Case Study 1: A team of people are working on a large project. They decided to split their team into three subgroups to tackle the project. Two of the subgroups are upset that the third subgroup is not following through with their project proposal. These two subgroups express their frustration and anger to the facilitator in front of the third subgroup. The facilitator asks the third subgroup where they are at with their project as well as what do they need in support to be successful. A member of the third subgroup complains that one of the other members (who is not in attendance) is not doing their part and, is lying about their contribution/effort to the project. The students are angry, frustrated, and want the facilitator to punish the team member who is not following through.
Case Study 2: A team of 25 students has been assigned to create and implement a community service project. A day was planned for the students to meet their teammates and their community service partner for the first time. After the team introductions, the community service partner came in to the classroom, introduced herself to the students, talked about what the agency that she represent does, and proposed her project ideas. The students knew that after they had this meeting with their community service partner, that they had an assignment to brainstorm project ideas with their teammates on webct. Tracy is upset because after the community service partner’s presentation, the students did not ask any questions. Tracy reminded them that they had their webct assignment due, and that the more questions they ask/information they get from their community service partner, the easier the assignment will be. Tracy asked if they had any questions a few different times throughout the presentation and afterwards, but no questions were asked. The students just sat there looking tired, disengaged, bored, or overwhelmed.
Case Study 3: At a meeting with a high school teacher, city council members, and other community stakeholders, frustration was experienced by all parties. The city council members were upset that they offered to allow the students to be included in their discussions but none of the students show up to their meetings. The city council members explained that they were provided a generous offer, they did their part. The high school teacher was upset that the city council said that they would involve her students in their meetings, but they were not going to “cater” to the students. The teacher and other community stakeholders explained that a traditional,evening, board-room meeting in a down-town location was not developmentally appropriate or feasible. The teacher proposed that the city council members come to the school or to a local diner to meet with the students. The teacher explained that the students are comfortable and familiar in these places and are more likely to engage in conversation. A city council member replied by saying that they are not going to put on “kid gloves” to get student involvement. If they want to participate in the meetings, they need to come down-town and attend the evening meetings.