Innovative Team Building Practices for Professionals: Developing Inter-Group Skills to Enhance Effective Performance

Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 22, No. 4, Summer 1998

Innovative Team Building Practices forProfessionals: Developing Inter-GroupSkills to Enhance Effective Performance

Mark D. Baldwin and Joseph F. Keating

ABSTRACT: The complexities of bringing teams of professionals together to work ina sustained and effective manner toward a common goal are considerable. Thenecessary inter-group skills involved are often not a part of most professionalpreparation programs. This article describes an innovative workshop for secondarypreservice teachers which targeted the development of communication, problemsolving, and team building. Results are promising. Any team of individuals, whetherit be a group of professors, a program that utilizes a cohort model (a group ofindividuals who go through a program or process together), or simply a group needingto develop effective inter-group skills, may benefit from similar workshops. The articleinvites continued discussion and research concerning the training of professionals inteam building and inter-group skills.

The complexities of bringing teams of professionals together towork in a sustained and effective manner toward a common goal areconsiderable. Frequently the necessary inter-group skills involved arelacking in professional preparation programs: the focus of such train-ing has centered on the more individual skills necessary to succeedin a specific professional setting. It should not be completely unex-pected, therefore, that the interpersonal nature of the work often cre-ates unexpected challenges to accomplishing the goal when teams ofindividuals are brought together.

Mark D. Baldwin received the doctorate in Educational Leadership and OrganizationalChange from Northern Arizona University, and he is presently an Assistant Professorat California State University, San Marcos. Previously he served for 23 years as ahigh school teacher, counselor, and administrator in the public schools. ProfessorBaldwin's work focuses on organizational change in public schools. Joseph F. Keatingreceived the doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction in Multicultural TeacherEducation from the University of New Mexico. He is an Assistant Professor atCalifornia State University, San Marcos, and also served 22 years as a high schoolteacher of mathematics and science. Professor keating's primary interests includescience education, service learning, and action research. Professors Baldwin andKeating serve as Program Co-Coordinators for the Single State Subject CredentialProgram at California State University, San Marcos. For more information about thisprogram readers are invited to visit the website at www.purposeful.com.

291 © 1998 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

In this article, an experiential team building training program isexamined as it relates to the preparation of cohorts of high schoolteachers. (A cohort is a team of students who take all program classestogether during the year.) We outline the process used in a teachereducation program to identify needs and describe the innovativeworkshop utilized to strengthen desired programmatic outcomes.This program can be widely adapted to meet the needs of any highereducation program seeking to promote collaboration and team build-ing skills. Skills of effective inter-group communication, conflict iden-tification, and resolution as well as the creation of a sense ofcollegiality within the groups are all elements which can be trans-ferred to a broader setting. Johnson and Johnson (1992) suggest thateven though some conflict will always be part of group processes,positive interdependence is at the heart of successful cooperativepractice. Their research supports the idea that individuals who havenot had formal training in group processes usually do not understandor readily accept the responsibility of group interactions, often re-sulting in frustration and confusion. In order to reduce the potentialfor group conflict, they further suggest, that it is critical to involveindividuals in a variety of carefully structured trainings. One out-come of the workshops discussed in this article is greater positiveinterdependence and enhanced group processing skills.

Background

The Challenge

The challenge presented by local public school districts to the sec-ondary faculty in the College of Education at California State Uni-versity, San Marcos (CSUSM) was to design a Teacher EducationProgram which would prepare high school teachers to meet the de-mands of 21st century schools. Foremost among the challenges were(1) improvement of the democratic nature of public schools and (2)the design of strategies for teaching team building, interpersonal com-munication, and values identification skills, which teachers and theirrespective students need in order to address complex issues of a mul-ticultural society. In an effort to meet the challenge, CSUSM facultyutilized a wide range of research, years of high school teaching expe-rience, and an educational steering committee to develop a pilot SingleSubject Credential Program, tested during the 1995-96 academic year,

292 INNOVATIVE HIGHER EDUCATION

which would credential teachers for secondary schools. Although thefocus of this article is on team building strategies for preservice teach-ers prior to entering a credential program, many of these strategiesmay also be appropriately utilized in inservice formats designed forpracticing teachers, for any programs which use cohort models, aswell as any program focusing on preparation for working in teams.

