I.

Rationale

People affiliate themselves with other people to satisfy themselves with their survival,

psychological, informational, interpersonal and collective needs that they didnt have (Goethal &

Mackie, 1987). This action has been proven by the evolutionary theory to be significant for the

persistence of the human race (Gouran & Hirokawa, 1983). Furthermore, liking because of

similarities was also a factor which would draw people to spend time together (Berscheid, 1983).

Groups experience decision making in order to suffice for those needs. Gouran and

Hirokawa (1983) outlined four functions that can be beneficial to the group decision-making.

These include analysis of the problem, goal setting, identification of alternatives, and evaluation

of positive and negative characteristics. These four functions were all equal in worth and

essential in achieving a high-quality decision.

Furthermore, it is inevitable for the emergence of conflict along the process of decision-

making. Almost all conflicts involve communication problems (Colorado University, 1988),

comprising a cause and effect relationship. Poor communications would lead to

misunderstandings, which is a prerequisite for conflicts. When the relationship is already

strained, communication problems arise because the flow of information would be inaccurate,

guarded and infrequent. As a result, communication plays a vital role in conflict situations.

Miscommunication, particularly the lack of information dissemination, has a huge impact

in the progress of the group. Not all the members would be able to contribute ideas and discuss,

leading to lesser productivity of the organization. Worse, it can make the members who were not

informed feel invalidated, thus, decreasing their commitment to the group.

 There are three kinds of team commitment cited by Eikenberry (2011): commitment to

each other and each others success, commitment to teams success and commitment to the

organization and organization goals. Commitment to each of the members success pertains to

actively supporting, believing and caring about each other. This type of commitment creates

comfortable and stress free environment, a necessary factor for higher productivity. Commitment

to the teams success is about understanding the teams role, making them willing to work

together for the good of the team. Commitment to the organization is aligning ones goal to the

goal of the organization, taking pride and sense of obligation.

Since the work environment of a person strongly affects the extent of his or her

connection to the group (Bogaert, Boone, & Wittleloostuijn, 2012), it is important to let the

group member feel belongingness through words of appreciation and positive regards.

This is why facilitators ought to improve the commitment and communication of the

target group, because aside from them being the process areas that need the most improvement, it

is also a factor in maintaining the groups relationship.

II. Group Composition

The participants were the pioneer members of the Parade Team during the 2013

Intramurals of the University of the Philippines High School batch 2013, composed of nine

females and one male whose ages ranged from 18-19 years old. Only 8 of the 11 participants

pursued to enter collegiate study in UP; the other two pursued to enter in the University of San

Carlos (USC).
 Health-wise, two of the group members were allergic to seafood and one was allergic to

dust. Also, two of the members reported to be asthmatic and one was prone to hyperventilation.

Summing up from the foundation of the group onto the present, the group has existed for

a total of two years. Through these years, all of the aforementioned members were also active

because they continued their friendship by transforming the group into a barkada after achieving

their objective, which was to make good quality props for the parade.

Based on the initial interview, majority of the members reported that they joined the

group because their friends were also joining the group. With this, mutual friends were

acquainted and became friends with each other in the process. Another reason why the members

joined the group was that they were non-cheer dancers and were not involved in any sports

during the Intramural games so they had no way to decline the participation in the Parade

Team.

Five of the members were the eldest, and only one was the youngest amongst their

siblings. The rest were middle-children. This may have affected the groups workflow and

initiative. The group reported that they held meetings for the prop-making, and when asked about

how they generated idea, they said that they would wait for a suggestion to pop out and the flow

of suggestions would follow freely. Also, a motivating factor for these meetings was the need to

not be embarrassed by the quality of the props that they would make.

Although the ideas in the meetings were expressed openly and every member gets a

chance to share or give some inputs, the members reported that they conducted general

meetings rarely. However, this does not mean that they did not suggest ideas when they were not
complete. The rare occurrence of the general meetings was just because of the difference of time

availability of the group members.

