Group Work Articles Learning and Understanding G 6 f1

Name – Avinash Vilas Pawar
Roll no – 46
Sub – Social Group Work
Guide – Dr. Chitra Rajuskar
List of Articles –
I. Theme – importance of social group work in youth welfare
Article – providing support to young people through group work
Author – Jane Westergaard
II. Theme – Importance of social group work in community organization .
Article – social group work in community setting.
Author – Joseph Vegheese.
III. Theme – Importance of social group work in women welfare
Article – Group work for women- gender and group identity In Social
Dilemmas.
Author - Rachel Croson, Melanie Marks And Jessica Snyde
Negotiation Journal October 2008 1

Article – 1
Groupwork 20(1), 2010, pp.87-102. © W&B, 2010. DOI:

10.1921/095182410X535926Supp ting young people through groupwork:
Personalized learning and development
Providing support to young people through groupwork: Delivering personalized
learning and development in the group context
Jane Westergaard1
Abstract: A key outcome of support work with young people, it is hoped, is increased
self-awareness and autonomy on the part of the recipient. Engagement in one-tone
interventions with youth support workers can enable this process to take place.
However, a valuable alternative approach to the work exists, which focuses on
helping young people to enhance their personal learning and development (PLD) in
a group interaction.
This chapter will explore how youth support professionals can facilitate PLD
effectively in a group context. It focuses on the following:
• Identifying what ‘personal learning and development’ means
• Examining how groupwork can enable young people to learn about themselves,
develop greater self-awareness and make decisions about their lives
• Evaluating ways in which being part of a group can lead to positive outcomes for
individuals
• Analyzing the role of the youth support worker in facilitating PLD in the group
context
In addition, the chapter offers a model to inform the planning, preparation and
delivery of PLD groupwork with young people.
Key words: Personal

Learning Groupwork Vol. 20(1), 2010, pp.87-102 87 and

Development (PLD); FAAST model; focus; aim; activities; structure; techniques;
groupwork
1. Senior Lecturer in Education, Canterbury Christ Church University
Address for correspondence: Runcie Court, Salomon’s, Broomhill Road,

Southborough, Kent, TN3 OTG. jane.westergaard@canterbury.ac.uk
Introduction
The established view of the role of youth support work focuses primarily on ‘helping
interventions’ with young people. Youth support workers in the UK are employed
in a range of settings and contexts, for example as learning mentors, teaching
assistants, youth workers, personal advisers and careers advisers in schools,
colleges, youth centers, and pupil referral units (Vestergaard, 2009). When asked,
most would state that their work involves engaging one-to-one in order to offer
advice, guidance and support, with the aim of reducing barriers and helping young
people to achieve their aspirations, and there is a wealth of literature which supports
this important element of their practice (Rogers, 1983; Egan, 2006; Reid & Fielding,
2007.) This much we know. What, perhaps, is less well known, and little
documented, is, as Smith argues, (Smith, 2008) that groupwork can also provide
youth support professionals with an effective tool for delivering guidance and
support to young people.
Youth support workers who do undertake groupwork with young people, often fi
Nd that the group setting offers a safe and supportive environment, where
participants are able to focus on shared issues and explore their experiences with
each other. Brown suggests that groupwork provides a ‘context in which individuals
help each other,’ (Brown, 1992, p.8). This exploration involves young people in
working together to identify options for change whilst at the same time revel acting
individually on their own position in relation to the issues discussed. Moon (2004)
argues that it is through drawing from, revel acting on and sharing experiences with
others that learning can be optimized. Schon (1987) supports this view, emphasizing
the revel active nature of learning in which the group is likely to engage. Payne
(2005) asserts that it is the experience of working together that offers the unique
‘group learning’ element that will enhance the individual experience for each group
member.
In my own experience as an educator of youth support workers in the UK, the
reluctance of students to undertake groupwork with young people is often palpable.

A lack of clarity appears to exist about exactly what groupwork in the youth support
context sets out to achieve, how it is different from other forms of group activity
(teaching, therapeutic groupwork and informal education, for example) and a
tendency for those involved in delivering it to identify themselves as ‘sub teachers’
(Higgins and Vestergaard, 2001). Therefore, as the Integrated Youth Support
Service in England is developed, a Common Core of key skills and knowledge is
identified ed (DCSF, 2008) and the numbers of youth support workers in schools
and other contexts are increasing, the time is right to engage in a debate about what
groupwork in the youth support context is, what it sets out to achieve and to establish
models to support those who are planning, preparing and facilitating group learning
with young people.
The purpose of this paper is not to provide a full and detailed analysis of learning
theory (Rogers, 1969; Kolb, 1984; Gardner, 1999; Honey & Mumford, 2006), or
group processes and skills (Geldard & Geldard, 2001; Jaquez & Salmon, 2007;
Vestergaard, 2009) as these apply to youth support work. These areas are covered
elsewhere in the literature. Rather the paper focuses specific call on clarifying the
features of personal learning and development groupwork in which youth support
workers engage and offers a model to support them in their work. The paper begins
by considering a defi nation of PLD groupwork delivered by youth support workers.
It goes on to explore a step-by-step approach to planning, preparing and delivering
PLD group sessions with young people, based on the FAAST model (Vestergaard,
2009). This emphasizes the importance of setting an appropriate Focus for the
session, agreeing an Aim and objectives and devising relevant Activities, ensuring
that the session is Structured and revel acting on Techniques and skills needed to
facilitate personal learning.
What is personal learning and development?

Although this paper does not set out to provide a critique of recent education policy
in the U.K. (Collarbone et al, 2005; Sebi et al, 2007), there are two distinct but
related developments within the education system in the UK which provide a helpful
context for defi Ning PLD groupwork and are worthy of note here. The fi rest
recognizes the signify cancel of ‘personalized learning’ and the second is the
introduction of a ‘personal development curriculum’ for each young person aged 11
– 16 in education (DfES, 2004a). Briefly y, the concept of personalized learning

focuses on the need to recognize the diverse abilities, cultural and social
backgrounds and learning styles of individual young people.
It demonstrates an understanding that each and every young person is unique, and
that the way in which learning is approached should revel act this.
‘There is a clear moral and educational case for pursuing this approach. A system
that responds to individual pupils, by creating an education path that takes account
of their needs, interests and aspirations, will not only generate excellence, it will
also make a strong contribution to equity and social justice’ (DfES, 2004b, p.7).
Schools and subject teachers are being encouraged to fi Nd new and innovative
ways to educate young people in all subject areas across the curriculum, recognizing
that every young person brings with them their own needs, skills, abilities, values,
beliefs and behaviors which will have an impact on their capacity to learn. Of course,
as the quote above implies, the imperative to increase the knowledge, skills and
functioning of young people is not solely concerned with their personal fulfil lament,
but is also informed by economic and social imperatives. The emphasis on all young
people to play a full and effective part in society, to achieve and to contribute to
economic stability cannot be ignored.
Secondly, the personal development curriculum recognizes the need for all 11–
16-year-old to be equipped with specific c skills and knowledge, which will enable
them to fulfil l their potential and function effectively in society. These include:
• working with others in a team

• decision making
• planning, monitoring and reviewing
• investigation and research • self-awareness and self-presentation
• evaluation.
These areas are addressed in all aspects of the curriculum, but offer a particular
focus within Careers Education, and Personal Health and Social Education where
there could be a clear role for youth support workers to be involved in the delivery
of PLD sessions.
In response to the lack of literature on groupwork in the fi eld of career education
and guidance which focuses on developing self-awareness, opportunity awareness,
decision making and transition skills (Law, 2001), Higgins and Vestergaard (2001)
set out to defi ne the key characteristics of what they termed ‘guidance groupwork’.

They identify ed three underpinning principles which can be applied equally to PLD
group sessions:
1. The topic addressed in the session should focus on the personal needs of the
individuals in the group. The facilitator takes responsibility for identifying a
focus for the session that will be relevant and useful to the group members.
Consideration is given to a number of points. First, where the participants are
‘at’ in terms of their development (Harper, 1993; Coleman & Hendry, 1999).
What are the key issues for them at this point in their lives? Is there a specific c
need (developmental, educational, emotional or behavioral) shared by a group of
young people that could be addressed through groupwork? The youth support
worker, in discussions with other professionals where appropriate, should make
an assessment of the needs of the group prior to the session, in order to select a
topic that will be relevant and useful to address in a PLD session. The skill
required by the youth support worker at this early stage in the planning process
should not be underestimated and will be examined later in this paper.
2. The session should include an opportunity for each individual to revel act on
their own position in relation to the topic. Bound et al (1985) emphasize the
importance of planned revel action in learning. This suggests that although the
topic has been identifying ed as being helpful and relevant to the group, each
young person’s response to it could be quite different. For example, a youth
support worker prepares a PLD session on ‘Options at 16’ for young people who
are reaching the end of their compulsory schooling. Each young person in the
group is provided with the opportunity to revel act on what the post-schooling
options are and, importantly, helped to consider which option might suit them
best. Not every young person will select the same option, as each group
member’s needs and responses will be different.
3. The PLD session should also consider the specific c action that each individual
needs to take concerning the topic. It is not enough that the topic is discussed,
underlying issues are explored and the session ends with a greater understanding
for individuals within the group. Positive though this is, PLD groupwork goes
further in
that group members are helped to think about how they would like ‘things to be
different’, to set goals and to identify specific c actions that they can take as a
result of the session to effect some change. To return to our session on ‘Options
at 16’, each group member will have the opportunity to think about what they
need to do next in relation to the options that suit them best. Action steps identify

ed in the session might include further research, accessing prospectuses, visiting
training providers, or talking to parents.
Planning, preparing and delivering PLD groupwork

Having established the key principles of PLD groupwork, it is interesting to note
that there is very little in the current literature that provides further insight into what
defi nest PLD groupwork and how sessions should be planned, prepared, structured
and delivered. As a response to this perceived lack of support in preparing and
delivering PLD groupwork, the FAAST model (Vestergaard, 2009), aims to provide
a useful starting point to inform the planning of PLD sessions. The FAAST model
offers a framework that was developed initially in response to the needs of youth
support workers in training, who experienced differ cultist in accessing literature
about PLD groupwork rather than other forms of group activity (for example
teaching, informal education, task-focused groupwork and therapeutic groupwork).
The FAAST model is set out below:
• F - Focus. Identifying an appropriate focus or topic for the session based on an

assessment of needs
• A - Aim. Setting a specific c aim and related objectives
• A - Activities. Identifying appropriate activities
• S - Structure. Structuring the session in such a way that learning is maximized
• T - Techniques. Developing a range of effective facilitation techniques and skills.
Focus
The fi rest step in the process of planning a PLD session is to select an appropriate
focus or ‘topic’ for the session. It is the responsibility of the youth support worker
to undertake an assessment of the needs of the group with whom they are working,
to ensure that a relevant topic is selected. This is no simple task; rather it requires
the youth support worker to draw on a range of skills and knowledge in relation to
assessing needs. This assessment should be informed by the following three factors:
• Make-up of the group