Program Design

The intensive two semester Secondary Program instituted atCSUSM in 1995 provides a solid foundation to prepare preserviceteachers to become skilled practitioners. It is designed to create aseamlessly connected, two semester experience tied together by fourthemes: collaboration, reflective practice, professionalizing practice,and student-centered teaching. Curricula is interdisciplinary and isintegrated with field experiences in partner high schools. The Uni-versity selects a teacher from each partner high school to overseethe development of a team of four or five preservice teachers, as wellas to select and work with the cooperating high school teachers.These supervising teachers also collaborate continuously with Uni-versity faculty to facilitate progress of preservice teachers placedwithin their schools. Because the field sites are primarily in schoolswith linguistically and culturally diverse populations, another impor-tant aspect of the program is the integration of Cross Cultural Lan-guage and Academic Development (CLAD). CLAD is imbeddedthroughout the content of all program courses, and issues of cultureand diversity are integral to each course and field work as well.

Pilot Year Findings

Another critical feature of the program is the yearly evaluationprocedure designed to assess program effectiveness continuously. Theyear-end evaluation of the pilot program by graduating students wasquite revealing. While both faculty and preservice teachers judgedthe overall program to be successful, two areas needing improvementclearly emerged. First, even though the program model was estab-lished to provide intra-group support throughout the year, studentsexperienced considerable difficulty with the rigorous and stressful de-mands required of preservice teachers. These issues created prob-lematic situations in preservice teacher experiences with partnerhigh schools as well as within the program itself. Second, students

Innovative Team Building Practices for Professionals 293

entering the program lacked skills to meet the challenges of intra-group relationships. More effective communication, problem solving,and team building skills needed to be developed.

Response to Pilot Evaluation

The faculty at CSUSM understood the gaps identified by the evalu-ation to be critical to teacher preparation. They also recognized thatpreservice teachers would be particularly challenged by the multicul-tural environments in which they would be working. Therefore, thesecritical skills and professional values essential to good teachingneeded to be addressed more effectively within the program. Conse-quently, program goals were designed to provide preservice teacherswith experiences and interpersonal skills to ready them for interdis-ciplinary teams in high schools.

The National Association of Secondary School Principals in a docu-ment entitled Breaking Ranks (1996) supported the CSUSM facultyconcerns that communication and problem solving skills of teachersmust be recognized as critically important by clearly identifying theneed for teachers to be able to work within teams and collaborativelywith one another. "High schools should reorganize departments tofacilitate a multidisciplinary approach to knowledge. They should en-courage faculty members to pursue close associations with colleaguesin other disciplines" (p. 49). The report continues, "Interdisciplinarycoalitions could enhance efforts to teach critical thinking or to teachproblem solving or cooperative learning . . ." (p. 49).

CSUSM faculty believed team building and creating communitiesof learners was another critical area. Though closely related to com-munication and problem solving skills, team building had been iden-tified in the report Breaking Ranks (1996), which stressed the needfor high schools to "... create small units in which anonymity is ban-ished" (p. 46). Further, the report pointed out, "Smallness of scalefosters situations in which teaching and learning more readily thrive,reducing size guarantees nothing in and of itself. Some schools failto exploit their smallness in ways that give students a sense of be-longing" (p. 49).

Method of Bridging the Gaps

The significant challenge now for the CSUSM faculty was how toaddress the needs identified without adding substantially to program


length. As a solution, the faculty planned an innovative team buildingprocess for all preservice teachers, implemented in a two day work-shop, prior to the beginning of university classes. Every preserviceteacher was required to attend the ungraded workshop as part oftheir program preparation. The necessary funding to implement theworkshop was obtained through a grant from CSUSM.

