Zina:

I am sharing from my own experience. But, I have discovered that sharing your ideas in the group can lead to the "not my idea syndrome". Colleagues are sometimes very crude in rejecting your ideas with no really valid reasons except that intangibly, it's not their's. I would advise that you "feel out" the situation first and decide whether it would be better to do the individual or collective reflection. All the same, if you do feel the need to do the "collective" and still have doubts about your department colleagues being objective, then choose a similar interest group outside your department.

Many thanks,

Debra

Thanks for your opinion Debra & T. D. I tried mixed methods, but I noticed from some articles that Middle East follows collectivism while the west focused on individualism that is why I tried to collect reflection on this subject.

I think individualism is better since it prepares them to face the challenges alone and then devise their solutions. 

It also teaches students to be responsible, hardworking, disciplined and resilient. 

Dear Shamsul thanks for your reflection But What about the system that the university follows, sometimes it is either collectivism or individualism. It is not decided by the teacher himself or herself  to change the system that is decided by the group member so they have to follow the group. 

Colectivism is way better to buil learning communities and networks. A research project can not be conducted by a single individual. However, there are students and i guess faculty who prefer riding 'solo', so we need both approaches to academics.

Success of teaching and learning depends on the joint efforts of both teachers and learners, definitely collectivism should play the pivotal role, with individual features supplementing and adding unique strengths.

The basic material is the same in each section of the course taught. However, it is the experience and knowledge of the professor that is different. If the students are not exposed to that, then they might as well read the book and test out. Are we creating critical thinkers or  training minions?

A recent piece on persuasion suggests that there might be an advantage in taking a fist-person approach in delivering information that may run counter to an audience's perspective instead of using "we."   Ken Bain suggests that "warm language" invites students to the subject in What the Best College Teachers Do.  The invitation is elaborated by revealing personal challenges with the discipline. An even more collective approach would be to team teach and share similar issues from a variety of perspectives.  

Both are necessary but at different time, context and magnitude attached with purpose. A project is to be completed by a group but a creative solution to the problem  comes from a deep individual reflection. Learning can be accomplished in a group where as learning should be expressed by an individual. interdisciplinary studies require collectivism whereas specialization permits individualism. 

Yes, I do believe with this because we need to development or 'being' concept of who we are, then we also try link with anyone, that is, the 'becoming' concept, which can enhanced in a collective negotiation.

Group working is always a good occasion to meet different opinions, learning styles and different study methods. It depends on his/her own decisions: if you are used to work by yourself it could be a good opportunity to change point of view; if you are used to groupworking it is again a good opportunity to improve again and again your own learning style.

On the other side, I think that it also depends on the topic/subject you are involved in: sometimes it could be a good thing to work alone/individually and then meet others to discuss, sometimes it is perfectly the opposite.

We need to think on the commons! And when we work with adults, we need to do in the perspective of andragogy: adults learn in a different way! The pairs are actors so important to structure the learning! I think collectivism is the better form to do!!!

As I'm student of university my learning says both are essential for learner as harward gardner defined individuals are different they learn with different linguistics. Yeah it is  best thing to know yourself best  than others.

As I'm student of university my learning says both are essential for learner as harward gardner defined individuals are different they learn with different linguistics. Yeah it is  best thing to know yourself best  than others.

As I'm student of university my learning says both are essential for learner as harward gardner defined individuals are different they learn with different linguistics. Yeah it is  best thing to know yourself best  than others.

I think that cooperative learning is a good way of generating skills for teamwork, leadership training , development of critical thinking as a result of debate and discussion , the world of work today is a more collective than individual world.

Depends on the work environment - overall the pervasive approach in the western world is individualism so it may be beneficial to start developing more the collaborative learning there. Being part of a group develops many other important social skills that may not be directly to the related studies but are so important in finding realization later in life.

I think that most times you find yourself reading about a simple dichotomy, or asking a question in such simple binary terms, you probably already know the answer: life is more complex than that, and it is all about finding the right blend for the right context.

No one methodology, or theoretical/philosophical perspective should be chosen for any classroom without considering context and the human beings involved. The question is presented as a dichotomy; as if an answer could be easily ascertained. If teaching were that simple, anyone would be able to do it well and we know that is not the case.  It is a complex blend of understanding the learner, the context, the subject matter, the goals and objectives, the assessment means, pedagogy, and philosophy. As stated above by K. A. WInston, "life is more complex than that."

From experience we can say it is collective and group dynamics which brings rewards. Silo players are ultimately failures.

Both! The individualism can build the critical thought, but the collectivism is the field to express the individual thought and lapidate the individual buid.

But many instructors at the tertiary level assume students have acquired the collective group skills along the way, only to discover that many struggle to orient group activity to a successful completion. As such, do not take it granted that students know how to collectively work in groups. Do a team building activity when requiring students to do group work.

Best regards,

debra

Dear Zina,

Student's background culture is critical in this question.  Students from Asian, Latin American and Mediterranean cultures definitely value group spirit.  Western, northern European cultures on the other hand appreciate individual work.  In my opinion within a multicultural class context a hybrid communication system embedding both values helps students relate to learning procedures by performing within their familiar cultural frame.

Regards,

Maria

Maria:

I do agree with comment. Attached are a few articles I have published highlighting this critical issue that needs more careful attention as international students pay almost three times the cost for tuition compare to a U.S. citizen (you pay for yourself and two U.S. students).

Article Workforce Education and Development (WED): Graduate Students...

Data Generation I: International and invisible in a workforce edu...

Data Curriculum Inclusiveness Challenge: Responding to Multicultu...

Thanks for your responses everyone. I appreciate them.  Dear Maria, I see your points and culture is important to manage both methods in learning and teaching procedures.

W.regards,

Best regards