• Input from others
• Current issues
First, the practitioner will be aware of the age of the participants, their gender and
their level of learning and education. Are they, for example, about to make a

transition from full time education? If so, there are likely to be key issues around
decision making and option choices that it would be useful to explore. Are
participants planning to move away from home to study in higher education? If they
are, there may be concerns around budgeting and living alone that would provide a
relevant focus.
Second, the worker will seek feedback from other professionals who have
knowledge of these young people. For instance, are there issues around bullying in
a particular class that could be explored through PLD groupwork? Is there a small
group of young people who have become involved in drinking, drug
experimentation or anti-social behavior? If so, the motivation for this behavior and
its consequences can provide a helpful focus for PLD sessions.
Third, the group may have specific c issues which continue to provide a barrier to
progression. Are there, for example, concerns around job search and interview
techniques for a group who may have been unemployed for some time? If so, the
youth support professional can plan a PLD session which helps to develop these
skills. The common link between all these topics is that the focus is on the individual
and their personal learning and development. The practitioner should be confit dent
that the focus of the session will be relevant to all group members – whether
reinforcing understanding, developing new perspectives or being introduced to ideas
for the fi rest time.
That said, there may be inherent differ cultist for youth support workers in accessing
information about group participants prior to working with them. Detailed data
about young people may be differ cult to come by, other professionals may provide
subjective and inaccurate opinions concerning the needs of the group and, as a result,
shared issues are not identified ed accurately. Where this happens, the young people
in the group are unlikely to relate to the topic or understand the session’s relevance
as it does not appear to meet their needs. Ultimately, engagement in the PLD session
is at risk.
Aim
Once the needs of the group have been assessed and a focus for the session has been
identify ed, the youth support worker can begin to plan the groupwork in detail. The
second stage in the planning process involves establishing an aim for the session.
An aim or ‘goal’ determines what the session sets out to achieve, provides direction
and clarity about the chosen topic and establishes a clear focus (Malakoff, 2004).
Any groupwork that does not have an explicitly stated aim is at risk of lacking

purpose and direction. It is important that the practitioner has thought about what it
is that the session should aim to achieve, and this should be communicated to group
members in order to encourage them to engage with the session and see its relevance
to their own situation. Linked to the aim, the session should also identify objectives
(Doel, 2006). An ‘objective’ is a specific c task or activity which students will
undertake during the session that will lead to a positive outcome following the
session. For example:
Aim: Managing moving away from home and independent living Objectives:
Participants in the session have the opportunity to:
• identify the positive aspects of independent living
• list the issues and barriers that they may face in living independently
• describe ways in which these issues can be addressed and the barriers
overcome
Outcomes: Students will take appropriate action before they move away from home
to manage the transition effectively.
The risk at this stage of the planning process is that the youth support worker is not
always entirely clear about the terminology and the distinction between aims,
objectives and outcomes. A result of this lack of clarity could be that aims,
objectives and outcomes are not considered in any depth and ‘sketched over’ rather
than thought through, resulting in a session that may lack direction and have limited
learning potential.
Once the aim and objectives for the session are established, the youth support
worker should detail both on a session plan. This will ensure that the groupwork is
purposeful and keeps on track, acting as a clear reminder for what should be
achieved. In addition, it will also provide a useful tool for evaluation at the end of
the session. See fi gore 1 below for the beginnings of a session plan for the PLD
groupwork outlined above.
Fig. 1. Session Plan
Session plan (timing): 1 Hour session
Group: 10 x 17-year-olds, mixed ability

Managing moving away from home and
Aim: independent living

Objectives: • Identify the positive aspects of
independent living
• List the issues and barriers that they
may face in living independently
• Describe the ways in which these
issues can be addressed and barriers
overcome.
Activities
Once a focus for the session has been decided and the aim and objectives set, then
the youth support worker can begin the process of selecting relevant, stimulating
and appropriate activities for group members to undertake to optimize personal
learning and development outcomes. The activities chosen should correspond
directly to the stated aim and objectives. In the example used above where the aim
of the session is ‘Managing moving away from home and independent living’, the
activities planned should focus specific call on how moving away from home and
living independently is managed. The session objectives provide a strong indication
as to what activities the practitioner might use. For example, the fi rest objective in
the example above requires participants to identify the benefit test of independent
living. To ensure that this objective is met, the youth support worker will consider a
range of appropriate activities to do just that. These could include a group
discussion, a ‘thought shower’ or use of case studies, all of which would enable
participants to identify what the benefit test of living independently might be.
In addition to attending to the session objectives, the youth support worker should
draw on their understanding of learning theory to enable them to choose activities
which will provide a positive learning experience. In this regard, Kolb’s (1984)
experiential learning cycle offers a useful model to analyses appropriate methods of
delivery. An understanding that we learn by revel acting on our own experiences
and the experiences of others, provides a helpful pointer to the kind of activities
from which young people will gain most learning. Similarly, Gardner’s (1999)
identify cation of multiple intelligences and Honey and Mumford’s (2006)
recognition of different learning styles (activist, pragmatist, revel Ector and theorist)
can each provide an insight into designing activities which will engage group
members and enable learning.
A common pitfall for those who are inexperienced in planning PLD group sessions
is to begin their preparations by identifying ‘fun’ activities that they may have used

before or seen others use, and try to make them ‘fi t’ with the session topic, aim and
objectives. There is a danger in this. First, although activities should be stimulating
and interactive in order to engage participants, being ‘fun for fun’s sake’ does not
necessarily have great value (Higgins and Vestergaard, 2001). Second, if objectives
have not been set, or have been set but are ignored at the expense of the fun activity,
it is likely that the session will lack focus and will not enable participants to build
on their learning.
Structure
For a PLD session to run smoothly and provide the optimum learning experience
for the participants, it should be well structured. In the same way that one-to-one
interventions are purposeful and forward moving, PLD groupwork should also have
a clear sense of direction, starting in one place and ending in another, where action
steps, leading to change, have been planned. A structure that can be applied to PLD
sessions draws on a recognized and respected model that informs one-to-one helping
relationships. Egan’s (2006) skilled helper model is used to great effect in one-to-
one helping interactions in a range of professional contexts and can be adapted easily
to provide a structure for PLD sessions. Similarly, Reid and Fielding’s (2007) Single
Interaction Model develops Egan’s work but applies it to ‘one-off’ interactions that
youth support workers may undertake with young people. Both models focus on the
following three stages:
Stage 1: Where I am now and what are the issues I want to focus on?
Stage 2: Where do I want to be and what are my options for getting there?
Stage 3: How am I going to get to where I want to be? What action steps do I need
to take?
In groupwork this means starting the session by introducing the topic and enabling
individuals in the group to see its relevance, encouraging them to revel act on the
issues raised, and to consider the signify cancel of these at this moment in their lives.
It means taking time to establish what the PLD session aims to achieve and
encouraging the group to engage with it in a purposeful way.
Once the group members have revel acted on the focus of the session and its
relevance, the session can move forward to consider options for change. This
provides an opportunity for group members to revel act on how they want their lives
to be different. This ‘consideration of options’ could include ideas relating to future

transitions, specific c behaviors, or practical aspects of the young person’s life.
When each group member has had the opportunity to explore the advantages and
disadvantages of each option, they can begin to make decisions about which option
best meets their needs. This is where the personal learning and development really
takes place, as each group member makes their own decisions about options. As the
session nears its end, group members are encouraged to consider the specific c action
steps they must take, thus continuing the process of learning and development
outside the session.
There are, of course, dangers in applying the model info exile. There may be times
when more attention needs to be paid to stage one, (where the group is meeting for
the fi rest time, for example) and the youth support worker should develop confit
dance in their judgement as they revel act in-action (Schon, 1987) to re-structure the
session if necessary.
This confit dance takes time, practice and experience to develop and may not be
achieved in the early days of facilitating PLD sessions. However, better, on balance,
perhaps, to have a clear, if rather rigid structure in place, than a series of
disconnected activities which do not develop and build into meaningful learning and
risk disengaging the participants.
Techniques
All the planning in the world will not in itself ensure the effective delivery of PLD
group sessions (although it will certainly help). In addition, the facilitator should
ensure that they have developed appropriate techniques and skills to use when face-
to-face with a group of young people (Geldard and Geldard, 2001). The key skills
which are utilized in group interventions include:
• active listening
• helpful questioning
• summarizing
• challenging • information sharing.
Many youth support workers have been trained in the use of these skills in their
one-to-one practice. They should feel confit dent in their ability to demonstrate
empathy through active listening, to help young people to explore by asking open
and probing questions, to show understanding through summarizing, to be congruent
and encourage realism by challenging and to enable informed decision making by

sharing information as appropriate. These techniques and skills can be applied
equally to PLD groupwork, but there may be differences in the way in which they
are used with groups. For example, active listening requires the ability to listen to
each individual group member and to ‘the group’ as a whole. What, for example
does the group, as well as the individual, express through the verbal and non-verbal
signals it communicates, and how can the facilitator demonstrate that they are
listening to both? The same applies to helpful questions. In PLD sessions, the
facilitator will be asking questions of individuals and of the group, in order to
encourage participation and learning. This requires attending to and managing group
members who have much to say, and those who have little. It means phrasing
questions that are relevant to, and understood by all group members, and dealing
sensitively with responses. It is important that the youth support worker has
knowledge of theories and concepts underpinning group dynamics (Boon, 1961;
Tuckman and Jensen, 1977; Belbin, 1993; Vernell, 1994; Slaving, 1997) and is able
to apply this knowledge in PLD groupwork. This means taking account of the verbal
and non-verbal responses of the group, as well as the individuals within it.
The skill of summarizing is as valuable in groupwork as it is in onto-one
interventions. It is the role of the facilitator to draw threads and themes together,
summarizing discussions in order that learning points are clearly expressed. This
requires the youth support worker to be able to ‘hold on’ to key points made
throughout the session and to refer to them later as appropriate. Likewise, the skill
of challenging remains one of the most helpful aids to learning, whether it is used in
one-to-one or groupwork. When challenging in the group context, the facilitator will
enable group members to engage with the learning dynamic. It is by challenging
discrepancies, consequences, and the need for realism that a greater understanding
of the subject, and an individual response to it, will emerge. Finally, as in one-to-
one work, the skill of information sharing is central to PLD group sessions. But here,
the youth support worker has an additional information resource in the group itself.
This is a resource which should be accessed and utilized – what the group members
learn from each other will have as much impact (if not more) than what they discover
from the facilitator.
By using the FAAST model outlined above, as a starting point in planning,
preparing and delivering their PLD sessions, ensuring that the Focus, the Aims and
Activities, the Structure and the Techniques have all been attended to, youth support
workers should feel more confit dent to experiment with groupwork as an effective
tool for delivering PLD. This is not to suggest that the model is Fl awless, indeed a