The goal of the workshop was for preservice teacher candidates todevelop the foundational skills required to become successful. Thespecific objectives for participants included:

• development of communication and conflict resolution skillsnecessary to become a successful member of an interdisciplinaryteam,

• development of an understanding of group dynamics and team-work as a way to lead and train others in cooperative groupwork, and

• participation in democratic practice (e.g. giving all members ofthe group an active voice in decision making and problemsolving) which could be transferred into a secondary schoolsetting.

The workshop was designed to accelerate the process of teachingthese skills to preservice teachers prior to beginning the secondaryprogram. It was hypothesized this approach would take less timeaway from other aspects of the curriculum and still address the prob-lematic issues which had emerged in the pilot year of the program.It was further hypothesized that the skills learned during the work-shop would be actively applied to assignments in the program suchas action research projects, service learning activities and interdis-ciplinary unit plans. Interdisciplinary planning necessitates teachersworking together in teams which cross discipline lines in order todevelop appropriate curricula.

Description of the Workshop

Workshops in a variety of settings have become common practicein efforts by schools and businesses to improve the sense of commu-nity and enhance communication skills. Although the workshop de-scribed here has some elements common to other workshops, itsuniqueness lies in the feedback/self-check system built into it that


assists in perpetuating the skills. This workshop, as implemented,has two specific outcomes. First, preservice teachers understand theimportance of multiple experiences to enhance learning. To accom-plish this outcome skills and concepts are presented in two differentlearning modalities: physical (kinesthetic activities) and cognitive(discussion activities). Second, underlying the whole process is theassumption preservice teachers will incorporate these team build-ing/communication skills into their assignments during the coursework of the program as well as during field experiences. Requiredreflective journal writing and discussions with colleagues and in-structors provide immediate feedback in both situations. The impor-tance of this reflective practice to the implementation of theseprocesses has been readily apparent in the quality of student feed-back as well as their responses to it. Too often workshops rely onone type of teaching/learning style and (or) provide formats that haveno context for implementation and reflection. Consequently, valuableconcepts may be underutilized or forgotten.

The CSUSM workshop was designed to include a number of coreactivities, presented in discussion, seminar, and experiential teambuilding formats. Facilitators introduced values identification andskills development related to the special focus of the workshop. Twoof the facilitators utilized a cognitive approach that involved oral,written, and group interactive activities while the third utilized apsychomotor, experiential approach to developing these same skills.These specialists met throughout the day with the two groups of stu-dents. The student groups rotated through a series of three 2 hoursessions each day.

One team of specialists included a psychologist and a values iden-tification facilitator, both of whom specialize in techniques associatedwith clarifying personal values and strategies in order to focus thesesame values and strategies on the development of skills critical tosuccessful teaching. More specifically, these included strategies in theareas of motivation, interpersonal communications, goal setting, andconflict management. During these sessions a variety of activitieswas modeled and introduced by the facilitators and then practicedby participants. The activities utilized a number of multi-modallearning strategies, including small group discussion, problem solv-ing, and role playing simulations. All are appropriate and readilytransferable for use with or by inservice teachers and their highschool students.


Teacher Characteristics Related to Values

The first strategy elicited from preservice teachers, in a smallgroup format, those values they admired most in their own teachersas well as additional values they believed were essential for today'steachers. Based on these values, workshop participants derived a listof the ten most important characteristics of a good teacher. The listincluded encouragement, humor, good listening skills, patience, per-ceptiveness, enthusiasm, humility, and demonstration of support andcaring for students. The group used the discussion of these criticalvalues as a springboard to the activities related to motivational tech-niques.

