Using film as instructional method

I have to say, that the concept of using film in our class to understand group and team dynamics is an exceptional idea. I remember in high school we used to joke that "movie day" meant the teacher had a "hang over" or did not feel like teaching that day. I never really thought of film as an effective instructional tool until now.

Thus far we have watched 3 films, all relative to group and team dynamics. It is rather interesting to me to watch these films as I have seen all of them at least once before. I will mention that 12 Angry Men was used in my Senior Government class as a demonstration of the how the jury process worked. I didn't make the connection until I watched the same film in an acdemic environment again, but instead we used the film to under stand Tuckman's staging model.

So, back to the films. What is most curious to me when watching these films and noticing things I never considered. I watched these films the first or second time for enterainment, but never would I consider the academic implications. For example, Levi discusses that groups and teams have many different charateristics. This is very clear in the film, Apollo 13, where a number of different teams are present.

Is having a deviant on a team a bad thing?

On February 2, 2009 I had a realization about what it means to be a part of team. The nature of my work requires my division to act in a very team like manner. For example, at the end of the day the goal is the same, to advance the mission of the University. We do that by raising private funds and engaging alumni in activities that brings them closer to their University.

Our class discussion that evening centered on the Paradox's of teams. We discussed in great detail what happens when you have deviant on your team and whether or not it is a bad thing. I say absolutely not, especially when that individuals agenda works towards achieving the end goal. I thought about two people on our our team who are relatively new to our team. These two have been labeled by others as being pot stirrers. According to our literature, they would be called deviants.

In a University setting, things have a bad habit of being siloed. For example, Student Affairs works in its sandbox and Advancement works in its own sandbox. One of these individuals does not believe in silos. I kid with this person that he came here with a bulldozer and he is tearing those silos down. It occurred to me that this individual who as I mentioned has been labeled a deviant is in fact doing a lot of good and helping us achieve our end goal. Dispite the denotation of the word deviant, in this particular case and maybe in most cases a deviant connotes a good thing.

But in life, everything has twos sides, so when is a deviant on a team a bad thing? I would think when a particular person acts in a deviant manner with only his or her agenda in mind. Like perhaps a class clown who disrupts a class displays deviant behavior and that behaviour does absolutely nothing for the class. Maybe a class isn't a team and might be more of a group. I'm sure we could debate that at a later time.