number of constraints have been identifying ed above. Neither is it to suggest that
the model ‘stands alone’ and provides a full and comprehensive guide to PLD
groupwork. As explained above, youth support workers should draw on and develop
their knowledge of a range of group-related concepts including learning theory,
group dynamics, and revel active practice in order to develop fully their
understanding of this aspect of their work.
Conclusion
This article began by suggesting that my own experience of youth support practice,
for the most part, is limited to working in one-to-one relationships with young
people. This is not, in itself, a ‘bad’ thing. However, it is important that groupwork
should not be seen as something less than, or more limited in what it can achieve
than one-to-one work. PLD group sessions offer something unique. There is much
to be gained by encouraging groups of young people to work together to share
experiences, to explore feelings, to support each other, to use information and to
design strategies to enable them to manage their lives.
Youth support workers often seem unaware of their own particular professional
expertise in delivering what they do so well, but with groups as well as individuals.
This may be because there is little published literature which supports and informs
this aspect of their practice, and for many, the context in which they work may
provide few obvious opportunities for working with groups. It may be because
groupwork is an area that is touched on in initial training, but not explored in depth.
Whatever the reason, by neglecting this area of practice, those offering support to
young people are in danger of ignoring an alternative method for doing so.
Groupwork provides a forum for young people to develop and learn more about
themselves by sharing experiences with others who have similar issues and
concerns, thereby enabling them to make informed and positive choices in their
lives.
References:
Boon, W. R. (1961) Experiences in Groups. London: Tavis tock/Routledge
Belbin, R.M. (1993) Team Roles at Work. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann
Bound, D., Keogh, R., and Walker, D. (1985) Revel action: Turning experience into
learning. London: Kogan Page
Brown, A. (1992) Groupwork. London: Heinemann

Collarbone, D., Finked., Leadbetter, C., and Tarleton, R. (2005) Leading
Personalized Learning in Schools: Helping individuals grow. London: National
College for Leadership of Schools and Children’s Services
Coleman, J.C. and Hendry, L.B. (1999) The Nature of Adolescence, (3rd ed.)
London: Routledge
Department for Children, School and Families (2008) 2020: Children and Young
People’s Workforce Strategy. Nottingham: DCSF publications
Department for Education (2004a) Careers Education and Guidance in England.
Nottingham: DfES publications
Department for Education and Skills (2004b) Every Child Matters: Next step.
Nottingham: DfES publications
Doel, M. (2006) Using Groupwork. London: Routledge
Egan, G. (2006) The Skilled Helper: A problem management approach to helping.
(8th ed.). Pacify c Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole
Gardner, H. (1999) The Disciplined Mind: What all students should understand.
New York: Simon and Schuster
Geldard, K. and Geldard, D. (2001) Working with Children in Groups. Basingstoke:
Palgrave
Harper, P. (1993) Developmental considerations in therapeutic provisions. in K.
Dwivedi (Ed.) Group Work with Children and Adolescents. London: Jessica
Kingsley
Higgins, R. and Vestergaard, J. (2001) ‘The role of group work in careers education
and guidance programmers’ Career Research and Development, 2,
NICEC
Honey, P. and Mumford, A. (2006) The Manual of Learning Styles. (3rd ed.)
Maidenhead: Peter Honey
Jaquez, D. and Salmon, G. (2008) Learning in Groups (8th ed.). London: Routledge
Kolb, D. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Law, B. (2001) New Thinking for Connexons and Citizenship. Cambridge: The
Career Learning Network
Malakoff, A. (2004) Group Work with Adolescents: Principles and practice. New
York: The Guildford Press
Moon, J. (2004) A Handbook of Revel active and Experiential Learning: Theory and
practice. London: Routledge

Payne, M. (2005) Working with groups in R. Harrison and C. Wise (Eds.) Working
with Young People. London: Sage (pp. 122-141)
Reid, H.L. and Fielding, A.J. (2007) Providing Support to Young People: A guide
to interviewing in helping relationships. London: Routledge
Rogers, C. (1961) On Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton Miff in
Rogers, C. (1969) Freedom to Learn. Columbus, OH: Charles E Merrill
Schon, D.A. (1987) Educating the Revel active Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey
Bass
Sebi, J., Brown, N., Steward, S., Galton, M., and James, M. (2007) An Investigation
of Personalized Learning Approaches Used by Schools. Sussex: University of
Sussex
Slaving, R.L. (1997) A group analysis approach to the education of children and
teenagers, Journal of Child and Adolescence Group Therapy, 7, 2, 69-78
Smith, M.K. (2008) ‘Groupwork’. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. (Www.
infed.org/groupwork/what_is_groupwork.htm)
Tuckman, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C. (1977) Stages in small group development,
Group and Organizational Studies, 2, 419-427
Vernell, B. (1994) Understanding and Using Groups. London: Whiting and Birch
Vestergaard, J. (2009) Effective Group Work with Young People. Maidenhead: Open
University.
Article 1 understanding and learning

This article is focused on application of social group work methods in youth
development activities, how group work can enable young people to take right
decisions about their life, career. Youth support workers work in different settings
like, schools, colleges, youth center these youth support workers are involved in
guiding, advising and supporting youngsters. Youth support workers are dedicated
to reduce barriers to achieve their aspirations. Group work provides safe and
supporting environment to young people to discuss their problems and finding out
various ways to solve these problems. In group setting people help each other.
Young students are seeming to be reluctant about importance of group work due to
lack of information and there is a lack of clarity about what group work achieve, and

how this is different from other forms of group activity like teaching, education etc.
The concept of personalized learning focuses on need to recognize diverse abilities
and different cultural background and learning styles of individual young people.
Concept of personalized learning teaches group worker that every young person is
unique. And that the way in which learning is approached should reflect this.
The personal development curriculum recognizes the need for all 11–16-year-old to
get them equipped with various skills and knowledge, so that it will increase their
potential and function effectively in society. These various skills include –
1. Working in team
2. Decision making
3. Planning, monitoring and reviewing
4. Self-awareness and self-presentation
5. Evaluation
Because there is very less literature available on group work with young people,
Higgins and Vestergaard set out to define some characteristics of Guidance group
work.
1. The topic addressed in the session should focus on what are the expectation
of individuals in the group.
2. There should be opportunity for every individual in the group to reflect
their ideas in relation to topic.
3. The personal learning and development sessions should not end only with
topic discussed, every individual in group needs to take affirmative action
regarding discussed topic.
There is very little information about how to plan group work with young
individuals, FAAST model of group work is beneficial while planning group work
for young people, it was designed for youth support workers training so that they
can be aligned with proper group work planning –
FAAST model –
F- Focus
A – Aim
A – Activities

S- Structure
T – Techniques
1. Focus – It is a first step in planning group work session for young people,
support worker need to asses needs to frame topic for the session. While
assessing needs for selecting topic of group work one needs to take inputs
from others and also need to think about current issues. Social group worker
needs suggestions from other professionals who have knowledge of these
young people. To asses surrounding of young individuals, for ex – is there
small group of young people involved in drinking, drug experimentation if so
then need to find out what was the motivation behind doing these things.
There may be various barriers in group which are hindering progress of group
members, like members are concerned about job search and lacks interview
techniques, so youth support worker needs to plan separate session to guide
these individuals about teaching various skills required for interview, the
practitioner should be confident that focus of the session will be relevant to
all group members.
2. Aim –
The second step while planning session for young people involve setting aim,
aim helps group members to see what the session sets out to achieve, if group
work has no aim, then group may be at risk of loosing purpose and direction.
Along with framing aims session should also identify objectives of session.
objective is a specific task or activity which students needs to perform, which
leads to positive outcome in following session. For ex.-
Aim - Managing moving away from home and independent living
Objectives: Participants in the session have the opportunity to:

• identify the positive aspects of independent living
• list the issues and barriers that they may face in living independently
• describe ways in which these issues can be addressed and the barriers
overcome

Outcomes:
Students will take appropriate action before they move away
from home to manage the transition effectively.
Sometimes group worker is not clear about various group planning related
terminologies and is unable to differentiate between aims, objectives,
outcomes. As a result of its sessions are just stretched without any through
understanding.
Activities –
Once focus, aims, objectives are set, then the youth support worker can look
for various activities for personal learning and developing skills in youth. The
activities should be linked to aims and objective of group work process.
Objectives provide indicators for group worker while planning activities. EX
– identify what the benefits of living independently might be. worker should
allow members to choose activities for active and participative learning. In
this regard Kolb’s experimental learning cycle helps in choosing delivering
method.
Structure –
Group work needs proper structure to run smoothly and provide best learning
experience for members. Group work should have a clear sense of direction.
Egan’s skilled helper model is used to great extend for planning one to one
helping interactions. Similarly Red and Fielding’s single interaction model
develops Egan’s work. Both these models focus mostly on these three states.
Stage 1: Where I am now and what are the issues I want to focus on?
Stage 2: Where do I want to be and what are my options for getting
there?
Stage 3: How am I going to get to where I want to be? What action

steps do I need to take?
Techniques –
While working with young people support worker needs skills which are
useful in group interventions these skills are as following
• active listening
• helpful questioning
• summarising
• challenging
• information sharing.
Many groups worker is already trained in the use of these above-mentioned

skills, but it seems sometimes workers lacks confidence about specific skills, group
worker needs to use active listening as skill while working with young people,
worker needs to ask probing questions to understand feeling of group members.
Conclusion – There is need of encouragement of groups of young people to explore
feelings, to support each other, youth worker is often seen not confident about their
own skills this is because of very less literature available which supports and informs
this aspect of their practice. Group work provides platform for for young people to
develop and learn more about themselves by sharing each other’s expiries and
working together to solve problems in life.