Motivational Techniques

In the core area of motivational techniques, the Personality ProfileAssessment instrument (Willingham, 1992) was used to categorizeworkshop participants. One beneficial outcome of understanding per-sonality types is that it allows individuals to communicate more ef-fectively; the message does not get lost in the style of delivery.Further, it was demonstrated to participants, how the instrumentcould be used to identify personality types which might then be usedto motivate their own students. Numerous examples of potential mo-tivational strategies were addressed during this session. An illustra-tion of the strategies included specific interviewing methods(Willingham, 1989) leading to methods of motivating students forpositive behavior and enhanced learning.

Interpersonal Skills

Interpersonal communication skills was the second core area, andtwo activities were used to clarify and develop this concept. The firstwas a whole group discussion that utilized personal histories. Com-ments related to reasons for selecting teaching as a profession, per-sonal interests, and other general background information. Facilitatorsmodeled positive acceptance of student statements through verbal andnon-verbal responses. It was noted by facilitators and preservice teach-ers that participants began to pick up on these behaviors and applythem to each other as discussion continued. This example appropriatelyillustrated the importance of positive and enthusiastic rejoinders whenrelated to individual differences in students.


The second activity utilized a simulation game called Epstein's FiveStage Rocket (Cohen, 1994) modified by Keating (1997) (see AppendixA). In this exercise, students were given a problem to discuss ingroups. Each new stage of the "rocket" introduced a new communi-cation skill which was monitored by a participant observer from eachgroup. The successive stages of the exercise included conciseness, re-flection, listening skills, and participation. An analogy used by thefacilitator underscored the importance of interpersonal communica-tion skills, "These interpersonal skills are like the front wheels of acar, determining direction so that the back wheel [knowledge] canappropriately follow."

Goal Setting

Goal setting, an intrinsic part of motivation, was the third coreskill modeled and was approached from the perspective used in TheOne Minute Teacher (Johnson & Johnson, 1986). This model suggeststhere are three basic strategies to attain goals: goal setting tech-niques, praise for supported goal achievement, and recovery fromchallenges to goals. Using these three strategies, workshop partici-pants formulated a list of challenges they believed would confrontthem as teachers as well as corresponding goals they would set toaddress them. The top challenges and corresponding goals identifiedwere as follows:

CHALLENGES GOALS

Diversity Course work in multicultural techni-ques and implementation in fieldexperience.

Teaching at-risk kids Learning and applying motivationtechniques.

Parents that don't care Practice writing, calling, and meetingwith parents.

Discipline Learning and practicing techniques ofdisciplining.

Large class size Learning and applying logistics ofclassroom management and applicationin field experiences.

Cutting edge teaching Course work, observations, and fieldmethods experiences.


The facilitators noted, "Everyone needs personal goals, especiallyteachers, so we can take these skills, hone them, and help teach ourstudents to become successful in their own endeavors; that is whenwe are the happiest."

Conflict Management

Conflict management was the last core skill considered. Discussioncentered around the role of conflict management in the establishmentof classroom discipline. In a small group exercise, participants wereassigned the task of determining the five most common areas of con-flict they believed they would encounter as teachers and how theymight respond to them. Using this "discovery learning" approach andin conjunction with the facilitator, participants derived three guidingprinciples to assist in managing conflict. The principles were thenincluded in a discussion of compassionate discipline. These principlesincluded:

(1) schools and classrooms must have reasonable, equitable rulesand consequences for student behavior;

(2) students and teachers should be part of the process of estab-lishing these guidelines by using their own values; and

(3) student-centered focus should be imbedded in the wholeprocess—teachers must accept different student learningstyles, an individual's preferences and personal problems mustbe factored into the equation of designing lessons and engagingstudents.

As the facilitator suggested, "People don't care how much you knowuntil they know how much you care."

