a tattle tale
Analysis of Alternatives
When T.J. is discussing K.C. with the rest of the group members on the telephone, he should communicate his own feelings towards the situation and ask if the others support his course of action instead of “setting aside his own personal opinions and going along with everyone else...which may lead to poor decisions and ill-advised actions.” (p21). Having the whole group accept the problem results in a much firmer course of action and unifies the group. Furthermore, K.C. will be more admitting of his actions and will be more open to changing if he believes that more than one person feels his irresponsibility. We considered having only T.J. approach K.C. as it could soften the criticism, however, because T.J. was originally supposed to have compiled the reports for Sunday, they are at a loss for time and need to take an immediate and effective course of action. The group cannot afford K.C. lingering on the task any longer as he has already submitted the previous contribution late and procrastinates when replying to T.J.’s e-mails and calls.
Because K.C. was already previously given a chance to correct his report and was continually unable to produce the ideal results, we must assume that he is either unwilling to put forth the effort or is having trouble understanding the academic concepts. Based on K.C.’s approach towards the work assigned, the group will need to confront him differently.
If K.C. is purposely acting as a “free rider” (p21), the most direct method is to confront him about the program’s emphasis of “ongoing assessment and group work in all its courses”, making him realize that his actions will not be tolerated. If K.C. was recently affected by external or emotional problems, the group should be understanding but stress the importance of maintaining your responsibilities and not letting your group down. The group must assure that K.C. understands the academic standards required to succeed in the assignment.
When T.J. is discussing K.C. with the rest of the group members on the telephone, he should communicate his own feelings towards the situation and ask if the others support his course of action instead of “setting aside his own personal opinions and going along with everyone else...which may lead to poor decisions and ill-advised actions.” (p21). Having the whole group accept the problem results in a much firmer course of action and unifies the group. Furthermore, K.C. will be more admitting of his actions and will be more open to changing if he believes that more than one person feels his irresponsibility. We considered having only T.J. approach K.C. as it could soften the criticism, however, because T.J. was originally supposed to have compiled the reports for Sunday, they are at a loss for time and need to take an immediate and effective course of action. The group cannot afford K.C. lingering on the task any longer as he has already submitted the previous contribution late and procrastinates when replying to T.J.’s e-mails and calls.
Because K.C. was already previously given a chance to correct his report and was continually unable to produce the ideal results, we must assume that he is either unwilling to put forth the effort or is having trouble understanding the academic concepts. Based on K.C.’s approach towards the work assigned, the group will need to confront him differently.
If K.C. is purposely acting as a “free rider” (p21), the most direct method is to confront him about the program’s emphasis of “ongoing assessment and group work in all its courses”, making him realize that his actions will not be tolerated. If K.C. was recently affected by external or emotional problems, the group should be understanding but stress the importance of maintaining your responsibilities and not letting your group down. The group must assure that K.C. understands the academic standards required to succeed in the assignment.