Article – 2
Learning and understanding
GROUP WORK IN COMMUNITY

SETTINGS \
by joseph Varghese
Understanding and learning of article –
UNIT 2 GROUP WORK IN COMMUNITY
SETTINGS
* Joseph Varghese
The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention 4(6): 3541-
3545, 2017 DOI: 10.18535/ijsshi/v4i6.04 ICV 2015: 45.28 ISSN: 2349-2031 ©
2017, THEIJSSHI
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Group work is very useful in the community. We have discussed in detail the most
widely used type of groups in the community- the SHGs. In this unit the other types
of groups will be discussed. Any number of natural groups is found in the
community. Most of them are spontaneous efforts by the people themselves to
control their lives by helping others and getting help from others. Most of them
receive no or minimum help from professionals. However, they are effective in
assisting those who are part of it. The members do not think of their membership in
the group as something outside their normal course of life. It is part and parcel of

their life. For the poor the groups are crucial part of their livelihood strategies and
survival strategies. They borrow money when needed, help building each other
homes, take part in joys and sorrows of each other’s lives and assist each other in
emergency.
Community based groups are based on neighborhood, caste and extended kinship
ties. Groups can also be formed on the basis of many different criteria- members
may be suffering from the same illness; members may be recovering from
alcoholism or drug addiction; etc. One important type of group that is increasingly
being important are the social action groups that aim at achieving social justice for
the disadvantaged. We will discuss the relevance and functions of these groups for
the society and for their members. We will also study community-based groups,
which serve people with different problems.
2.2 SOCIALACTION GROUPS
Social work is not only associated with treatment and delivery of services, it is also
involved in challenging discriminating practices and advocating the rights of
* Dr. Joseph Varghese, Christ University, Bangalore

the marginalized. Right from the days of the settlement movement social work
pioneers have aimed at system transformation and social reform. It has been realized
that treating individual clients alone will not solve social problems. Social
institutions have to be transformed and exploitative structures destroyed. These
methods are usually considered part of the domain of the social work method of
Community Organization.
According to Rothman (1968) three models of community organization are- Social

Planning Model, Locality Development and Social Action. Though community
organization aims at mobilizing the community it is the groups that actually that does
much of the work. According to (Staples in Garvin et al, 2004; 346) the “group
setting is an ideal access point for most community members to engage in social
action. Small groups maximize opportunities for participation in process of
discussion, analysis, consciousness raising, decision making and planning”. He
further says that before every event held in the community, smaller meetings are
held for variety of purposes including action research, leadership training, executive
decision making, strategic analysis, community education, recruitment, action

planning, negotiating, lobbying and evaluation. These tasks done largely in groups
determine to large extent the success or failure of the community organization
process.
As you know group work groups are divided into two types (1) Treatment group that
consists of personality development groups, educational groups, recreational groups,
support groups and therapeutic group (2) Tasks groups includes committees and
councils. The main purpose of the task groups is to accomplish that task or
programmed that has been entrusted to it. Social actions groups belong to category
of Task groups. It usually consists of a small number of members who may belong
to the community or are outsiders to the community or both. They take up an issue
that they identify as having an adverse effect on the wellbeing of the members of the
community. They identify the causative factors that lead to the problem. Institutions,
practices and values that cause the problems are identified. The agent can be the
government itself or a government department, police, industries, social groups,
organizations whose actions or inactions has led to the problem. Many times, it is
the combination of factors that lead to the problems. Government inaction invariably
contributes to the problem. The action group believes that the problem can be
alleviated if people unite and challenge the powerful and force them to act in public
interests. When people participate in the process of decision-making and thereby
gain mastery over their lives it is called empowerment.
Empowerment is long process in which people first understand the reality of power
structure around. They understand the interconnections between the social structures
and how it controls their lives. Pablo Freire calls this process conscientization. They
have to get rework on their images. They must stop seeing themselves as passive and
powerless. They must begin see themselves as agents of social transformation.
Groups are ideal for this kind of activity. Cox (1991) gives the following reasons (1)
Groups facilitate sharing of experiences which will help describe the reality as they
view it themselves (2) Successful cases of overcoming the powerlessness can
motivate and inspire others (3) Member’s discussion can confront each other with
their fears and hopes facilitating the consciousness raising (4) Learning with each
other increases knowledge of the political dimension.
Social action groups are formed on the basis on the following (1) Geographical area
like neighborhood, community, and people living in close proximity. Since they live
close by, they are likely to have the same problems and more importantly share a
common identity. Commonconcernslike housing, public utilities environmental

issues are then taken up by the action groups. Sometimes the community members
are part of formal organizations like resident welfare associations and community-
based organizations. Again, often committees are formed within these organizations
to deal with the authorities. (2) Another type of groups is based on the particular
issue such as women rights, Dalit rights and tribal rights, consumer awareness and
rights and land rights. (3) The third type of groups is based on identity like ethnicity,
religion, sexual orientation, and mental or physical disability.
According to Rothman the goal of social action is to bring about a shift in how
resources and power is distributed in the society. It is their belief that there is
asymmetrical division of power and resources, which leads to the dominant sections
using power to attain their goals at the costs of the community. Consequently, the
disadvantaged sections experience injustice and deprivation. Conflict,
confrontations, agitation, protests, PILs, negotiations and strikes would be some of
the techniques to be used
For example, an industry lets untreated affluent to the river, which causes pollution,
contamination of water bodies and land degradation. If industry is unwilling to listen
to the pleas of the people the only strategy that would yield results would be
challenge the factory using the legal means, holding protests and publicizing the
problem using the media.
Social Action Groups in India

In India social action groups began to make its presence known during the 1970s.
That decade was turbulent times in the life of the nation. The declaration of
emergency; the war with Pakistan; rise in prices; the frequent strikes and protests;
the controversial family planning programmed and demolition of slums; numerous
arrests of social activists; rise of Naxal movements; student protests are some of the
important events that shook the nation. The political system especially the political
parties to a large extent lost their creditability. The police and the bureaucracy also
lost its credibility. Many people felt that there is a need for alternatives from outside
the prevailing system. Social action groups emerged out of this situation.
Most of activists were from middle class families. (Kothari, 1987; 441, Sheath,
D.L.,1984; 258, Sharma, S.L.255, Sethi 1984;305). They were disillusioned with the
mainstream parties who advocated change but in practice-maintained status quo.
Their bitter experience during the emergency made them ideologically anti state and
anti-bureaucracy (Kothari, 1984; 220). They rejected the idea that the state could

ever be an instrument of justice and liberation. They rejected the developmental
paradigms set by the state (Kothari, 1984,220, Sheath D.L.,1984, 259). They saw the
problems of India not only in economic terms but also in cultural and social
dimensions.
Consequently, their strategies for development were different. They believed in
living among them and taking part in their struggles rather than dictating instructions
to them for development. People’s knowledge and experience was respected and
integrated with the group strategy for development.
Conscientization and building people movements were the main instruments.
Marxian and Gandhian ideologies influenced most of social action groups. However,
over the course of time many of these groups turned in formal organizations some
of them even became as bureaucratic and corrupt as the government institutions that
they challenged. It is also observed that some of them built alliances with the
government and co-opted into the system.
Another controversy with these groups is the foreign funding and its role in the
emergence of these groups. Prakash Karat (1984) accused action groups of building
micro social movements with the intention of breaking the larger workers and
peasant’s movement, which had a greater chance for social transformation worker’s
movement, peasant movements and women movements. According to him foreign
agencies promote this role of the action groups in mind when they fund the action
groups. So, he concludes that social action groups organize people into micro
movements, which aim at small changes while neglecting the macro level problems
of capitalism and imperialism. However as mentioned above these groups emerged
when large formal organizations like political parties and the bureaucracy failed in
attaining their objectives.
Political leadership of even revolutionary parties lost their radical agenda when they
attained state power. (Michel, Robert, 1915). Therefore, social activists were more
comfortable while working in small groups in which the members knew each other
personally and ideologically similar rather than large organizations that could be
manipulated by the leadership for serving selfish motives. Moreover, small groups
can give importance to every member opinion, thereby reducing alienation of its
members.
Social action groups have been helped by the Supreme Court and High Courts
accepting Public Interest Litigation (PILs) to deal with problems. Public Interest

Litigation allows the activists to take up issues of public concern and ask for judicial
action. Similarly, the Right to Information Act has enabled the activists to ask
information from the government departments and use it to compare the reality on
the ground. Both these developments opened new avenues of action for the groups.
But it cannot be denied that there are number of shortcomings of action groups. Some
of them are as follows-
1) Factionist and frequent splits in the groups
2) Personal factors often interfered with professional conduct leading to blurring
of line between professional and private.
3) Empire building and monopolizing of issues
4) Working for publicity and fame and thereby neglecting the real causes
5) Often outside leaders of these groups have overshadowed community leaders
because of their knowledge and social network.
6) Corruption and mismanagement.
7) Leadership is authoritarian and dictatorial 8) Foreign fund-based activity and
priorities
Some of the areas, which action groups have contributed, are as follows-
1) Promotion of human rights issues including protection of the under trials; police
atrocities including custodial deaths rights of the arrested; encounter deaths;
juvenile justice; rights of sexual minorities. The People’s Union for Civil
Liberties and Human Rights Law network is just two examples of action groups.
2) Rights of people are displaced due to Development Project. Examples -the
Narmada Bacha Angolan and Protest Movements against Tehri Dam in
Uttarakhand.
3) Women rights issues like domestic violence, dowry, and sexual harassment.
Many of legislations have been passed and existing laws modified due to the
pressure from action groups. For example, the Vinaka judgment, which deals
with sexual harassment at work places, is result of the action group’s case against
atrocity in Rajasthan on a community worker.
4) Tribal issues like land alienation, displacement and exploitation

5) Environment issues pollution of rivers, lowering of water table because of over
exploitation by corporate, damage to monuments has been taken up by the action
groups. The Centre for Science and Environment, Delhi and Cost Ford are
examples of action groups that have intervened in environmental issues.
6) Protest against forcible Land acquisition
7) Protection of the rights of informal labor like workers working in house
(domestic workers), brick kilns, glass-manufacturing units.
8) Child labor
9) Animal rights
10) Right to housing and rights of people living in slums.
Steps for social action group

According to Car (2008) the following steps can be implemented to create and
sustain a social action group
1) Engaging
The process in which the group worker engages the target group- a community
(a village where the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme is not
implemented properly); a section of society whose rights are denied (sexual
minorities); collection of people whose rights are violated (workers whose
factory have terminated their services illegally). The engagement phase will
include familiarizing herself with the various dimensions of the problem. The
laws related to the problem, government policies, the response of the local
authority, research available and news articles could be studied. Another step in
the process is build rapport with the existing leadership in the community and
knowing their limitations and strengths.
Initial reflections- the group worker must understand the situation and identify
the principles that will guide her action and her relationship with the target
group.
Assessing system barriers- the group assess the various barriers that stand in
between the target group and its objectives. Some of the barriers can be related
to the situation (like government indifference to the issue) or to the target group
themselves (lack of awareness) or be related to the other issues (leadership of
the group, past events).