III. Group Needs

A Training Needs Analysis questionnaire was utilized by the facilitators to gather data on

profile of the group and perception of the group members on the groups condition.

Table 1

Group Rating of Process Elements

Focus Area x SD

Enjoyment 4.67 0.66

Determination 4.44 0.83

Closeness 4.22 0.92

Cooperation 0.79

Initiative 4.11 0.87

Supportiveness 0.99

Productivity 1.20

Competence 1.10

Communication 3.77 0.92

Commitment 3.56 0.96

 A Likert scale was used with excellent rated as 5 and poor as 1. Table 1 presented the

ratings of the group based on the ten process areas. Enjoyment received the highest rating.

Furthermore, the communication and commitment areas received the lowest ratings.

The group rated its perceived successfulness of the group with a mean of 5.89 (SD =

1.20).

Table 2

Group Strengths

Strength f

Cooperation, closeness, unity 13

& similarities

Determination and hardwork 5

Understanding, open- 4

mindedness

Communication 8

Procrastination 6

Commitment 4

The results of Table 2 further supported the results of Table 1 citing cooperation as the

strongest aspect of the group.

Consequently, the facilitators chose to focus on developing the commitment and

communication among the group members as what they have disclosed. Base on the initial
interview with them, specifically, open and more positive way of communicating were what the

group perceived to be their weakness.

IV. Objectives

The learning exercise sought to fulfill the following objectives:

1. To demonstrate positive feedback through the use of affirmative words in a

nonthreatening manner to group members during the activities.

2. To appreciate the positive working environment through sharing of at least two

realizations on the impact of positive feedback on the groups performance during the

activities.

3. To determine at least three factors which prevent the members from giving of words of

appreciation and endearment to others and share possible alternatives during the

activities.

4. To assess the importance of working together in achieving the goals per tasks by sharing

their insights on the effects of collaboration during the processing.

V. SLE Plan

The SLE commenced on the 3rd day of June 2015, Tuesday, from 3:00-4:00 PM, at the

Room 246 (Psychology Laboratory) in the AS Building of the University of the Philippines

Cebu. The ice breaker took 10 minutes, first activity took up 20 minutes, 10 minutes for the

sharing, followed by 10 minutes for the second activity, 30 minutes for the third activity, 40

minutes for the last activity and 25 minutes for the processing.

Dinner was served to everyone after the activity.

VI. Procedures and Mechanics

A. Ice Breaker

Mechanics:

1. Each participant is to randomly choose his/her partner to play rock-paper-scissors.

2. The winners would act their favorite movie in a nonverbal manner and the losers would

have to guess it.

3. The winners and losers of each pair would group together and play another round of

rock-paper-scissors.

4. The losers would act their favorite song in a nonverbal manner and the winners would

have to guess it.

5. For the last question, the participants would randomly find a partner that he/she hasnt

paired with before.

6. They would play rock-paper-scissors.

 7. The winners would act their favorite food in a nonverbal manner and the losers would

have to guess it.

B. First Activity: End of the Pizza world

Introduction: Oh no, the CIA has overheard your sentiments in the previous activity and has

decided to take away all the pizzas in the world. Only 10 necessary ingredients are left, but they

are going after it right now in this moment. Because you are the super Parade Team, with your

super cooperation and creativity, you are tasked to race against the CIA to save the future of the

pizzas. You now have to decide which among the ten ingredients you would want to save.

However, because of time constraints, you can only save three ingredients as of the moment.

Mechanics:

1. Each person is to pick through fishbowl the ingredient they are to represent.

2. They are then given two (2) minutes to think of a creative way in presenting to the group

the ingredient they are assigned.

3. After the short introduction, each member is to say which ingredient he/she thinks should

be saved.

