|
|
| (8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | Caelyn Kelly-Fleisher
| + | practice! |
| − | Critical Thinking
| |
| − | Sec. T04
| |
| − | Jan 17, 10
| |
| − | Field Exercise
| |
| | | | |
| − | The first situation I encountered was when my mom and dad noticed my horse was acting strangely, meaning he could be ill. My mom panicked and wasn’t sure what the best solution would be in order to prevent it from growing into a larger problem. The formality of the discussion was low, and the parameters were centered on finding a solution to the problem of a sick horse. The levels of intensity varied, my mother had a high intensity level, while I was relatively calm. Reflective styles of the participants were similar in that I made sure to stay calm and try and understand where my mom was coming from in the situation in order to try and mediate it. This is similar in that my mother tried to understand where I was coming from in not being as concerned, and then eventually became calm as she understood where I was coming from.
| + | I definitely added a page somewhere. Did I do it right this time? [[User:Kmullay|Kmullay]] 18:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC) |
| − | Another situation I observed was when two of my friends were having a discussion about what movie to rent. I identified one of my friends clearly as a “fact checker” because she wanted to rent a movie that had gotten good reviews from the critics. This particular character trait of hers came in handy because my other friend was clearly a “skeptic,” who needed convincing that this movie was worth the money to rent. The overall situation was clearly informal with a low intensity and was resolved rather quickly due to the balancing of traits between them. The ability of the “fact checker” to be well-informed about the general perception of the movie allowed the “skeptic” to feel relatively well-informed and comfortable about their final decision.
| + | |
| − | The final situation that I was a part of was when my roommate and I had a discussion about the behaviors that we were each expressing. I acted as the “debater,” while my roommate’s role was of a “lurker.” This became frustrating for the both of us when she didn’t feel comfortable expressing to me what the problem was or how to remedy the situation. The parameters of the situation were actually quite strenuous because I wanted a solution to the problem, while she didn’t want to cause conflict. The formality of the discussion was low, while the intensity was high. The amount of intensity was probably affected by the timing of the confrontation, which was near the end of the semester. This discussion was frustrating for the both of us because of our differences of opinions when it comes to conflict. In a situation like this, she needs to feel comfortable confronting me, and I need to learn to be aware when I’m approaching things in a manner that she might find threatening.
| + | My practice post. [[User:Rwilliams2|Rwilliams2]] 21:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC) |
| | + | Sample webpage link: [[http://happiness-project.com/ The Happiness Project]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == Wiki Practice == |
| | + | |
| | + | [http://gonzaga.edu Gonzaga Homepage] Laura's Practice |
| | + | |
| | + | Practice [http://uploads2.wikipaintings.org/images/vincent-van-gogh/the-starry-night-1889(1).jpg The Starry Night] |
Latest revision as of 21:23, 19 May 2013
.jpg){kind=link}