Finding allies and making contacts
Networking with like-minded groups, developing contacts in the media and
academic world and obtaining the support of other communities are important
function of the group leader. In India personal contacts with the police, bureaucracy
and professionals (lawyers, doctors) are also very useful. These allies and contacts
can be useful in many ways- increasing the knowledge base, for providing
professional guidance, recruiting new members, contributing resources, arranging
publicity and giving encouragement.
2) Initiating the Group

Identifying members, seeking ways to motivate them to join the group, finding
resources and venue meetings are the important tasks that have to be done. This
phase can be stressful one as convincing people to join is tedious job. The group
worker must be able to withstand the problems of forming the group before she
moves ahead
Recruiting participants
Individuals may initially agree and then refuse or refuse many times before agreeing
to join. There may be occasions in which personal and professional disagreements
can threaten to split the group or even end it. It is found that recruiting members
from the disadvantaged section is difficult.
Finding a venue and obtaining needed materials
An accessible place for meeting and materials needed have to be organized. It is
better if available resources are used.
Building trust
Any group has to have a certain level of trust and goodwill among its members. This
is crucial maintenance function. The level of trust can be increased if opportunities
and a climate exist in the group to express one’s opinions and views. Similarly,
others should be able to respond to these views freely without worrying about hurting
the other members or retribution.
Establishing collegiality
Perfect equality may not be possible in the group as the group worker often is a
person with more knowledge and skills. However, he should take care that he works
with the group rather than for the group. His example will help set norms for the
group regarding the rules of participating and engaging. Further as mentioned earlier

the various processes in the group is itself an empowering experience for the
participants.
3) Facilitating the group Establishing ground rules

Rules and regulations agreed upon by all members help in maintaining the
group. These rules and regulation can be to govern a whole gambit of activity of
the group. Group discussions and interaction, decision making and other process
of the group should be subject to rules.
Facilitating consciousness raising
The discussions that take in the group has to raise the level of consciousness in the
group members. The group workers should encourage group members to draw
connections between the problems that identify as personal and the collective
manifestation of these problems as political issues (Car, 2005). For example, the
discussion on poverty of families in a community is linked to the lack of accessibility
to economic resources and education resources, which in turn is a political problem.
The process of raising consciousness will include challenging and removing many
of the existing perceptions of the members on their situation.
Supporting action
Group action should follow the raising of consciousness. Action requires the
utilization of all available resources - personal and community based. The support
network built by the group including personal contacts and community members,
concerned students, activists is used. Action should identify the target - the
institution or person against whom the action is taken. This target should be carefully
chosen as the success of the action depends on the how much change is achieved in
the institution.
Encourage praxis
Paulo Freire described praxis as “reflection and action directed at the structures to
be transformed’”. Thus, any action should follow by reflection about its
consequences, successes and failures. A certain amount of learning takes place in
every action even if it fails in achieving its objectives. The learning can be about the
group itself, or the community as a whole or about the power structures. These
learning can be analyzed by getting the members to talk about it. The sharing of the
views will increase the level of consciousness. Based on these learning, future action
is planned and taken and the process goes on...

4) Transferring power
The ultimate aim of the empowering process is to make the members
independent, not make them depend on the group worker. After a period, the
group members should be able to function with limited or no support from the
group leaders. The group workers should be able to transfer his skills and
information to the group members. Some of the methods used to build the
capacity of the members are training; handholding (members, performs under
close supervision) and delegation of authority.
5) Wrapping up
The group worker must be able to leave the group at the right time. The group
members should be prepared for this. Leadership should be created and trained
and resources identified for future use. Groups, whose members are from highly
disadvantaged sections, require more time before they can function
independently.
Social action groups will remain relevant for a long time to come. Their
effectiveness in countering social injustice makes them ideal vehicles for social
transformation.
2.7 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES
Bhat, Anil (1989). Development and Social Justice; Micro action by weaker
sections, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Garvin, Charles, D. et al (ed), 2004, Handbook of Social Work with groups, Rawat
Publications, Jaipur.
Malakoff, A. (1997). Group Work in the Prevention of Adolescent alcohol and other
drug abuse. In Greif G. L. & Epirus. P.H. Group Work with Population at risk.
Oxford University Press. New York.
Newburn , Tim(1993), Disaster andAfter, Social work in the aftermath of disaster,

Jessica Kingsley Publications, London.
Phillips Julie (2001)., Group work in Social Care; Planning and setting up groups,
Jessica Kinsley Publications, London.

Karat, Prakash(1984), “Action Groups, voluntary organizations: A Factor in
Imperialist Strategy”, Marxist Vol2. April-June,
Kothari, Rajni (1984), “ The Non Party Process”, Economic and Political Weekly,
Vol.XIX, No.5.
Sharma, S.L.(1992). “SocialAction Groups as Harbinger of Silent Revolution”,

Economic and Political Weekly, XXVII, No.47
Sheth, D.L.(1984).” Grassroots Institutions in India” Economic and Political

Weekly, Vol XIX NO.8.
Trecker, Harleigh (1972), Social Group Work, Principles and Practices, Follet
Publishing Company, Chicago
Learning and understanding of article no – 2

Any number of natural groups is found in the community. Most of them are
spontaneous efforts by the people themselves to control their lives by helping others
and getting help from others. Most of them receive no or minimum help from
professionals. However they are effective in assisting those who are part of it. The
members do no think of their membership in the group as something outside their
normal course of life. It is part and parcel of their life. For the poor the groups are
crucial part of their livelihood strategies and survival strategies. They borrow money
when needed, help building each other homes, take part in joys and sorrows of each
other’s lives and assist each other in emergency.
Community based groups are based on neighborhood, caste and extended kinship
ties. Groups can also be formed on the basis of many different criteria- members
may be suffering from the same illness; members may be recovering from
alcoholism or drug addiction; etc. One important type of group that is increasingly

being important are the social action groups that aim at achieving social justice for
the disadvantaged.
SOCIAL ACTION GROUPS Social work is not only associated with treatment and
delivery of services, it is also involved in challenging discriminating practices and
advocating the rights of Social Group Work in Different Settings the marginalized.
Right from the days of the settlement movement social work pioneers have aimed at
system transformation and social reform. It has been realized that treating individual
clients alone will not solve social problems. Social institutions have to be
transformed and exploitative structures destroyed.
These methods are usually considered part of the domain of the social work method
of Community Organization. three models of community organization are- Social
Planning Model, Locality Development and Social Action. Though community
organization aims at mobilizing the community it is the groups that actually that does
much of the work. Small groups maximize opportunities for participation in process
of discussion, analysis, consciousness raising, decision making and planning".
Before every event held in the community, smaller meetings are held for variety of
purposes including action research, leadership training, executive decision making,
strategic analysis, community education, recruitment, action planning, negotiating,
lobbying and evaluation. These tasks done largely in groups determine to large
extent the success or failure of the community organization process.
As you know group work groups are divided into two types
(1) Treatment group that consists of personality development groups, educational
groups, recreational groups, support groups and therapeutic group
(2) Tasks groups includes committees and councils.
The main purpose of the task groups is to accomplish that task or programmed that
has been entrusted to it. Social actions groups belong to category of Task groups. It
usually consists of a small number of members who may belong to the community
or are outsiders to the community or both. They take up an issue that they identify
as having an adverse effect on the wellbeing of the members of the community. They
identify the causative factors that lead to the problem. Institutions, practices and
values that cause the problems are identified.

The agent can be the government itself or a government department, police,
industries, social groups, organizations whose actions or inactions has led to the
problem. Many times, it is the combination of factors that lead to the problems.
Government inaction invariably contributes to the problem. The action group
believes that the problem can be alleviated if people unite and challenge the powerful
and force them to act in public interests. When people participate in the process of
decision-making and thereby gain mastery over their lives it is called empowerment.
Empowerment is long process in which people first understand the reality of power
structure around. They understand the interconnections between the social structures
and how it controls their lives.
Pablo Freire calls this process conscientization. They have to get rework on their
images. They must stop seeing themselves as passive and powerless. They must
begin see themselves as agents of social transformation. Groups are ideal for this
kind of activity.
(1) Groups facilitate sharing of experiences which will help describe the reality as
they view it themselves
(2) Successful cases of overcoming the powerlessness can motivate and inspire
others
(3) Member’s discussion can confront each other with their fears and hopes
facilitating the consciousness raising
(4) Learning with each other increases knowledge of the political dimension.
Article 3

Groups Work for Women: Gender and Group Identity in Social Dilemmas
Rachel Crosson, Melanie Marks, and Jessica Snyder
Behavior in social-dilemma (mixed-motive) situations has been of great interest

to economists, psychologists, and negotiation scholars. In this study, we used a
threshold social-dilemma game to examine factors that have not yet been
investigated and that may have an impact on behavior in these settings: gender
and group identity. We found that, for women, interacting with members of a
naturally occurring group increased coordination and efficiency, while for men,
interacting with members of a naturally occurring group decreased coordination
and efficiency. Psychological literature on gender differences and group
interdependence explains these differences. We conclude by discussing the
implications of these results for gender differences in negotiation behavior.
Key words: negotiation, social dilemma, identity, gender.
Rachel Crosson is director of the Negotiation Center and professor in the

department of economics and in the School of Management at the University of
Texas at Dallas. Her e-mail address is crosonr@utdallas.edu.
Melanie Marks is a professor in the College of Business and Economics at
Longwood University in Farmville, Virginia. Her e-mail address is
marksmb@longwood.edu.
Jessica Snyder graduated from the College of Business and Economics at
Longwood University in
Farmville, Virginia.
10.1111/j.1571-9979.2008. 00195.x
© 2008 President and Fellows of Harvard College

