THANK YOU TEDDY!!

as class began, and the professor revealed the class average for the midterm, i was a bit worried. i do remember handing in the midterm feeling a little uncertain about a couple of questions, but i guess hearing "69" from the professor really confirmed my destiny. turns out, i didn't do that bad. i usually shoot for A's but i don't mind being complacent just this one time. i don't think the material was that difficult more so than the format of the exam. and so when the professor proposed that as long as 100% of the class agrees to a reasonable request in attempt to adjust our grade/ editing the format of the next exam, i'm thinking, "what is the professor about to get himself into?" i know for a fact, the multiple multiple choice was going out the window; it was a smart way of asking, almost, 50 different questions, condensed into, what appears to be only 8 questions. i would say, out of the terms under "how people handle conflict" i was more of a mix between avoidance and accommodation. i wont neglect to mention that i was a bit pissimistic, thinking it was going to be mission impossible to find a request that EVERYONE were better off. i was wrong! in fact, we acheived quite a bagain. i think we couldn't have had a better leader who identified with our request and pretty much found a common denominator we all desired. from this point on, i was all about accommodating others request because again, i didn't do bad so i kinda felt bad for those who felt discouraged in acheiveing a desirable grade. i'm completely content with the outcome and don't think it couldve happend any better. THANX TEDDY!! HAHAA

it was worth a shot

wow! even though the planning process was introduced to us after this assignment, i feel this systematic procedure stumbled upon my group intuitively. commencing this assignment, my group had a bit of an advantage as we entered the class with sketches of our contraption; beginnig the planning phase in advance. though our contraption was a failure i believe my group carried out the planning steps quite successfully. our goals and objectives were pretty evident; building an egg protection device that would keep the egg from cracking after being dropped from 10 feet in the air. we were conscious about the time that was given and we met the deadlines of deliberating our plan as well as constructing our contraction. we were informed of the limited material that will be allowed to construct such a contraption. off the bat, i think out group leader emerged naturally. he took charge and clearly explained his opinion. though he sketches were already made, he was completely opened for constructive feedback; everyone in the group contributed their two cents and as a result, we all were getting along and seemed quite compatible. then we began to alter the sketches already made as we began to realize we needed a more efficient cushion to offset the impact. however, i don't think anyone realized that dropping the egg from 10 feet above doesn't guarantee that it will fall strait down without flopping from side to side. this i believe was our main flaw that hindered our plan. not aware of this, we began our tactical plan. it was then when we started dividing up the tasks; one person measured the straws and marked a specific cut off point as the next person would cut the straw and tape them together. the next person would then begin to build the base/ foundation of this protection device. my task was mainly to guard the egg with my life as we were told if it were to break at any point, we can no longer participate (i did a fantastic job!). to make a long story short, our egg was one of the many that cracked (though it wasn't as severe as others). again, i think our flaw was not addressing the possibilities of the egg flopping from side to side not assuring that the egg will land on its purposeful contraction, instead, landing on the other, non-protected side. we did a hell of a job though! it was worth a shot.