4. It will be recorded which ingredient was the choice of the majority.

5. The top three ingredient will be the saved ones.

C. Second activity: Crusting the seven seas and oceans

Although what you did was heart breaking, I would like to commend you for making a

very tough decision. Rest assured that your effort will not be in vain. But now, it is not that easy
to obtain the three ingredients because they are situated at the opposite poles of the world. For

efficiency, it would be better to group you into three tribes, with each tribe assigned to an

ingredient.

Instructions: Each of the tribe member will have to cross from the starting point to the end point

and return to the starting point again. While doing this, they are to close their eyes and listen to

the instructions of their team members.

Mechanics:

1. The participants will group themselves into three tribes.

2. All tribe members will have to cross from the starting point to the endpoint in

succession.

3. While doing this, they would close their eyes and listen to the other members coach

them.

4. The next member would have to wait for the preceding member to finish before he/she

can start crossing.

5. They would repeat this until all of the members have successfully crossed the seven

seas and oceans.

D. Third activity: Circum-pie-rence

Mechanics:

1. Each tribe members will be linked using a paper chain. Cutting off the link, whether

accidentally or purposely, will mean taking away one clue to find the ingredients.
 2. Each tribe will have to answer a math equation that will lead them to the specific

circumference of a pizza that they are to make.

3. Without the tribes knowing, there will be only one equation to solve. They have to

discover among themselves that the clues each tribe has are interconnected with one

another.

4. They will be allowed to communicate with the other tribes in answering.

5. It is the prerogative of each tribe to find the other parts of the solutions.

6. They will be given 10 minutes to solve.

7. If they are successful, they are given a new ingredient: the dough and the clues on the

location of the remaining 7 ingredients: (bacon, ham, cheese, red sauce, pineapple,

tomatoes, mushroom, pepperoni, and beef) within the vicinity of AS Lobby.

E. Fourth activity: Pizza hunting and making

Story. First, congratulations! You have come this far and there is no backing down now. With

your crust, trust that you can find the remaining six ingredients.

Since you are the only ones who know what a pizza looks and tastes like, you are tasked by the

fairy godmother to recreate and reintroduce the pizza to humanity through finding the remaining

ingredients.

You have two choices, 1) you can find all the other ingredients as one group given 15 minutes, 2)

cut the link into 3 and you will be given 5 minutes. You have one minute to decide.

Again, we remind you that any paper chains that would be cut off would mean taking away one

clue.
 1. They are given a set of clues on the location of the ingredients.

2. Together, they will solve clues and find the ingredients.

3. Once they find all the ingredients, they are to make the pizza.

4. They are given one sheet of bond paper, ingredients, and other materials to complete

the task.

5. They are to follow the prescribed circumference that they have solved in the previous

activity.

6. The order of putting the pizza ingredients is as follows: crust, red sauce, tomatoes, ham,

pineapple, beef, pepperoni, mushroom, bacon and cheese.

7. Once done, they are to make 7 pizzas in the span of 5 minutes.

- DINNER -

VII. Processing tools

The processing tools were made in accordance to the TNA provided by the participants

prior to the activity. The questions were centered on commitment and affective communication.

Other questions sprung out from the responses made by the participants as they were asked to

elaborate more on their insights.

Processing tools

The processing questions raised during the group processing were done per activity. It

was crafted in accordance with the five parts of the Experiential Learning Model: experiencing,

sharing, processing, generalizing and applying. Probing questions were also employed to evoke

details from the participants.

Observation tools

To maximize time during the activity, the observation tools employed both open-ended

questions and a checklist. Each of the participants were represented by a number (e.g. 1 Cyril,

2 Felda, 3 Elaine, 4 Ella, 5 Hannah, 6 Jai-jai, 7 Jasmine, 8 Jessah, 9 Ria and 10

Yan-yan). Words (e.g. encouragement, insults) relating to communication were used in

observing them.

VIII. Process Report

The participants natural way of communication was through the use of sarcasm, blunt

words, and irony, insult, but without the intention to hurt others. Delivered in a joking manner,

this was observed as early as the ice breaker. Though the jokes was hurtful in nature, it was as

if a tacit agreement for everybody in the group not to take it seriously.