Experiential Team Building

In addition to group discussion strategies and activities which fo-cused on teacher values and principles of good teaching, participantsalso engaged in physical activities in support of these same concepts.The experiential team building aspect of the workshop was designedto begin building a level of trust within the group of participants,increase communication skills, and develop a sense of team duringthe two day workshop. Each of these goals was accomplished througha set of strictly supervised, sequential physical activities (see Appen-


dix B). Preservice teachers moved from safe and moderately chal-lenging physical activities to higher risk activities which requiredteamwork to accomplish. Following each activity, the facilitatorbrought the group together to reflect on their experiences.

The strategy for each experiential challenge presented to the par-ticipants was the same. First, the appropriate foundational physicalskills were taught; for example, "Trust Falls," during which one par-ticipant stands behind another and catches the falling partner, wasintroduced. Once a basic level of trust was established, the teammoved on to a more difficult challenge. One of the more revealingactivities involved moving the entire team across several wood beamsto a final destination, without falling. This activity was undertakenon both the first and second day of the workshop and clearly illus-trated the growth of a team mentality.

On the first day, the only instructions given were to move all par-ticipants across the beams, and no participant was allowed to returnonce across. On day one, the most physically adept team memberscrossed first, without regard to others lacking the same physical dex-terity. Neither group was able to move all their members across thebeam and consequently failed the challenge.

During the debriefing session, it became clear to the participantsthey were only thinking of themselves and how they (as individuals)could get across. Group members who were unable to reach the goalspoke of frustrations, embarrassment, resignation, and a sense of be-ing left out.

Day two instructions in the beam challenge were similar to dayone, except additional "handicaps" were added to the process. Someteam members were blind folded, a few others had their arms tiedin a sling. The results of day two were very different. Prior to anyoneattempting to cross the beam, a team strategy was devised utilizingthe strengths within the group. As the attempt to cross was made,the group began to communicate and continuously evaluate theirstrategy. As a result, both groups of 25 participants met the chal-lenge, and all team members celebrated their success together withcheers.

The debriefing session on day two marked a turning point in cre-ating a sense of team. Members who had previously felt abandonednow felt a part of the group, those who believed themselves incapableof the physical challenges now understood the power of cooperativeactions, others who had previously considered only themselves now


spoke of the need to help everyone succeed. A cooperative spiritemerged, and a level of trust within the group became evident.

The concluding challenge presented in the workshops is known asthe "Web." The team must move all its members from one side ofthe web to the other. (The "Web" is a large 6' x 8' frame, with variousstrings resembling a spider's web.) Participants must pass thoughthe web without touching any string and using each opening onlyonce. The group was challenged on all levels: trust, communication,cooperation, and problem solving. Each team successfully met thischallenge.

As the facilitator later noted, "Participants began as individuals,analyzing each task from the perspective of themselves. 'Can I dothis?' 'Will I look foolish?' Eventually individuals began to see them-selves as part of a larger team, able to accomplish every challengepresented together. This change occurred as participants learnedabout themselves and others, effective communication within thegroup, and trusting the team to help them be successful." These werethe skills and attitudes which were absent from the first preserviceteacher group from whom the faculty had learned so much. The twogroups emerged, following the two day experience, well on their wayto becoming fully functioning teams, determined to help each otherbe successful in the credential program.

One comment from a student seemed to summarize the process,"You put us in positions and places, both physically and mentally,that were uncomfortable at first, and we had to learn to trust, de-pend, and rely on each other. As a result I will be able to dependon my team for support in the future. If you can't physically supportsomeone, then you probably won't have emotional support either. Bygiving us models of communication and problem solving using dif-ferent modalities it pointed this out to us."

Results

Results of the findings indicate the level of effectiveness for thisworkshop have been outstanding. Many of the interpersonal problemsevidenced during the first year of the program have been absent fromthe second year groups. As problems arose in the first semester,rather than using faculty to resolve the issues, the students them-selves have demonstrated the ability to use skills acquired duringthe workshop to solve problems on their own.


