This is the P2PU Archive. If you want the current site, go to www.p2pu.org!
Conflict Resolution
My recent threads
You haven't posted any discussions yet.
Recently updated threads
- Notification of research observation Tue, 2011-04-05 23:19
- Week 8: Multi-Track Diplomacy Mon, 2011-03-21 03:19
- Week 7: Ethics Sun, 2011-03-13 23:39
- Week 5: Facilitated Dialogue & Appreciative Inquiry Wed, 2011-03-09 21:50
- Week 4: Mediation Wed, 2011-03-09 21:14
Social Contract
In preparation for our shared learning experience in this course, it is important that we create a "social contract." This set of guidelines will help us to establish common expectations for communication, behavior, and participation within the class. Examples could include: no name-calling; ask for clarification rather than making assumptions about what someone has said; everyone should participate in online discussion at least once a week. (These are just examples - everything in our social contract will be established as a group.)
Please use this discussion thread to propose expectations you feel are necessary for our social contract. At the end of our first week, I will create a draft of the contract for us to discuss and approve/edit as a group. This thread can also be used as a place for you to post any suggestions you may have for the syllabus - as a peer-led course, it is important that we are focusing on the issues that you want to learn about!
I'd be able to do text based chatting via Skype if anyone wants to.
Dave, thanks for bringing this up - I'm going to post shortly about creating chat/face-to-face discussion groups!
I propose the following to the class
A 5 limit, per week, posts/responses
NO USE OF THE CAPSLOCK UNLESS GRAMMAR COMPEL US
No name-calling and/or use of "bad words"
Use of "In my opinion", in the beginning of all posts
For those who will be using "Skype" to record and upload onto a YouTube channel for all to view at a later time.
What do you think?
Joshua,
I like your ideas about avoiding capslock ("yelling"), and about banning name-calling. Do you think that we need to explicitly start all posts with the words "in my opinion," or do you think we could word this point differently so it doesn't seem quite so restrictive? I know it would be difficult for me to remember to do that every time!
I also add these few points :
-Respect between members regardless of their religion ,race,language..etc.
-Try always to understand and to be understood ,explain your points of view clearly .
-Criticize thoughts or ideas ,but not the people (positive criticism ).
- Praise any good ideas that inspire you,and be thankful to the owner.
Excellent additions! I really like how you made these all positive (things we should do) as opposed to negative (things we should not do) - I think it's easier for people to follow guidelines like this.
I'm wondering what is the best way to leverage the time difference component between students for the benefit of everyone?
Do you think a) it makes sense to segregate students into groups by timezone in order to benefit from online availability for real-time communication (skype, chat, etc.) b)or would that be discriminative and pose a disadvantage for the others?
btw, I can do skype (username: josephza) GMT+2
I think it is a very good idea to group participants based on their time zone.
Thanks for bringing this up, Joe! I will be posting soon about creating smaller chat groups within the class so we can have live discussion in addition to our forum discussions. Zaheer, basing the groups on time zones is an excellent idea! I'll include more details in my post...
There's also a chat room that's made for the course build into this website; is there a bandwidth limit, or occupancy limit to it? Rather than using Skype (since it's another program to download for those who don't have it) could we use the build-in chat room?
I agree with Joshua Alcantara's no cap-lock rule. However, I'm not sure about the 5 post limit. That rule may be difficult to enforce, and it depends on the purpose of it. If it's to eliminate spam, then how about a rule for no spamming(definition needs to be clarified of course)?
Rei, I agree that the 5-post limit is a bit touchy, for the reasons you listed as well as because I feel that it is important for everyone to express themselves. Rather than placing restrictions on ourselves from the get-go, let's deal with issues as they arise - being that this is a conflict resolution course, this could provide some excellent opportunities to utilize our new skills!
I think it could be better for no rules, just work on the principle of respect for each other. If in the case conflicts does arise during our discussion, at least we could all see what led to it which is a form of learning itself.
PS. despite wat i said, i do agree with no cap lock though.
The social contarct is of great importance in guiding our discussion limits. Open-ended discussions may be a substrate for discussion conflicts and disapointments. Common rules will be our pathway. Tom
Well said, Tom!
I agree with "ZM L" that it would be a lot simpler if we just started with the principle of "mutual respect" (which is already self-evident on p2pu anyway, in my opinion).
Call me optimistic, but I don't really anticipate any problems that would call for an explicitly-written social contract in an online class setting where everyone is here to learn about conflict resolution.
So I think it makes sense to refrain from drawing rules ahead of time and instead suggest new rules over time in this thread -- but only if the need arises.
I agree with Huy Zing,we are all adults and we know what respect means so i think we should not be in a hurry to make rules but rather let us trust ourselves to be of good conduct as we are here to learn and make friends and not to fight and make enemies.
I think the discussion we just had about drafting a social contract have already brought up some principal points to everyone's attention. We should start the course and see how it will go.
I agree we do not need rules except for everyone to be honest, sincere and committed.
I love that many of you are so positive and enthusiastic that you feel rules are unnecessary! While I do not anticipate any major problems during our course, the social contract (in addition to being a requirement of P2PU) is an important agreement for us to create as a community in order to establish clear guidelines for how we interact. The purpose is not to make rules, but rather to clearly express our shared goals and expectations. I would personally find it acceptable to use a simple statement such as "mutual respect," as Huy suggested. While we do not require a complicated social contract, it is essential that we have some agreement to guide our interactions throughout this course.
How about "P2PU Conflict Resolution, developing wise, honorable, and cultivated citizens" as a social contract. I agree we don't need a huge set of rules but a vision or one sentence that underlines social expectancies is good.
I think it is a good idea to set mainly the goals and expectation. As for the rules I believe on the open system based on mutual respect and use of common sense (like not caps for shouting, finger pointing to some one, etc)
For goals and expectations I would said my idea is:
- Get a clear idea of how to deal with conflict when emotions start arising from the involved parties
- Understand/Develop a method to solve conflict by a win/win or compromises
- Techniques to identify when the conflict is getting out of scoop and how to re-engage on the original argument
I’m a supporter of brevity and a suggested process that lends itself well to the course work requesting the writer to mentally or literally “walk away” from their post prior to sending it to consider and reconsider developing more concise, succinct language.
I think the communication through emails and chat rooms are very cold, then how can we know that the messages sent are honest, sincere and peaceful?
I think defining any netiquette can be beneficial when we can communicate and interact.
For example, as suggested above: do not write in capital letters, but also, add emoticons in special cases, like irony, jokes, etc.. (or special tags like: message)
Perhaps, start sentences with "I believe" or "I think" instead of "you are. "
It's just my opinion.
Regards.
David
My vote goes to the Vision/Loose Framework camp as opposed to concrete rules and regulations. While I see the merit to having clarity aourn rules of engagement, it has been my experience that some people inevitably gravitate to self-appointed policing. When this occurs the focus can be more on the rules than the content.
It looks like we have democratically decided on a state of anarchy with regard to our social contract. :)
For now, let's just say we will all do our best to demonstrate respect to one another, and deal with any issues as they arise - maybe we'll get an opportunity to flex our new conflict resolution muscles!
Well mediated Emily :)