Ice breaker. It was observed that everyone followed the rules and participated with

enthusiasm. Also, all pairs were able to guess the partners favorites within seconds, except for

one who did not get the correct answer twice. There was also a short tte--tte on the how the

participants were feeling. As they said, they were happy to have seen each other as a group after

a long time.

End of the Pizza world. All of the members were able to think of a creative manner to

present their ingredients even before the allotted time was finished. When it came to the decision

part of which ingredient to save, the responses of the participants were in line with their natural

way of communication. Other participants said that they wouldnt save cheese because of the
person who represented it. However, in contrast, cheese was part of the top ingredients they

chose along with the other three ingredients. Due to that, they had another round of choosing to

come up with the top three. As they reported during the sharing, they didnt choose the

ingredients in relation to the group but only to their personal preference.

In general, the activity was successful, as the participants were able to present the

ingredients creatively and entertained the others with their answers. For those who werent

chosen, they have lightly accepted the groups decisions, and voiced out their feelings in a joking

manner.

Circum-pie-rence. The participants grouped themselves according to who was their

closest friends, and those who were not able to group immediately, the same people who werent

chosen in the previous activity, decided to group together. All of the participants were efficient

in crossing from the starting point to the finish, even with their eyes closed. No accidents had

occurred. They eagerly performed the activity, consuming only one-fifth of the allotted time.

After, the chains were then given, and each of the members of the tribes willingly worked

together in attaching the chains. When the other two tribes used up all the reserved staple wires,

the remaining tribe resorted to using the masking tape to attach each of the paper links. One

participant humorously blamed one member of the other tribe who used up more than what was

necessary on the staple wires. Also, it was noticed that the paper chains themselves were

attached differently for a tribe, as one of the chain was cuffed longer in length compared to

others.

When the math equations were presented, the first reaction of the participants were

negative, saying that how can we solve this, but as fast as they groaned, they immediately took
pride in their members who were, according to them, Mathematically-blessed. Upon receiving

the equations, one of the tribe immediately had the answer, though wrong, and this tribe decided

to ask the other tribes about their equations. One tribe had solved the radius first and all the

others followed. They then worked together to solve the equation and came up with the correct

answer.

When asked if they would like to find the other ingredients as a team or independently as

tribes, they opted for the first choice. For them, it was for practical purposes, because of the

longer amount of time given and avoid competition when grouped in three. Nobody in the group

opposed this decision.

Pizza hunting and making. The participants were enthusiastic to go out and do treasure

hunting. They found some of the ingredients easily, but were stuck with the last ingredient,

taking up most of their time. During this activity, all of them were linked but even so, they

decided to hold each others hands which according to them during the processing was natural

for the situation at hand. It was also during this activity that three of the links were cut off

accidentally because of a participant trying to tie her hair. When this happened, the said

participant decided to insert her hand on the remaining links, and the other participant didnt

reprimand her for what happened.

All of them gave suggestions as to where the ingredients were located and what the clues

would have meant, resulting to varied answers. One of the participants who suggested the correct

answer but was not entertained immediately, voiced out that I-told-you-so speech to the other

members.
 During the pizza making activity, the participants were united in making the pizza, except

for one. At the start, during the measurement of the circumference, some of the participants

reprimanded a participant who took the opportunity to use a compass. However, the said

participant continued to use the compass and everyone waited for him to be done. Once done, the

others immediately cut the dough and tape the other ingredients. One participant made a

crust, but received another reprimand for the effort. She stopped for a while, but another

participant praised her work so she continued.

A participant continuously reminded the one participant who didnt help out in an ironic

and sarcastic manner, but the latter just continued with the by-standing behavior, reasoning that

she was the supervisor and the quality control. It was also her who criticized the quality of

the pizza, but didnt give any suggestion or alternative that would make the product better.

Instead, she continued on saying maot kayo inyong pizza and laughing.

