Communication and Group Development
What do we know that can be validated in our own experiences and in the experiences of these scholars that relates to the nature of communication within and between individuals, combined with group dynamics and group development as described by Leland Bradford, Warren Bennis, Rensis Likert, Chris Argyris, Bela Banathy and others who have labored in the research of the National Training Laboratory of Bethel, Maine.
A test of your logic.
If no two people have had the same experiences throughout their lives and have developed unique sets of attitudes, beliefs, values, and orientations, can these individuals as receivers of a message be expected to hear identical meanings as intended by the sender who also has a unique background to draw from?
This assumption is maintained within conventional schools. The messages sent during instruction are expected to be heard exactly as intended by the sender, the teacher. If not, the receiver is deemed guilty of not paying attention.
Is this logical, given the facts?
The facts are there are numerous factors that influence what is heard and understood in a message from teachers that occurs within every group setting.
Intermediary influences
1) Due to differences in individual development, the quality of social context can appear supportive to one person and hostile to another.
2) The level of intellectual development – a youngster who is pre-operational will interpret messages differently from those at the levels of concrete or formal operations etc.
3) The level, type, quality, and quantity of experiences – past experiences will prepare one to relate meaningfully with related new experiences. Without these experiences readiness for learning new information is diminished.
4) Self-awareness – self-knowledge and self-understanding are required to assimilate messages with meaning.
5) Physical/biological potentialities – everyone brings to a transaction a different innate potential for dealing with information.
6) Energy level, need and motivation – Without these a readiness to receive the messages will not be present.
When considering the many variables that surround the nature of communication, it’s clear it is not a simple matter. However, the purpose of group development has been found to improve those factors in communication.
Warren Bennis of The National Training Laboratory found that small groups develop in an invariant sequence much like individuals. The first stage occurs when the group is first assembled unaware of what to expect.
The assigned leader of the group will either set the stage for the group to remain dependent upon the leader or will encourage members to voice their independent views and aspirations in a civil manner in an atmosphere of mutual respect. If the leader allows openness within the group, it will foster freedom to enter the second stage, that of independence. If the dependency example of leadership applies, that group will remain at the level of dependency, the initial stage of development in every group, never reaching maturity.
The open-ended process allowed by a more open facilitator is a difficult stage that teachers are not often able to manage in an authoritarian system, so they maintain the stage of dependency and set the rules and punishments that will be employed.
If they could set a rule that communication must initially focus on clarity regarding what each member is communicating rather than focus on disagreements or criticism, this group will be able to enter the third and final stage of maturity, interdependency.
This stage employs consensual validation in communications focusing on conflict resolution as members can confront one another about their differences and still show respect for the legitimacy of personal views.
This group will become a cohesive team capable of reaching solutions to shared problems. This team would reflect cooperative decision making, respect for differences of viewpoint and other such growth producing measures that encourage honest and open communications. Learners who experience this growth are not likely to have pent up and unresolved hostility like what plagues present day society.
Groups that participate in the interdependent group processes featuring consensual validation will likely engage problem solving activities with enthusiasm and with a positive sense of mental health.
This group having reached its mature stage will appreciate the value of personal and cooperative inquiry that is guided by the methods and materials of the disciplines within each realm of meaning. They will find pleasure in their efforts to find and execute solutions to problems using insights drawn from active participation in these disciplines that will motivate them to seek solutions through independent and cooperative activities.
A test of your logic.
If no two people have had the same experiences throughout their lives and have developed unique sets of attitudes, beliefs, values, and orientations, can these individuals as receivers of a message be expected to hear identical meanings as intended by the sender who also has a unique background to draw from?
This assumption is maintained within conventional schools. The messages sent during instruction are expected to be heard exactly as intended by the sender, the teacher. If not, the receiver is deemed guilty of not paying attention.
Is this logical, given the facts?
The facts are there are numerous factors that influence what is heard and understood in a message from teachers that occurs within every group setting.
Intermediary influences
1) Due to differences in individual development, the quality of social context can appear supportive to one person and hostile to another.
2) The level of intellectual development – a youngster who is pre-operational will interpret messages differently from those at the levels of concrete or formal operations etc.
3) The level, type, quality, and quantity of experiences – past experiences will prepare one to relate meaningfully with related new experiences. Without these experiences readiness for learning new information is diminished.
4) Self-awareness – self-knowledge and self-understanding are required to assimilate messages with meaning.
5) Physical/biological potentialities – everyone brings to a transaction a different innate potential for dealing with information.
6) Energy level, need and motivation – Without these a readiness to receive the messages will not be present.
When considering the many variables that surround the nature of communication, it’s clear it is not a simple matter. However, the purpose of group development has been found to improve those factors in communication.
Warren Bennis of The National Training Laboratory found that small groups develop in an invariant sequence much like individuals. The first stage occurs when the group is first assembled unaware of what to expect.
The assigned leader of the group will either set the stage for the group to remain dependent upon the leader or will encourage members to voice their independent views and aspirations in a civil manner in an atmosphere of mutual respect. If the leader allows openness within the group, it will foster freedom to enter the second stage, that of independence. If the dependency example of leadership applies, that group will remain at the level of dependency, the initial stage of development in every group, never reaching maturity.
The open-ended process allowed by a more open facilitator is a difficult stage that teachers are not often able to manage in an authoritarian system, so they maintain the stage of dependency and set the rules and punishments that will be employed.
If they could set a rule that communication must initially focus on clarity regarding what each member is communicating rather than focus on disagreements or criticism, this group will be able to enter the third and final stage of maturity, interdependency.
This stage employs consensual validation in communications focusing on conflict resolution as members can confront one another about their differences and still show respect for the legitimacy of personal views.
This group will become a cohesive team capable of reaching solutions to shared problems. This team would reflect cooperative decision making, respect for differences of viewpoint and other such growth producing measures that encourage honest and open communications. Learners who experience this growth are not likely to have pent up and unresolved hostility like what plagues present day society.
Groups that participate in the interdependent group processes featuring consensual validation will likely engage problem solving activities with enthusiasm and with a positive sense of mental health.
This group having reached its mature stage will appreciate the value of personal and cooperative inquiry that is guided by the methods and materials of the disciplines within each realm of meaning. They will find pleasure in their efforts to find and execute solutions to problems using insights drawn from active participation in these disciplines that will motivate them to seek solutions through independent and cooperative activities.