Introduction
Settings in which individual interests’ conflict with the interests of the group are
common in many domains and have been studied by researchers in multiple
disciplines. For example, each country and its fishing industry may have incentives
to overfish international waters, but the planet as a whole and the future fishing
industry is better off if each limits its own consumption. While the correct number
of fish to harvest is generally not zero, sustainable harvests are lower than what
countries would reap by following their own self-interest but higher than taking no
fish.
Researchers have modeled this type of setting using a threshold social dilemma (for
a review see Dawes 1980).1 This dilemma has the familiar features: there is tension
between free-riding and increasing one’s own earnings (in our example, by
overfishing), and contributing and improving the earnings of the group as a whole
(in our example, by exercising restraint through catch-limit regulations and other
fisheries policies). Because there is an optimum level of fish to be caught (greater
than zero but less than whatever you can catch), this game is not only about the
conflict between competition and cooperation but also about coordination. In our
example, individual countries need to decide among themselves who will get how
much fish in order to achieve the optimal amount of harvesting. This article
compares the impact of gender and group identification on cooperation and
coordination in a threshold social-dilemma setting.
This particular mechanism has two types of predicted outcomes or equilibria. In the
first, participants acting only in their own self-interest fully “free-ride” (defect), and
no social benefit is created. In the second, the group contributes, but the amount of
contribution from each member of the group can differ. Each individual would prefer
that others contribute while he or she free-rides.
Only one other article (Cads by and Maynes 1998b) has explored the impact of
gender in this setting. Our article builds on this stream of research. In particular, we
are interested in determining if more cooperation occurs within some groups of
individuals than within others.
We continued this line of research by considering the interaction of gender and group
identity when individuals of established groups such as sororities, fraternities, and
service organizations make decisions with others in their group. We compared the
decisions made in these groups with those made in groups of the same gender
composition (all male, both genders, all female) who are strangers. The design

allows us to determine if the existence of a cohesive group identity matters and, if
so, if the impact is similar for male groups, female groups, and mixed-gender groups.
Previous Literature
Researchers have undertaken many studies of the role of gender in social dilemmas,
although with one exception, the paradigms used have been slightly different than
ours.
Experimental Economics Studies on Gender
Although a large literature on gender differences in psychology exists, relatively,
experimental economists have only recently discovered that gender can be an
important driver of behavior in many situations. (See Eckel, de Oliveira, and
Grossman 2008 in this issue for an excellent review of this literature.)
For example, a series of articles in experimental bargaining finds that men and
women make different decisions in dictator games (for an alternative view, see
Bolton and Kotok 1995; Eckel and Grossman 1996 and 1998). James Andreoni and
Lise Vesterlund (2001) found that these gender differences are sensitive to both the
relative costs of contributing money and to the benefits of receiving it. Eckel and
Grossman (2001) and Sara Solnick (2001) identified gender differences in ultimatum
game bargaining. Rachel Croson and Nancy Buchan (1999) found that, in
experimental trust games, women were more trustworthy than men.
A number of previous experiments have explored gender differences in linear social
dilemma games in which the optimal thing to do for the group is to contribute
everything (or, in our previous example, to take no fish). For example, Jamie Brown-
Kruse and David Hummels (1993) found that males contributed significantly more
than females. Their result was replicated by Bram Cadsby and Elizabeth Maynes
(1998b).
Jane Sell, W. I. Griffith, and Rick Wilson (1993) extended this research by
comparing both gender and the gender composition of the group. In experiments
with monetary payoffs, the authors found that neither gender nor composition had
an impact on contributions. Women who interacted exclusively or almost
exclusively with other women gave somewhat less than men who interacted
primarily with other men, but the result was not statistically significant. When
payoffs were changed from money to “time with an expert,” however, men
contributed significantly more than women, although no group composition effects
were found.

In the study that is closest to ours, Cadsby and Maynes (1998b) investigated the
effect of gender in threshold social dilemmas for all-male or all-female groups. In
these settings, the optimal thing to do for the benefit of the group is to contribute
some intermediate amount (or,in the fisheries example, to take some intermediate
amount of fish). The decision then must be made as to how much each person should
give (or take). The researchers found that women contributed marginally more than
men in the initial rounds of the game. In the last five rounds, women displayed more
cooperative behavior than did men, but contribution levels and rates of meeting or
exceeding the threshold did not significantly differ by gender. In our study, we
extended this research to look at the effect of group identity, as discussed later, as
well as gender.
Experimental Economics Studies on Group Identity
The second dimension we varied in our experiment is group identity. The creation
of group identity and its impact on behavior has been studied by psychologists,
primarily in prisoners’ dilemma games with more than two players (e.g., Dawes, van
de Kragt, and Orbell 1988; Brewer and Brown 1998). These scholars have suggested
that group identification may cause people to place a group’s interests above their
own. Our project examined whether such group identity effects are gender specific.
Researchers have conducted experiments in linear social dilemmas designed to
measure group identity and have used these measures as an explanation for behavior.
Brown-Kruse and Hummels (1993) used a pregame questionnaire wherein
information was shared in a public manner to create a “sense of membership” among
individuals in a group. The authors concluded that the questionnaire did not enhance
contribution levels and found no difference between men and women in their
response to this manipulation. Cadsby and Maynes (1998b) used the same pregame
questionnaire, administered to a larger group. They also found that the questionnaire
had no impact on the outcomes of the experiment. When looking at the first round
only, however, they found that using the questionnaire seemed to diminish the
contribution differential between women and men (with women contributing more)
than researchers had previously found (Cadsby and Maynes 1998b, discussed
earlier). We conclude from this research that these manipulations were insufficient
to generate the group identification that psychologists (as discussed earlier) have
suggested would be effective.
John Solow and Nicole Kirkwood (2002) took a more naturalistic tack by comparing
three mixed-gender conditions or scenarios: the stranger’s condition, in which

individuals knew nothing about the other members of their group; the questionnaires
condition, which was similar to those described earlier; and the groups scenario,
which involved members of an already-existing and established group, the Iowa
Marching Band. As in previous research, they used a linear social dilemma. They
reported significantly higher contributions when social identity was high (the
marching band). The authors also found some gender differences, but all groups were
of mixed gender.
In our study, we used this strategy of identifying naturally occurring groups and
inviting members from those groups to the lab in order to compare the impact of
group identity on decisions in a social-dilemma setting. But because we also sought
to examine the interaction of group identity and gender, we compared all-male, all-
female, and mixed-gender groups.
Experimental Design and Procedures
Theoretical Model
The model employed in this design is based on one introduced by Mark Bagnoli and
Bart Lipman (1989). In this model, each group comprises five people, and each
individual begins the game with an allotment of fifty-five tokens. Individuals are
asked to contribute some portion of their endowment to the group account. If the
sum of the contributions exceeds 125 tokens, then each person in the group will
receive a bonus of fifty cents, regardless of whether or not they contributed
themselves. If not, all contributions are refunded. Tokens kept earn one cent per
token for the individual only.
Note that any contributions over the threshold of 125 disappear. Thus, if the
threshold is met (with or without excess funds), each player receives the benefits
from the tokens they keep, and their value is fifty cents. If the threshold is not met,
contributions are returned.
We choose parameters such that the social benefits outweigh the social costs. For a
five-person group, if each individual contributed twenty-five tokens, the threshold
of 125 would be exactly met, and everyone would earn their value for the public
good of fifty cents. It would cost each individual only twenty-five cents (the twenty-
five tokens they could have consumed privately) and all parties are better off with a
total of eighty cents than they would be if nobody contributed (earning fifty-five
cents each). Each individual, however, might prefer a slightly different outcome. For
example, I would rather give only twenty-four tokens, and have someone else in the

group give twenty-six to make up for my shortfall. More generally, I would rather
that I give less and those others give more, as long as it means I can still collect my
bonus for the public good. These outcomes are distinct from one another only in the
rule used to divide the costs of meeting the threshold among the group members. We
will examine those rules in the results section on equity.
Note that if group contributions are below 125, the group earns less than it could
have; everyone will be better off if the public good is provided. If group contributions
are above 125, this outcome is also inefficient; it costs individuals tokens (which
they could have kept and used to earn money) but does not create any additional
benefits for the group.
Experimental Design
The experiment entailed a 3 ¥ 2 design, incorporating three gender conditions (all
males, all females, mixed groups) and two group-identity conditions (high group
identity, low group identity). Each of the six conditions involved five experimental
sessions of one group of five participants each. In each session, participants played
twenty-five rounds of the social dilemma game repeatedly with the same group of
participants, with the length of each session announced to all participants.
Participants were not permitted to communicate in any way with their counterparts
in their group or with others in the session. Thus, this experiment is designed to
capture settings like the international fishing situation before explicit negotiation or
agreements have been introduced. Each individual independently decides how much
to contribute in each round. After each round, each individual sees the contributions
of the others in their group, and decides on his or her subsequent round’s
contribution. All sessions of the experiment were performed in a noncomputerized
laboratory at Longwood
University.
All experimental instructions were written so that they conform to language
developed by Mark Isaac, David Walker, and James Thomas (1984). All language
that referred to “investments” or “contributions” was intentionally avoided and
replaced by neutral words such as “allocation” of tokens, in order to avoid priming
the participants with any particular objective. (Our instructions are available upon
request.) To ensure uniformity and common knowledge, we both read instructions
out loud and projected them using an overhead projector. We also administered a
post instruction questionnaire to ensure that all participants understood the

instructions and were able to calculate their earnings. After each decision period, the
total contribution was announced verbally and was displayed on a dry-marker board.
Participants
All participants were undergraduate students at Longwood University. Low-group-
identity participants were recruited from classrooms. Recruiters were careful to
avoid scheduling individuals who had been sitting near each other in class for the
same experimental sessions. We recruited high group-identity participants by
contacting well-established organizations whose members we believed would share
a group identity. The groups we recruited from included fraternities (all-male
condition), sororities (all female condition), a service fraternity (both-gender
condition), and a business fraternity (both-gender condition).
Participants arrived at the lab, were given instructions, made their decisions (with
feedback as described previously), were paid privately, and were dismissed. An
experiment generally lasted for one hour and forty-five minutes, with each round
lasting between five minutes and one minute (earlier rounds took somewhat longer,
while later rounds were significantly shorter). Participant payoffs ranged from $15
to $18.
Results
We were interested in a number of dependent variables, including:
• the number of tokens contributed,
• the likelihood of meeting the threshold,
• the distance between the group’s contribution and the threshold contribution of
125, and
• the variance of contributions made by individual members of the group.
The first set of variables reflects the social benefit created by the group. We designed
the experiment such that meeting the threshold of 125 tokens is good for the group,
but the distance between the group’s contribution and 125 is also a measure of
efficiency, because contributions above or below 125 represent losses.
In contrast, the variance of contributions within a group is a measure of equity. If
everyone gave twenty-five tokens (the equal-cost-sharing outcome), we would see
zero within-group variance of individual contributions. We have used the observed
variance of contributions within a group as a measure of the equity (or fairness)
exhibited by the group.