Preservice teachers have been observed in their classrooms usingteam building strategies, developing their students' communicationskills, and maintaining very student-centered classrooms where theirstudents' ideas are valued and instrumental in helping guide prac-tice. Additionally, preservice teachers have reached out to each otherand offered support to work together as needed to minimize stress.

Midterm reflections regarding the workshop produced very positiveresponses. Many preservice teachers commented they believed theirability to work effectively as a large group and within their smallersite groups was linked directly to the initial efforts established atthe workshop. They attributed success to both the informal socialinteractions and the more structured activities of the workshop.

In addition to the data elicited during the academic year, partici-pants involved in the August 1996 workshop were asked to completea structured interview exit survey at the conclusion of their studentteaching experience (Baldwin & Keating, 1997). This evaluationyielded detailed, valuable feedback that will assist in the structuringof the next workshop. Following each question asked in the survey,the results, with comments, are tabulated below.

Rating Scale:

1 = not at all useful / important / valuable2 = limited usefulness / importance / value3 = useful / important / valuable4 = highly useful / important / valuable

1 2 3 4

1. Assisted in clarifying the range of important 7% 27% 27% 40%values critical to the teaching profession.

Over two thirds of the participants found the experience to be use-ful or highly useful in the identification and clarification of valuesimportant to the teaching profession.2. Assisted in clarifying the importance of goal 10% 23% 30% 33%setting and motivation for oneself and one's stu-dents.

Even though 63% of the participants found the workshop usefulor above with regard to this issue, the facilitators believe that thenext workshop can be enhanced by the program coordinators focus-ing more completely on goal setting by preservice teachers.


Innovative Team Building Practices for Professionals

3. Assisted in clarifying the importance of inter- 0% 13% 13% 73%personal skills (in the teacher and his/her stu-dents) to successful learning/teaching.

The workshop was very successful in helping preservice teachers(86%) understand the critical nature of interpersonal skills andtheir relationship to teaching.4. Assisted in clarifying the importance of team 3% 0% 10% 87%building and cooperation with colleagues and stu-dents.

Team building and collaboration are essential to high school teach-ers in restructured schools. The workshop provided preserviceteachers with a clearer understanding of why these skills are es-sential in their work.

5. Provided the opportunity to meet and interact 0% 3% 13% 82%with fellow cohort members, faculty, site and uni-versity supervisors.

Nearly every participant found the workshop helpful in initiatinginteractions with those colleagues and faculty with whom theywould spend a considerable amount of their time in the course ofthe credential program.6. Assisted in developing a sense of team and co- 0% 1% 15% 84%operation within your cohort.

One workshop goal, building a sense of team, was accomplished al-most completely (97%).

7. The opportunity to listen to previous graduates 0% 20% 33% 40%discuss the program and its demands

This aspect of the workshop will be enhanced by including abroader panel of former graduates. This will insure a more di-verse conversation which will hopefully reach more participants.8. The opportunity for the Dean and Program Co- 2% 27% 33% 30%ordinators to discuss the program and its demands.

Programmatic information will be more formally structured into theworkshop; more specific information regarding program goals, expec-tations and demands will be provided both in writing and orally9. The workshop format was designed for activi- 0% 0% 17% 83%ties to be both psychomotor (physical) and cognitive.

The format was deemed successful by the participants and will becontinued.

303

Conclusions

Communication, problem solving, and team building skills, as wellas values identification to manifest essential characteristics of goodteaching, is a topic for further investigation. Co-curricular eventssuch as those detailed in this article might become valuable aspectsof preparing the necessary foundation for any team of individuals tobe successful in working together and accomplishing targeted goals.In the CSUSM teacher education program, the process has helpedprovide prospective teachers with opportunities to begin the devel-opment of skills essential to the profession of teaching.

The authors believe building a level of trust within a group, work-ing specifically on communication and conflict resolution skills, anddeveloping a sense of team prior to focusing on a specific task hasclear advantages in predicting more successful outcomes. In any situ-ation where collaborative team work is essential to meeting specificgoals, students can benefit from the use of a similar team buildingprocess which includes identifying the intended outcomes of teambuilding, breaking down the essential participant skills needed, andthen teaching these skills in the workshop. Through this process anycollaborative project can build an appropriate foundation for success.