During the beat the record part, one person suggested the division of labor tactic and

everyone in the group followed suit. Everyone, including the previous participant who didnt

help, assigned themselves to a certain task and did their job efficiently. Though everyone was in

disarray and the activity involved a lot of mess, they were able to successfully make 7 pizzas

with only a 30 second extension in the allotted five minutes.

The group processing evoked a lot of responses from the participants. They were actively

contributing their insights in the discussion, however, the insights were still done in their natural

way of communication. Therefore, the insights were sarcastic and lacking of seriousness and

depth. When asked if they would resort to affective communication, the participants admitted

that such communication is overacting and they would only use that if a member is truly worth
praising. They said that praising, for them, is a different context so it is not every day that they

would praise their friends.

It was also observed that the discussion would oftentimes sidetrack, as the participants

started to insert different topics. When this happened, the facilitators try to bring them back to

the matter at hand, and again, they would find ways to sidetrack the discussion.

Though everyone was contributing to the discussion, it was obvious that some of the

participants dominated it while others silently watched, and shared only when the facilitators

asked for their insights.

There were also two of the participants who disclosed that they were not informed on

certain aspects of the previous activity.

In the discussion, the real problem which was the purpose of the group, came out. This

happened when a participant, the same one who didnt help that much in the pizza making, asked

the others ngano friends man ta. This led to a conversation of varying responses and conflict-

prone atmosphere.

The participants also related the existence of the paper chains as the barrier to their

friendship, but one of the participants said that it was more of a unifying force for them to

collaborate. This part of the discussion was able to elicit a bit of affective communication from

the participants, as they related the activity to their friendship in real life.
VIII. Inferences

Analysis and Conclusions

Despite the failure to meet the first objective which was to elicit affective communication

among the members, the activity became a tool for their natural way of communication to show.

Although majority of them reported in the TNA that they would like to adapt the affective way

of communication, this viewpoint changed during the group processing. Some of the participants

said that they were more comfortable in their present communication pattern, and that praise

would only be given if the situation entails the needcontradicting to their report in the TNA.

The notion that affective communication was oversentimental and mushy were cited as reasons

preventing them from applying it all the time. Therefore, it can be inferred that though the

participants would have liked to use more affective words in addressing others, the norm of the

group would prevent them to do so.

Further, the commitment of the group since the beginning of the activity was

incomparable. They had participated in all of the activities with high energies and unlimited

enthusiasm. The story of the pizza seemed real because of their great efforts put into the

activities. They finished all the activities within the limits of the allotted time, even earlier. The

last activity was already tiring for them, as seen in their faces when they didnt find easily the

last ingredient, yet they were in fervent interest in making the pizza. The groups strength which

was cohesiveness helped them in the beat-the-record round.

Another thing that has transpired in the activity was the misalignment of the activities to

the real problem of the group. Although commitment and communication were the main
problems listed in the TNA, an answer revealed in the discussion paved way to knowing the real

problem of the group, which was to find the purpose of the group.

The group, which was established as the Parade Team, has long accomplished their goal

and the members have remained with the group as it evolved as their barkada. Because of this, it

can be said that the group is stuck in the norming stage of the group development and with their

cohesion, they have developed enough trust to each other, resulting to fast and efficient ways in

finishing the activities. It is also because of this trust that some members do not actively

participate, knowing that the rest of the group would still perform the activities without his/her

cooperation.

Recommendations

Based on the background of the group, they have been together because of one purpose

during high school. The purpose of the group then was to make props for the cheer dance

competition. Since then, the members have been in constant get together as the group has

progressed into a barkada. The new development then had lacked of a newer purpose. They were

able to perform in their old purpose as the Parade Team yet their performance as a barkada is

questionable based on what was raised during processing. It seemed that they have remained in

the group due to the comfort they had experienced.

It is recommended for the group to explore activities leading them to their purpose.