Descriptive Statistics
Figure One through Figure Six graph the group contributions in our six treatments.
Note that all the figures are on the same scale, and that group contributions “hover”
around the predicted outcome of 125. These data are similar to those generated from
previous experiments (see, e.g., Marks and Crosson 1998).
A comparison of Figures One and Two with Figures Five and Six illustrates some of
our results. In Figures One and Two, which show contributions by all-female groups,
the variance of group contributions was noticeably greater in the low-identity groups
than in the high-identity groups. Figures Five and Six, which show contributions by
all-male groups, indicate more variance in high-identity than in low-identity groups.
Interactions between gender composition and group identity will be demonstrated
statistically later in the discussion.
Table One provides some summary statistics for our experiments.
Boldface denotes the average contribution made for each condition.
Efficiency
In this section of the article, we analyze our measures of the efficiency of the players’
behavior. As might be intuited from the figures and table, we found that neither
gender nor group identity had significant effects on the amount allocated to the group
account, with the following average contributions: female high identity, 124.85;
female low identity, 123.17; both genders high identity, 122.50; both genders low
identity, 123.18; male high identity, 124.50; and male low identity, 124.93.
(Regressions are available from the authors.)
The second measure of efficiency we examined is the proportion of times that each
group met the threshold. As with contributions, we found gender and group identity
had no significant effects: female high identity, 54 percent; female low identity, 50
percent; both genders

Figure One

Female,High-IdentityGroup
FigureTwo
Female,Low-IdentityGroup

Figure Three

Both Genders, High-Identity
Group

Figure Four

Both Genders, Low-Identity
Group Figure Five

Male,High-IdentityGroup
FigureSix
Male,Low-IdentityGroup

Table One
Summary Statistics
Treatment Average Proportion Average Average
Contribution Success Abs Within-
Dist. Group
125 Variance

Female high 124.85 0.54 5.51 31.36
identity
Group 1 127.72 0.52 7.92 24.02
Group 2 123.68 0.60 4.36 21.61
Group 3 125.04 0.48 4.12 42.27
Group 4 120.76 0.36 6.80 53.88
Group 5 127.04 0.76 4.36 15.01

Female low 123.17 0.50 10.89 83.24
identity
Group 1 125.24 0.52 8.96 35.70
Group 2 125.80 0.56 4.56 31.57
Group 3 123.24 0.44 12.56 76.14
Group 4 127.40 0.56 9.52 90.74
Group 5 114.16 0.40 18.84 182.04

Both high 122.50 0.50 6.94 54.46
identity
Group 1 125.00 0.68 2.56 20.19
Group 2 115.92 0.24 12.20 95.48
Group 3 123.72 0.52 11.92 51.94
Group 4 121.68 0.48 4.84 83.12
Group 5 126.16 0.60 3.16 21.55

Both low 123.18 0.48 6.14 45.13
identity
Group 1 123.44 0.52 3.72 35.81
Group 2 124.40 0.48 7.64 40.60
Group 3 119.96 0.44 9.04 52.94
Group 4 127.32 0.60 4.48 27.41
Group 5 120.76 0.36 5.84 68.91
Male high 124.50 0.58 7.64 54.05
identity
Group 1 129.32 0.64 8.72 29.18
Group 2 120.12 0.48 13.28 137.80
Group 3 123.16 0.48 5.92 12.81
Group 4 124.48 0.72 4.36 56.45
Group 5 125.40 0.56 5.92 33.98
Male low 124.93 0.65 4.60 31.88
identity
Group 1 124.72 0.56 9.32 96.60
Group 2 126.64 0.88 2.28 25.49
Group 3 124.72 0.72 1.48 1.70
Group 4 125.60 0.64 5.08 6.73
Group 5 122.96 0.44 4.84 28.90
high identity, 50 percent; both genders low identity, 48 percent; male high identity,
58 percent; and male low identity, 65 percent. Of course, these observations are
linked — if one group contributed more than another, it would also (likely) have had
a higher rate of success in meeting the threshold.
The third measure of efficiency we have examined is the (absolute) deviation from
the threshold of 125. When groups contributed less than 125 tokens, their efficiency
was diminished because they failed to meet the threshold and thus each individual
earned less. When groups contributed more than 125 total tokens, efficiency was
reduced because contributions over the minimum were not returned to individuals
and were thus wasted. How closely each group came to contributing exactly 125
tokens can thus be construed as a measure of that group’s ability to successfully
coordinate. Groups that are more successful at coordination would thus have
contributions closer to the threshold.

For each group and each round, we calculated the absolute distance between the
contributions it produced
and the threshold of 125. Figure Seven demonstrates the pattern of the data, which
are statistically significant in regression analyses (available from the authors).
As Figure Seven shows, the high-identity all-female group experienced lower
deviations from the desired threshold of 125 than did the low identity female group,
which we believe is a result of better coordination among the group’s members.
(Women who know each other were significantly better able to coordinate than
women who did not.) In contrast, we found the exact opposite pattern for men: our
results indicate that all-male groups with higher group identity had significantly
worse coordination than those with low identity. We found group identity had no
significant effect on the mixed-gender groups.
We saw this pattern again when we analyzed within-group variance of contributions
(see later discussion). Together, these two results paint a picture of greater
coordination by females when they are in groups with high identity but less
coordination by males when they are in groups with high identity.
Equity
Our measure of equity is a within-group measure. We calculated the variance of the
contributions across individuals within a group. If group members chose the “fair”
solution in which each participant contributed 25 tokens (and received his or her
individual fifty-cent bonus), this variance would be zero. If they instead chose an
unequal rule, this variance would be high. This variance thus provides a measure of
equity within the group. Figure Eight depicts the results, which are statistically
significant (regressions available from the authors).
Figure Seven

Absolute Distance between Contributions and Threshold
FigureEight
Equity within the Groups
The pattern in Figure Eight mirrors that in Figure Seven. Women in high-identity
groups exhibited significantly more equitable outcomes (less within-group variance)
than women in low-identity groups. But this pattern was reversed for males. In our
study, males in high-identity groups reached significantly less equitable outcomes
than did males in low identity groups.

Conclusion and Discussion
This article builds on a
growing literature experimentally testing behavior in social-dilemma (mixed-
motive) settings. This literature seeks to examine what variables promote increased
(and decreased) coordination, efficiency, and equity. In our study, we examined the
impact of gender and group identity on contribution levels in a threshold social
dilemma. While related work has looked simply at the impact of gender with
inconclusive results (Cads by and Mayne’s 1998b), we examined the interaction
between gender and social identity. We found that, in all-female groups, when
participants were part of a larger organization with high social identity, the group’s
coordination, efficiency, and equity increased. In all male groups, however, high
social identity decreased these measures.
This result is consistent with evidence from other fields. Noted biological
anthropologist Lionel Tiger, whose book Men in Groups introduced the term “male
bonding” to popular discourse, discusses this phenomenon. In particular, his work
claims that, as with other primates, male bonds often involve “competition for
dominance, “crucial to the reproductive survival of the tribe (Tiger 1984). We
believe this competition for dominance is activated in all-male groups whose
members interact on a frequent basis (who are members of the same tribe, or
fraternity). This causes high-identity male groups to do more jockeying for position,
which causes greater deviation from the threshold contribution of 125, and to settle
on more inequitable cost-sharing allocations, which causes greater within-group
variance of contributions.
Research from self-construal’s (a person’s definition of herself or himself based on
his or her relationships) in psychology also supports this explanation. Susan Cross
and Laura Madison (1996) suggested that women are more likely to exhibit
interdependent self-construal’s, while men are more likely to exhibit independent
self-construal’s. The (female) interdependent self-construal results in a situation in
which “the goals and
needs of families and close friends are often as important as one’s own goals and
needs” (Cross and Madison 1996:7). This explanation is consistent with our results
that indicate that groups matter more for women than they matter for men. Similarly,
in her studies of children, Elinor Maccoby (1990) found that boys’ groups were
characterized by demonstrations of dominance, while girls’ groups were
characterized by cooperation and efforts to maintain social relationships. This

research is also consistent with what we found: men in high-identity groups vied for
dominance, which caused
lower equity within the group.
When considering negotiation behavior more generally, individuals have both
incentives for coordination (to make the pie bigger) and competition (to take more
of the larger pie). Our results suggest that for women, negotiating with someone in
their group (here, the same sorority) will increase the cooperative drive and decrease
the desire for competition, leading to more efficient outcomes relative to negotiating
with a female stranger. For men, however, negotiating with others in their group
(here, the same fraternity) seems to have engaged the desire for competition, leading
to more competition when compared with negotiating with a male stranger. Our
results predict no effect of group identity for mixed-gender negotiation.
These predictions suggest interesting and testable hypotheses for future studies.
These could include: add the ability to communicate in these settings and then
examine the communication for cooperative or competitive statements, undertake
more detailed analysis of the individual contributions and how they change in
response to others’ actions, and identify different types of all-male and all-female
groups in order to determine the robustness of the results.
As our title suggests, creating group identity seems to help women, but not men. As
this team of (female) authors has found, female bonding using sugar and spice can
pay off.
NOTE
1. Our particular setting follows parameters and structures theoretically developed
by Bagnoli and Lipman (1989), and previously tested by Marks and Crosson (1998),
among others. The interested reader should see Isaac, Schmidtz, and Walker (1989);
Bagnoli and McKee (1991); Ledyard (1995);Cadsby and Maynes (1998a);Croson
and Marks (1998);Cadsby and Maynes (1999); Croson and Marks (1999); Marks and
Croson (1999); Marks,
Croson, and Schansberg (1999); Rondeau, Schulze, and Poe (1999); Croson and
Marks (2000); Croson and Marks (2001); Poe et al.
(2002); Rose et al. (2002); and Rondeau, Poe, and Schulze (2003).

REFERENCES
Andreoni, J. and L. Vesterlund. 2001. Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in
altruism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1): 293–312.
Bagnoli, M. and B. Lipman. 1989. Provision of public goods: Fully implementing
the core through private contributions. Review of Economic Studies 56(4): 583–
601.
Bagnoli,M. and M. McKee.1991.Voluntary contribution games:Efficient private
provision of public goods. Economic Inquiry 29(2): 351–366.
Bolton, G. and E. Katok. 1995. An experimental test for gender differences in
beneficent behavior. Economics Letters 48(3–4): 287–292.
Brewer, M. and R. Brown. 1998. Intergroup relations. In The handbook of social
psychology, 2nd edn., edited by S. Fiske, D. Gilbert, and G. Lindzey. Boston,
MA: McGraw-Hill.
Brown-Kruse, J. and D. Hummels. 1993. Gender effects in laboratory public goods
contribution: Do individuals put their money where their mouth is? Journal of
Economic Behavior and Organization 22(3): 255–267.
Cadsby, B. and E. Maynes. 1998a. Choosing between a socially efficient and free-
riding equilibrium: Nurses versus economics and business students. Journal of
Economic Behavior and Organization 37(2): 183–192.
— — — and — — —. 1998b. Gender and free riding in a threshold public goods
game: Experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
34(4): 603–620.
— — — and — — —. 1999. Voluntary contribution of threshold public goods with
continuous provisions: Experimental evidence. Journal of Public Economics
71(1): 53–73.
Croson,R. and M. Marks.1998.Identifiability of individual contributions in a
threshold public goods experiment. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 42(2–
3): 167–190.
— — — and — — —.
1999. The effect of heterogeneous valuations for threshold public goods: An
experimental study. Risk, Decision and Policy 4(2): 99–115.
— — — and — — —. 2000. Step returns in threshold public goods: A meta- and
experimental analysis. Experimental Economics 2(3): 239–259.
— — — and — — —. 2001. The effect of recommended contributions in the
voluntary provision of public goods. Economic Inquiry 39(2): 238–249.