References

Baldwin, M. D., & Keating, J. F. (1997). Questionnaire to elicit effectiveness of Work-shop Model. (Unpublished manuscript)

California Task Force. (1992). Second to none. Sacramento, CA: Department of Edu-cation.

Cohen, E. (1994). Designing group work. New York: Teachers College Press.Johnson, S., & Johnson, C. (1986). The one minute teacher. New York: William Morrow

& Co.Johnson, S., & Johnson, C. (1992). Positive interdependence: the heart of cooperative

learning. Edina, Mn.: Interactive Book CompanyKeating, J. A. (1996). Learning theory applications for motivating small groups. (Un-

published manuscript)Keating, J. F. (1997). Modification to Epstein's Five Stage Rocket by Cohen. (Unpub-

lished)Knowles, J. G., Cole, A. L., & Presswood, C. S. (1994). Through preservice teacher's

eyes. New York: Merrill College Publishing Company.National Association of Secondary School Principals (199ft). Breaking ranks: Changing

an American institution. Reston, VA, NASSP.Willingham, R. (1989). When good isn't good enough. Phoenix: Integrity Training Sys-

tems.Willingham, R. (1992). hey, I am the customer. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.



Appendix AEpstein's Five Stage Rocket: A Simulation to Improve

Interpersonal Communication Skills in Cooperative GroupProcesses

PRE-TEST a) Teacher discusses purpose of cooperative groupsand a specific problem that will be used in thesimulation.

b) Groups discuss problem for 3-5 minutes withoutany specific directions on group processes to use.

c) Based on this exercise the teacher and studentsbrainstorm both the strengths and impediments thatwere observed in their group efforts to discuss theproblem.

STAGES a) One observer/timer/note keeper is selected foreach group whose role is to enforce rules byassigning penalties and observing/recording groupprocesses—this role is rotated at the end of eachstage so that all participants may have thisopportunity.

b) The rule of stage one is introduced—participantsshould value conciseness in their responses (15seconds maximum response time). Long responsestend to be repetitive and limit time for othermembers to contribute. Violators are assessed onepenalty point per violation by the observer/timer.Discuss same problem for 3 minutes.

c) The rule of stage one continues to be enforcedand the rule of stage two is introduced—participants should not interrupt another participantwhen he or she is talking so that all members havethe opportunities to complete their responses.Violations of stage two are assessed as a one pointpenalty. Discuss the same problem for 3 minutes.

d) The rules of stage one and two continue to beenforced and the rule for stage three isintroduced—participants should allow for wait time(three seconds) so that all group members can processinformation. Violations are assessed as a one pointpenalty. Discuss the same problem for 3 minutes.

e) The rules of stages one, two and three continueto be enforced and the rule for stage four isintroduced—participants shouldclarify / restate /elaborate the previous respondentideas before replying. The importance of this is sothat all members will listen to, incorporate andvalue each other's responses. Failure do so resultsin a penalty of one point. Discuss the same problemfor 3 minutes.

f) The rules of stages one, two and three and fourcontinue to be enforced and the rule for stage fiveis introduced—all participants should haveopportunities to reply. Each person must speak oracknowledge they will pass before a person who hasspoken once can speak again. This encourageseveryone to voice ideas and have a role in theoutcome and ultimately results in the strength ofgroup solutions. Failure to do so results in apenalty of one point. Discuss the same problem 3minutes.

g) At the end of stage five each group should havea brief opportunity to share scores and any generalobservations on their success (or lack of) regardingthe application of these communication skills.

a) new observer/timer assesses only positive points(one each) each time these rules are appliedsuccessfully—no penalties are assessed.

b) problem is discussed for 3 minutes—solution andrationale is formulated for presentation.

c) final solution is presented to class, total score (+and - tallied) and debriefing closure byteacher/students on value of each skill.