Knowing the purpose would stop disagreeing thoughts of why they still stay with each other

despite the option not to. This would also strengthen their commitment to the group and help

them achieve affective communication without the barrier of awkwardness and soppy

sentiments.
IX. Insights

Group Development

As what resulted after the SLE activity, the group seemed to be stuck with finding its new

purpose after performing its old task. The members, despite being not friends at the very

beginning, have remained seeing each other despite the years that have passed. However, still the

tension provoking question Nganung friends man ta? came up during the processing. The

question provoked reflections among them and made them doubt the reality of their friendship.

One member blatantly said makigkita ka niya kay magamit nimo siya for her own perspective

of how the group served to her. We researcher suggested it to be the psychological needs,

especially social support and survival needs specifically financial support (e.g. borrowing of

money). The other members functioned to be the replacement of family members such as a

sister/brother or parental figure to them. The one who frequently plan, initiate the activities,

speak out her judgments and act objectively was viewed as the parental figure while the others

who share with them their interests with deep enthusiasm and passion were the sibling figures.

Overall, the members were like family because of the idea of naay maduolan and mashare-an

summarized in the satisfaction of these three needs: inclusion, affection and control. They also

shared that they associate themselves because of the specific characteristic of the person like

being naturally kind and intelligent. The intelligent members, as what the others see, were the

source of information. As what transpired in the discussion, it could be inferred that the members

did not emphasize such facts of their companionship because of censorship and viewing those

needs as opportunism.
 Because of the initial division of the members into smaller subgroups, acknowledging

them to be cohesive as one whole group may only apply to those who were present in the SLE

activity (they were the only ones who responded to our consistent request). The members who

did participate may have not felt satisfied in the above mentioned needs and found them from

their other groups.

As a whole, the entire group is in need to progress from the forming stage to the next

stage.

Personal Insights

Nulla:

Upon doing the activity, I have come to realize that being a facilitator is challenging, in

relation to three aspects: 1) the participants, 2) the mechanics, and 3) the time.

First, the participants in our SLE were friends, and in effect, they were comfortable

around us, saying things directly, and even complaining at times. It was hard to manage them,

specifically during the group processing wherein the topic would branch out into other, more

fun topics. Whenever this happens, I tend to get tempted to talk about those topics but I have to

always bring them back to the matter at hand, even if this meant cutting off their humorous

conversation. When we tried to ask for their insights, they tend to give us superficial, random

answersanother sign that they are too comfortable around us.

 Also, because of this friendship, the participants had easily missed on our first scheduled

SLE with excuses such as dysmenorrhea ko ron on the day of the activity itself, leaving my

partner and I waiting for them, and postponing the activity when they didnt arrive.

The second challenge was the organization of the games and the giving of mechanics.

Since we were the ones who made our games, the mechanics were not established yet. Ergo, we

had to make impromptu improvisations especially when the participants caught some loopholes.

On top of this, we had to make sure that they were entertained enough to not notice our mistakes.

Third, the time. Its either a) we tend to get involved in the activity to notice the time or

b) the activity was done faster than the time we allotted. Because of this, we had to either shorten

or lengthen the time for the activities. Sometimes, even if the time was running out, we would

give extensions since the hype and the excitement of the participants were at its peak already.

In general, facilitating is fun filled with adrenaline and pressure. One has to be mindful

during the activities and see to it that the participants are having fun and that everyone is

cooperating. Also, one has to keep in mind that the games are not just for fun, but also a means

for the betterment of the group, and that the SLE should become a way for the group to realize it.

Rosco:

It was a first for me, along with my partner, to facilitate a group. Ever since from the start

to the very end, I could say it required all of our blood, sweat and neurons. The process of

constructing an SLE based on the analysis of the TNA questionnaires was confusing and tedious.

Pointing affective communication towards each other and commitment of each member to the
group as the weaknesses of the group was easier said than done. It was challenging for our part

to measure the would-be commitment output of the group and to develop activities which would

make them appreciate the affective communication naturally along with the construction of the

objectives which should be parallel to the guidelines and still consider its realistic progression.