Croson, R. and N. Buchan. 1999. Gender and culture: International experimental
evidence from trust
games. American Economic Review 89(2): 386–391.
Cross,S. and L. Madson.1996.Models of the self:Self-construals and
gender.Psychological Bulletin 122(1): 5–37.
Dawes, R. 1980. Social dilemmas. Annual Review of Psychology 31: 169–193.
Dawes, R., A. van de Kragt, and J. Orbell. 1988. Not me or thee but we: The
importance of group identity in eliciting cooperation in dilemma situations —
experimental manipulations. Acta Psychologica 68(1): 83–97.
Eckel, C., A. C. M. de Oliveira, and P. J. Grossman. 2008. Gender and negotiation
in the small: Are women (perceived to be) more cooperative than men?
Negotiation Journal 24(4): 429–445.
Eckel, C. and P. Grossman. 1996. The relative price of fairness: Gender differences
in a punishment game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 30(2):
143–158.
— — — and — — —. 1998. Are women less selfish than men?: Evidence from
dictator experiments. The Economic Journal 108(448): 726–735.
— — — and — — —. 2001. Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Economic
Inquiry 39(2): 171–188.
Isaac, M., D. Schmidtz, and J. Walker. 1989. The assurance problem in a laboratory
market. Public Choice 62(3): 217–236.
Isaac, M., J. Walker, and S. Thomas. 1984. Divergent evidence on free-riding: An
experimental examination of possible explanations. Public Choice 43(2): 113–
149.
Ledyard, J. 1995. Public goods: A survey of experimental research. In Handbook of
experimental economics, edited by J. Kagel and A. Roth. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University
Press.
Maccoby, E. 1990. Gender
and relationships: A developmental account. American Psychologist 45(4): 513–
520.
Marks, M. and R. Croson. 1998. The effect of alternative rebate rules in the provision
point mechanism of voluntary contributions: An experimental investigation.
Journal of Public Economics 67(2): 195–220.

— — — and — — —. 1999. The effect of incomplete information and heterogeneity
in the provision point
mechanism of voluntary contributions: An experimental investigation. Public
Choice 99(1–2): 103–118.
Marks, M., R. Croson, and E. Schansberg. 1999. Using suggested contributions in
fund-raising for public goods: An experimental investigation of the provision
point mechanism. Nonprofit Management and Leadership 9(4): 369–384.
Poe, G., J. Clark, D. Rondeau, and W. Schulze. 2008. Provision point mechanisms
and field validity tests of contingent valuation. Environmental and Resource
Economics 23(1): 105–131.
Rondeau, D., G. Poe, and W. Schulze. 2003. VCM or PPM? A comparison of the
efficiency properties of two voluntary public goods mechanisms. Working Paper,
Department of Economics, University of Victoria, Canada.
Rondeau, D., W. Schulze, and G. Poe. 1999. Voluntary revelation of the demand for
public goods using a provision point mechanism. Journal of Public Economics
72(3): 455–470.
Rose, S., J. Clark, G. Poe, D. Rondeau, and W. Schulze. 2002. The private provision
of public goods: Test of a provision point mechanism for funding Green Power
programs. Resource and Energy Economics 24(1–2): 131–155.
Sell,J.,W.I. Griffin,and R. Wilson.1993.Are women more cooperative than men in
social dilemmas? Social Psychology Quarterly 56(3): 211–222.
Solnick, S. 2001. Gender differences in the ultimatum game. Economic Inquiry
39(2): 189–200.
Solow, J. and N. Kirkwood. 2002. Group identity and gender in public goods
experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 48(4): 403–412.
Tiger, L. 1984. Men in groups. London: Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd.

Article - 3 understanding and learning –
Settings in which individual interests conflict with the

interests of the group are common in many domains and have been studied by
researchers in multiple disciplines. While the correct number of fish to harvest is
generally not zero, sustainable harvests are lower than what countries would reap
by following their own self-interest but higher than taking no fish. Researchers
have modeled this type of setting using a threshold social dilemma.. Because
there is an optimum level of fish to be caught, this game is about the conflict
between competition and cooperation and about coordination. This article
compares the impact of gender and group identification on cooperation and
coordination in a threshold social-dilemma setting.
In this article it seems , designed the experiment such that meeting the threshold
of 125 tokens is good for the group, but the distance between the group’s
contribution and 125 is a measure of efficiency, because contributions above or
below 125 represent losses. The variance of contributions within a group is a
measure of equity. If everyone gave twenty-five tokens, we would see zero
within-group variance of individual contributions. We have used the observed
variance of contributions within a group as a measure of the equity exhibited by
the group.
All participants were undergraduate students at Longwood University. Recruiters

were careful to avoid scheduling individuals who had been sitting near each other
in class for the same
experimental sessions. They recruited high group-identity participants by
contacting well-established organizations whose members we believed would
share a group identity. The groups were recruited from included fraternities,
sororities, a service fraternity, and a business fraternity.

The first set of variables reflects the social benefit created by the group. In this
article they have designed
the experiment such that meeting the threshold of 125 tokens is good for the
group, but the distance between the group’s contribution and 125 is a measure of
efficiency, because contributions above or below 125 represent losses. In
contrast, the variance of contributions within a group is a measure of equity. The
first set of variables reflects the social benefit created by the group.
This article builds on a growing literature experimentally testing behaviour in

social-dilemma settings. This literature seeks to examine what variables promote
increased coordination, efficiency, and equity. We examined the impact
of gender and group identity on contribution levels in a threshold social
dilemma. While related work has looked at the impact of gender with
inconclusive results , we examined the interaction between gender and
social identity.
In all-female groups, when participants were part of a larger organization with
high social identity, the group’s coordination, efficiency, and equity increased.
This article builds on a growing literature experimentally testing behaviour in

social-dilemma settings. This literature seeks to examine what variables promote
increased coordination, efficiency, and equity. We examined the impact
of gender and group identity on contribution levels in a threshold social
dilemma. While related work has looked at the impact of gender with
inconclusive results (Cadeby and Maynes 1998b), we examined the interaction
between gender and social identity. In all-female groups, when participants were
part of a larger organization with high social identity, the group’s coordination,
efficiency, and equity increased.
The design allows us to determine if the existence of a cohesive group identity
matters and, if so, if the impact is similar for male groups, female groups, and m
ixed-gender groups.
Experimental Economics Studies on Group Identity The second dimension we v
aried in our experiment is group identity.
In this study, they

used this strategy of identifying naturally occurring groups nd inviting members
from those groups to the lab in order to compare the impact of group identity o
n decisions in a social-dilemma setting.
Participant payoffs ranged from $15 to $18. Results We were interested in a nu
mber of dependent variables, including: the number of tokens contributed, the li
kelihood of meeting the threshold, 416 Croson, Marks, and Snyder Gender and
Group Identity in Social Dilemmas
the distance between the group's contribution and the threshold contribution of
125, and the variance of contributions made by individual members of the grou
p.
. In Figures One and Two, which show contributions by all female groups, the
variance of group contributions was noticeably greater in the low-identity groups
than in the high-identity groups. As Figure Seven shows, the high-identity all-
female group experienced lower deviations from the desired threshold of 125
than did the low identity female group, which we believe is a result of better
coordination among the group's members. In contrast, we found the exact
opposite pattern for men: our results indicate that all-male groups with higher
group identity had significantly worse coordination than those with low identity.
In all-female groups, when participants were part of a larger organization with
high social identity, the group's coordination, efficiency, and equity increased. In
all-male groups, however, high social identity decreased these measures. We
believe this competition for dominance is activated in male groups whose
members interact on a frequent basis.
It is found that for women, negotiating with someone in their group will increase
the cooperative drive and decrease the desire for competition. For men, however,
negotiations with others in their own group seems to have engaged the desire of
competition. The researchers suggest interesting and testable hypotheses for
future studies.

Group Work Articles Learning and Understanding G 6 f1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Group Work Articles Learning and Understanding G 6 f1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name – Avinash Vilas Pawar

I. Theme – importance of social group work in youth welfare

Article – providing support to young people through group work

Author – Jane Westergaard

II. Theme – Importance of social group work in community organization .

Article – social group work in community setting.

Author – Joseph Vegheese.

III. Theme – Importance of social group work in women welfare

Author - Rachel Croson, Melanie Marks And Jessica Snyde

Negotiation Journal October 2008 1

Groupwork 20(1), 2010, pp.87-102. © W&B, 2010. DOI:

Key words: Personal

Negotiation Journal October 2008 2

1. Senior Lecturer in Education, Canterbury Christ Church University

Address for correspondence: Runcie Court, Salomon’s, Broomhill Road,

Negotiation Journal October 2008 3

What is personal learning and development?

Negotiation Journal October 2008 4

• working with others in a team

Negotiation Journal October 2008 5

Negotiation Journal October 2008 6

Planning, preparing and delivering PLD groupwork

• F - Focus. Identifying an appropriate focus or topic for the session based on an

• Make-up of the group

Negotiation Journal October 2008 7

Negotiation Journal October 2008 8

Fig. 1. Session Plan

Session plan (timing): 1 Hour session

Group: 10 x 17-year-olds, mixed ability

Negotiation Journal October 2008 9

Negotiation Journal October 2008 10

Negotiation Journal October 2008 11

Negotiation Journal October 2008 12

Negotiation Journal October 2008 13

Negotiation Journal October 2008 14

Negotiation Journal October 2008 15

Article 1 understanding and learning

Negotiation Journal October 2008 16

Negotiation Journal October 2008 17

Objectives: Participants in the session have the opportunity to:

Negotiation Journal October 2008 18

Negotiation Journal October 2008 19

Many groups worker is already trained in the use of these above-mentioned

Negotiation Journal October 2008 20

GROUP WORK IN COMMUNITY

Negotiation Journal October 2008 21

2.2 SOCIALACTION GROUPS

* Dr. Joseph Varghese, Christ University, Bangalore

According to Rothman (1968) three models of community organization are- Social

Negotiation Journal October 2008 22

Negotiation Journal October 2008 23

Social Action Groups in India

Negotiation Journal October 2008 24

Negotiation Journal October 2008 25

Negotiation Journal October 2008 26

Steps for social action group

Negotiation Journal October 2008 27

2) Initiating the Group

Negotiation Journal October 2008 28

3) Facilitating the group Establishing ground rules

Negotiation Journal October 2008 29

2.7 FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

Newburn , Tim(1993), Disaster andAfter, Social work in the aftermath of disaster,