Note: teachers must continue to reinforce these skills through dynamic processessuch as:

1) visible charts/lists/review2) formal and informal feedback to groups3) group self evaluation forms

Adapted from: Designing Group Work by Elizabeth Cohen (p. 175-178).



Appendix BExperiential Team Building Activities

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION GOAL

Group Juggle Group stands in circle. Establishpattern of throwing objects fromone member to another. Whenthrowing, say own name firstand then name of personcatching. Person catching thanksthrower and then tosses to nextin pattern. Gradually add moreobjects to be thrown

Crescent Need an even number ofTraffic Jam participants and one more carpet

square than participants. Placesquares in crescent shape. Have aparticipant on each square leav-ing one empty space in exactmiddle. Object is for those onSide A to get to Side B. No onecan ever pass a person fromhis/her own side.

Mini Trust Pair up and practice falling.Falls Fallee has arms folded and

crossed on chest. Catcher has onefoot in front of other and armsflexed, palms upraised and readyto support fallee. Fallee leansback with straight body. Catchergently catches fallee and restoresthem to original position. (Thenmove to two catchers)

Willow Group stands in tight circle withproper stance (see above). Falleebegins exchange and then falls.Group gently pushes falleearound the circle. Fallee controlstempo and can ask for it to bespeeded up or slowed down.Members take turns in themiddle.

Allowing partici-pants to knowand use eachother's names.Ice breaker witha newly formedteam.

Identify groupdynamics in agroup problemsolving situation.

Establishes abasic level ofsafety and trustwith partners.

Increases thelevel of trust ingroup dynamics.


Trust Falls

Trust Lift

Spider Web

Jump Rope

Stand in two lines with fallee onplatform, back to group. Groupshave arms zippered and footfarthest from fallee is forward.One group member at end ofline checks feet and heads.Fallee then stiffens body andfalls.

Liftee lies on ground. Have fourpeople on each side of the lifteeand one person at the head toact as coordinator. Groups havehands on the body. Coordinatortells liftee to take three breathsand let out all negative feelings.On third breath group putshands under liftee and lifts towaist, then shoulders, and thenall the way up. Rock lifteegently towards coordinator andthem back. On coordinator's com-mand descentGroup is on one side of web andmust get to other side. Memberscannot touch web, cannot goover, under, or around it. Oncethrough, cannot come back toother side. If when passingthrough there is a touch byanyone, that hole is used up.

Turn long rope. Have groupjump thorough, one at a time,one jump and out. Next send intwo at time, then four, keepbuilding.

Ultimate test oftrust incolleagues tocatch the fallee.Members beginto understandboth the physicaland emotionalconnectionsnecessary todevelop a safeworkingenvironment.Demonstrates theimportance ofteam work inaccomplishing atask, as well asthe necessarytrust in col-leagues to safelycomplete the task.

A significant prob-lem to be solvedby the groupwhich requires ateam effort, bothin creating asolution to theproblem and thencarrying out theplan.Ice Breakeractivity to getgroup com-fortable witheach other.


Plank Walk Planks are set in any non-linear position. Object is to getentire group from one side tothe other without falling.

Group problemsolving effort andcollaboration priorto action is a mustif team is tosuccessfullyaccomplish thistask.

Blade Participants stand in two Concluding trustRunner lines with arms zippered and activity. All mem-

outstretched, palms down. bers must runRunner stands about ten to fif- the gauntlet,teen feet away, then goesthrough arms as they are raisedand lowered around the runner.Similar to the "Wave"

Each activity is debriefed by the facilitator at its conclusion in a group setting.This allows participants time to process both the physical and intellectual learningof the activity.

Documents

Innovative Team Building Practices for Professionals: Developing Inter-Group Skills to Enhance Effective Performance