Further, the option to create an original storyline was fun at the same time effortful in making the

transition sensible and cohesive from one activity to another.

The preparation of the needed materials such as the paper cut outs for the ingredients

were stressful because we made them the night before. It was frustrating to think that it was

cancelled out an hour before the planned time because of the non-availability of the participants.

On the day of the SLE, we just prepared ourselves for the possibility of another

cancellation yet we hoped not. It was a jittery feeling during the actual.

Ive done well but I couldve done better were my thoughts after the whole activity.

The physical glitches (e.g. loss of one ingredient, materials left at home so I had to get it back)

were easily solved. I feel really bad during the processing. It was a big failure to my part that our

main objectives were not achieved. I could not blame the facetious behavior and superficial

responses of the participants because it was our own inadequacy not to be able to see the actual

problem of the group at the very beginning. I felt not good enough as a facilitator because of it. It

could be that I was too complacent.

In general, although we did not achieve our full objectives, it was an SLE worth

remembering since a lot was learned for us as facilitators especially in the construction and

preparation of the proper SLE activities and observation and facilitation during the actual event.
 REFERENCES

Bergami, M. and Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). Self-categorization, affective commitment and group

self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of Social

Psychology, 39, 55577.

Berscheid, E. (1983). Interpersonal Attraction.

Bogaert, S., Boone, C., & Wittleloostuijn, A. v. (2012). Social Value Orientation and Climate
Strength as Moderators of the Impact of Work Group Cooperative Climate on Affective
Commitment. Journal of Management Studies.

Colorado University. (1988). General information about communication problems. Retrieved

May 15, 2015, from Conflict Information Consortium Web site:
http://conflict.colorado.edu/

Eikenberry, K. (2011, November 1). The three types of team commitment. Retrieved from Eyes
on sales Web site: http://www.eyesonsales.com

Gouran, D., & Hirokawa, R. (1983). Functional perspective on group decision making.

Iverson, R., & Buttigieg, D. (1999). Affective, normative and continuance commitment: Can the
"right kind" of commitment be managed? Joumal of Management Studies.

Ortigas, C. (1990). Group processes and the inductive method: Theory and the practice in the
Philippines. Ateneo de Manila University Press .
 APPENDIX A

TNA Questionnaire

Good day, friends! First, we would like to thank you for participating in our team building

activity. We would like to ask you to answer a short survey before we conduct the

aforementioned activity. Rest assured that your answers will remain confidential.

Group Profile

Name of Organization:

Number of Group Members:

1. How did the group form?

2. How many years are you involved in the group?

3. Why did you join the group?

4. What is the objective(s) of the group?

5. Do you conduct meetings? YES NO

If yes:

5.1 How often?

I I I I I

Never Almost never Seldom Almost always Always

 5.2 What is the purpose(s) of the meetings?

5.3 Describe how the ideas were shared in the meetings.

Organizations Evaluation

This scale is to assess your personal ratings on the quality of the group. Please put a check mark

() on the box that corresponds to your answers.

Rate your group in Excellent Good Average Fair Poor

terms of:

1. Closeness

2. Cooperation

3. Initiative

4. Enjoyment

5. Supportiveness

6. Productivity

7. Determination
8. Communication

9. Commitment

10. Competence

6. Please rate in a scale the successfulness of the group in fulfilling its objective, with 1 as least

successful and 7 as most successful.

I I I I I I I

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. What do you think were the factors that contributed to the success of the group?

If unsuccessful, what do you think were the factors that hindered the group from achieving

success?

