29

Std. Deviation .87 .73 .65 .75

Retreat overall Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent



Satisfied 35 60.3 60.3 75.9

Very Satisfied 14 24.1 24.1 100.0

Total 58 100.0 100.0


79

Packing list Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent



Satisfied 27 46.6 46.6 89.7


Total 58 100.0 100.0

Check-in process




Satisfied 15 25.9 25.9 29.3

Very Satisfied 41 70.7 70.7 100.0

Meals at the YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly



Satisfied 16 27.6 27.6 29.3

Very Satisfied 41 70.7 70.7 100.0

Cookout Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent




Satisfied 29 50.0 50.9 82.5

Very Satisfied 10 17.2 17.5 100.0


80

Free time at YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly




Satisfied 36 62.1 62.1 74.1

Very Satisfied 15 25.9 25.9 100.0

Letter-writing activity





Satisfied 22 37.9 37.9 87.9


Upperclass Park facilitator for your group




Satisfied 18 31.0 32.1 87.5



81

Professor Bruck's talk at Mt. Mitchell Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent



Satisfied 33 56.9 56.9 65.5

Very Satisfied 20 34.5 34.5 100.0

Total 58 100.0 100.0

Discussion Following Professor Bruck's talk at Mt. Mitchell Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent


Satisfied 28 48.3 48.3 58.6

Very Satisfied 24 41.4 41.4 100.0

Lunch at Mt. Mitchell State Park Restaurant Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent



Satisfied 24 41.4 41.4 55.2

Very Satisfied 26 44.8 44.8 100.0


82

Appendix G. Freshman Survey Results: Open-Ended Items How did the retreat change the way you think about Scholarship, Leadership, Service and Character? I now know exactly what is expected of me in each category and it will be

easier to meet these expectations with the help of our fellow Park Scholars, the faculty, and Park faculty.

I think the retreat taught me that I do have the abilities to succeed in all those areas, that they are all intertwined and that I’m surrounded by people who will make a nourishing environment for such success.

It opened my eyes to the opportunities for success as opposed to the expected opportunities for failure.

Emphasized that each should be fun and fulfilling. Didn’t change the way I thought about the terms, but gave concrete

examples of how to lead and serve. Made me less apprehensive. I assumed I’d have amazing expectations solely in academia. Now I see

that I am to be enhanced as a person while giving back to my community. Made me more excited about performing service.

Please describe your favorite part(s) of the retreat. I liked the low ropes activity, the climbing, and the allegory lecture and

discussion. The cookout. Chubby Bunny. The talk on the Montagnards. “Who’s Line is it Anyway?” The free time to talk and interact with each other. Writing the notes for everyone’s envelope. Talks with upperclassmen. Getting to participate in many different groups to get to know almost

everyone. The tower was great; it got me to do stuff I never would initiate myself. The small groups because it was easier to voice my opinions and

participate, and they helped me learn about myself, other Parks, and communicating.

The discussion after the cave because of the serious input everyone contributed.

The facilitators were great! Low ropes were great for teambuilding and bonding. Playing the “party quirks” game at night. The group activity where we pulled questions out of the envelope.


83

If you were planning next years’ retreat, what would you do differently? The first day was very strenuous with no breaks or free time. More get-to-know-you activities, even before we leave Raleigh. Have an activity to orient us to campus and Raleigh. Start with more small group activities. Plan alternative activities in case it rains. The group should be involved in some sort of service rather than being

lectured by several different people. The Raleigh part seemed disconnected and should be re-named.

More time for the letter to self activity. Move the part in Raleigh to sometime during the semester. Have discussion and lecture earlier in the evening. Dr. Kessler’s talk was too late. More time for students to move-in and say goodbye to their parents. Maybe a little less facilitating. A more in-depth packing list (alarm clock). Plan more fun stuff at night. More time at Mt. Mitchell. More free time. No ground rules for discussion. No floaters between groups. Make the retreat longer to include hiking or camping. Slightly larger groups so we could meet more people. Only have one debriefing session per day.

What were the strengths and weaknesses of the group discussions of the activities? Strengths: My facilitator’s openness and willingness to answer questions was a major

strength. Brought up views and ideas I hadn’t thought of. Got the group to listen. Not interrupting people. Intelligent thoughts and ideas. Everyone was able to honestly express their ideas. Our discussions went very well. The facilitators were really able to lead groups into discussions and make

them run smoothly, but without taking charge. We got to know each other much better. Good bonding experiences. Sharing ideas and working together. Everyone was respectful of others. Liked the small group size.


84

Weaknesses: Sometimes the connections were obvious and discussion wasn’t needed. Too much repetition. Some people didn’t get involved. One person trying to dominate. Facilitator was too structured. I didn’t know everyone yet. Discussions were too long. More time needed for discussions.

Other comments: I was nervous about coming on the retreat/moving away from home, but at

the completion of the retreat, I felt much better about college in general. I know my class a lot better and am excited to work with them. I think it was really effective. My facilitators were great! Very useful in developing trust in each other. I’d like to know more about what we’d be doing before going on the

retreat. It was wonderful! The discussion of the allegory has really helped me to have the

confidence to pursue what fields I really wish to pursue. Tell everyone to pack more shirts. Some pre-reading on the cave would be helpful.

Documents

Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Survey: Final Report · Facilitation Workshop and Retreat Survey: Final Report Presented to the Park Scholarship Program Administration by the The