The Smallest Group

My Open University course information referred to reflective practice in terms of a conversation with yourself (Moon, 2006). In those terms I could regard the smallest group, not to be me and another person but me and the me that evolves with reflection. So then when Mead speaks of small groups and their ability, as thoughtful and committed citizens, to change the world, maybe I can start with the smallest group - past me, present me and future me.

I can see this blog as a reflective diary or learning journal which as Moon (2006) describes is a continuous conversation with myself where I am setting questions and exploring answers and learning from my experiences as I might in a conversation with a like-minded friend. As Moon puts it 'A journal is a friend that is always there...'

This friend I hope to share with, learn from and evolve to be a better friend in the future, more thoughtful and committed and better able to change the world.

• Learning and Assessing through Reflection: a Practical Guide 
• Reflection in Higher Education Learning
• Learning Journals: A Handbook for Reflective Practice and Professional Development

 Moon, J. (2006) Learning Journals, 2^nd edn, London, Routledge

A Small Group

Working with a new group of adolescents could make me doubt Mead's ideas around groups achieving anything. How they get to be the 'thoughtful, committed citizens' that 'can change the world' could seem an impossibility. If it wasn't for Tuckman's (1965) group theory working in the past,  I might not believe it.

Instead I ask myself where is the group now and what do I have to do to promote group development so it can move through the stages below:

Forming > Storming > Norming > Performing

The group today was certainly forming and storming. The behaviour of the group was not self regulating in any way. New people tested boundaries and adult workers had to be constantly vigilant and behave in a quite authoritarian manner to assert and maintain those boundaries. Some characters dominated the session and few people took any responsibility for their actions while others opted out.

So we stopped the session and gathered everyone together. We talked about what they wanted from the session and what their and our expectations were and recognised the fact that it was a new group that had to acclimatise to the environment and each other. We gave everyone the chance to contribute but did not force anyone who was not comfortable and who could contribute on paper more easily. We talked about the consequences of actions from the curtailing of activities by either removal of the person or the shortening of the session. And the expansion of the range of available activities according the interest of the group and the ability of individuals to take on responsibility.

We have a long way to go...from forming and storming to norming and performing. And from experience I know that its not a straight line but a zig zag and overlapping line where one day in one activity we will reach the performing stage and then in the next five minutes regress back with a comment or a misunderstanding to the storming stage. We have a long way to go. But its exciting because now its all potential. There's a long way to go. Who knows what they will achieve and how they will change the world.

Tuckman, B. W. (1965) ‘Developmental sequence in small groups’, Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399. 

Never Doubt

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.

Margaret Mead 

As I watched Pride and 'Bill Nighy, Imelda Staunton and George MacKay sparkle in this tale of lesbian and gay activists’ support for the miners’ strike', as Mark Kermode put it (Observer, Sep 14, 2014) and was inspired.

I remembered what Martin Niemöller had said about the need to stand up for other people.


First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

There are so many things I am not and so many things that I am and at one time or another I have been treated with prejudice because of what people thought I was or was not. Hasn't everyone?

So shouldn't I stand up for other people whether they are people like me or not - because they are people? Or should I stand up for stuff like ethical issues or justice? Do I have to have something to believe in? Will I, as Malcolm X suggests 'fall for anything' if I don't 'stand for something'?

What do I believe and what do I stand for? How do I show it? In how I live? What else? In the film Pride you could see prejudice being overcome and shows of unlikely solidarity on a grand scale. I thought of the marches I had been on whether for peace or for trade justice or while on strike, and enjoyed those feelings of solidarity. What did they do though? Were they just to make me feel better, as if I was doing something? Was I doing anything?

Protests work. Look at a writer for the Independent, Johann Hari's article aptly titled 'Protests Work' (2010). Unsurprisingly he ends his article with the same Margaret Mead quote above.

Tomorrow is The People's Climate March. It's happening in 150 countries all over the world, from Melbourne to New York. Its a call to action to influence decisions at the UN Climate Summit. Tomorrow the march will be going from Temple to Parliament Square in London. Tomorrow I will be there. I will be making a stand.

Protests work. Never doubt.