8. What are the group's strengths?

9. What are the group's weaknesses?

10. What opportunities do you think would best develop the potential of the group?

11. What aspects of the organization would you like to be developed?

12. Have you joined any team building activities in the past? YES NO
13. If yes, please specify:

a. Name of organization that conducted the team-building:

b. Date of team-building and place:

c. Objective(s) of team-building:

14. If no:

14.1. Are you willing to participate in one?

14.2. If yes, what are your expectations in joining a team building?

14.3. If no, what are your reasons?

Personal Information

School: Program:

Occupation:

Please encircle you perceived socioeconomic status:

I I I I I

Very Rich Middle Poor Very

Rich Poor

Age: Gender:

Birth order in the family: Number of Siblings:

Religion: Place of origin:

Allergies: Respiratory Problems:

Other Health Risk/s:

 APPENDIX B

Materials and Budget

ITEM Price Quantity Unit Total

Neon orange P 7.00 1 Piece P 7.00

cartolina

Red cartolina P 7.00 2 Piece P 14.00

Pack of brown art P7.00 1 Piece P 7.00

paper

Pack of P 32.00 1 Piece P 32.00

multicolored

construction paper

Short bond paper P 0.50 16 Piece P 8.00

Masking tape P 21.00 1 Piece P 21.00

Box of staple wire P 6.00 1 Piece P 6.00

(No. 10)

Goldilocks cake P 22.00 1 Piece P 22.00

slice

McDonalds P 57.00 13 Piece P 831.00

chicken fillet and

delivery

Total: P 948.00
 APPENDIX C

PROCESSING QUESTIONS

First Activity

1. How did you feel that you were chosen to be saved?

2. How did you feel that you were not chosen?

3. How were you able to decide who to save and not to?

4. How were feeling while deciding?

5. How did the activity affect your relationship with one another?

Second Activity 1. How did you come up with a strategy in fulfilling the task?

2. How was the experience of not being able to see in walking and

relying on your team?

3. Was the feeling being able to achieve the task in just one minute?

Third Activity

1. How did you find the activity (solving for the circumference)?

2. How was the feeling knowing that you have to go to the other tribes

to be able to solve the equation?

3. Who took the first lead to go the other tribes?

4. How was the experience in looking for the ingredients? Difficulties

encountered?

5. How was it working as one with the other tribes? How did the new

members help you?

 6. What difficulties did you encounter with the other tribes members?

Fourth Activity

1. How did you feel that you were able to recreate the pizza and

reintroduce them to humanity again?

2. Who was the one planning the activity?

3. Who was the one who execute the plans?

4. Who was the most supportive to other members?

5. Who was the most dedicated to solve the mystery?

6. Who was the most dedicated in not breaking the paper chains?

7. When beating your own record, what do you think were the factors

that made you achieve/fail at the task?

8. How did you feel about this?

9. How was the atmosphere (working environment) among the team

when working for the pizzas?

10. What was/were the strategy employed by the group in making the

pizzas within 7 minutes?

11. What could have been done to improve the groups performance in

the task?

12. If given another chance, what would you have changed in your

performance as a group?

13. What did you learn in the activity?

14. How would you relate the entire activity in real life?
 APPENDIX D

OBSERVATION TOOLS

A. Communication

Words of: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Support 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Encouragement 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

Discouragement 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Insult 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Padungog- 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

dungog

Swear words 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Appraisal for 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1

self/own group

Appraisal for 1 2 2 1 0 0 1 0 2 0

others

1. Who said the most number of positive appraisals? Ria

2. Who said the most number of negative appraisals? Elaine

3. Who took the appraisal

Positive appraisal Negative appraisal

Seriously

Lightly Cyril

Positively Hannah

Negatively

Defensively

B. Commitment to group

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Initiative x x x x x 0 0 0 x 0

Cooperative x x 0 x x x x x x x

Passive 0 0 x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Planner 0 x 0 0 0 0 0 0 x 0

Dessenter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Informed x 0 0 x x x 0 x x x

on all

aspects of

the activity
 Time allotted Time finished Passed/Failed Remarks

First Activity 20 mins 12 min Passed

Second Activity 10 mins 5 mins Passed

Third Activity 30 mins 19 mins Passed

Fourth Activity 40 mins 42 mins Passed 3 links were

cut off