When working in a collaborative team environment, there are distinguishing

factors that take place in my classroom. From my research previously mentioned, I have
categorized students in five categories: the forcing shark, the accommodating bear, the
compromising fox, the withdrawing turtle and the problem-solving owl. This section will
focus how each of the students express specific qualities of each of their animal
identifiers and the manners that shaped them.
Over the course of five months, students reflected on their actions when working
in groups. This was to ensure that the students were aware of how they handled conflicts
as well as to capture student voice through out the research process. At the end of each
group activity or project, students had to fill out an exit card. To gain a better
understanding of the student reflections in these exit cards, it is necessary to have a point
of reference about the various projects and activities in my classroom.
The following chart describes the activity, duration, and the student learning
objectives.





















Xander, the forcing Shark
Forcing sharks tend to prioritize goals as paramount when working with others.
They have little concern for others in a group.
Because they are highly task oriented, they can often come across as brash and
strong-willed to group members.
Force win-lose negotiations





Date September
27th
October
14th
November
8th
December 5th

Grouping
Propaganda
poster and
presentation
Literature
circle
discussion.
Group
discussion
critical thinking
brainstorming
activity.
Partners
researched an
unsolved mystery
in history.
Deliverable Collaborative
discussion/
created a final
product.
Discussion
guide and
shared their
connection
s to a novel
Students
created their
own
government
based on
certain
questions.
Gallery walk,
web quest, and
joint research
paper.
Length
of time
Two classes

One class
period
Two, 55 minute
classes
Three weeks
Product Students
created a joint
poster
Student
artifact that
represented
his or her
reflection
Students
created
constitutions
for their land
Students created
photo
reenactment

Xanders self reflection:
Xander is consistent with is reflection. Sharks frequently have blinders on in peer
communication. This explains the two reflections when he identified as a turtle. Sharks
are focused on task completion. In this case, in Xanders mind, the task was to force his
ideas across to his group. When he did not, Xander surrendered his ideas. When their
opinion is not heard, in the case of Xander, the sharks can retreat.

Xanders Peer Reflection
One of the startling arguments from Xanders peers was when I had students fill
out a choice sheet at the beginning of a six-week project. Part of this choice sheet asked,
Who do you want to work with? and conversely, Who is someone you dont want to
work with and why?
For the student responses, Xanders name came up nine times. Some of the
reasons they listed were:
Because we don't agree on anything and we never get anything done
Just not Xander because I like to read instead of going deaf from his [shouting]
.
I cannot work with Xander because [he is] not a good participating partner and
he is not good at being nice as partners.
One person I cannot work with is Xander because he tends to get off topic and
sometimes doesn't get his work done and I like to get my work done sooner than
the deadline.
Because sharks are strong willed and often unwilling to compromise, they often
isolate themselves with peers.

Teacher reflection
Xander can often get into verbal altercations with students. He is a student who is
forceful with his peers when he feels that they do not respect him. Sharks tend to have
forcing tendencies and have little concern for others, but truly are focused and driven on
work completion or a specific goal. Sharks can often keep the group focused and on task.
Unfortunately, this is not the case with Xander. His major aim is getting is opinion across
to others. This leads to isolation Forcing involves assuming conflicts are settled when
one person wins and the other person loses. (Johnson & Johnson, 4:6) This assumption
is common with Xanders thinking. In the case of Xander, he neglects relationships and
often and forces others to concede to his ideas. This has made other students
apprehensive and fearful of working with him.
Propaganda
Poster
Literature
Circle discussion
Create your
own
government
Historys
Mysteries
Turtle- I was
withdrawing
today because I
was worried that
no one would
like my idea
Shark- I became
a shark yesterday
when no one else
was offering
ideas
Shark- I was a
shark and a
bear at the same
time.
Turtle- because
I didnt agree
with my
partners idea,
so I let them do
it all.

Melanie, The Smoothing Bear
Accommodating bears view relationships as very important, but have little or no
concern for accomplishing goals or completing work.
They are typically students who are more outgoing and can make friends easily.
Smoothing involves letting the other person have his or her way (Johnson and
Johnson 4:6).
People pleasers

Melanies self reflection


Melanie has identified herself as a variety of animal identifiers and there are a
number of reasons for this. One main conclusion is that bears are people pleasers, and I
believe that teacher-pleasers fall into this category. I had a feeling that the comments she
wrote depict what she thought I wanted her to write, rather than be more self-reflective.
Through each of the reflections, there are underpinnings of accommodating their group
members. Melanie does not like to make waves. More specifically, when she wrote
propaganda poster reflection, she noted that she compromised in listening to music.
However, she said that she wanted to work, but instead chose to listen to music, because
that is what her partner wanted to do. She sacrificed her own needs, for her partners
needs.

Melanies Peer Reflection:
Melanies partner feedback additionally supported that she displayed
characteristics of a smoothing bear. They stated that my partner didnt do much, so
someone had to take charge. In her December 5th reflection Melanie agreed that she did
not work great with her partner. She tended to focus more on the socializing aspect of
school. With smoothing bears, who they work with is paramount because they can be
easily swayed. In a follow-up interview, I had with Melanie where they were able to
choose their partners, I asked Melanie, Did you get all of the work done? Her response
was, No, talking was more fun.

Teacher reflection
Altogether in Melanies self and peer reflections, I unearthed a pattern. While
Melanie is strong student and comprehends content easily, her quality of work and grades
did not reflect her intelligence. In group work, Melanie would often need redirection
from me to refocus on the work, though, sometimes, she was extremely focused
Propaganda
Poster
Literature
Circle
Discussion
Create your own
government
Historys
Mysteries
Fox- Because I
wanted to work and
my partner wanted to
listen to music, so we
worked and each one
had a headphone to
listen to music.
Bear- I was a bear
because I did not
focus that much on
my lit circle.

Owl-
Because I tried to
get my group to
work and did not
have an argument
Turtle- I was
withdrawing
because I could
have done more
work with my
partner.
Smoothing bears work productivity and quality is often inconsistent because of their
susceptibility to others. Fop instance, when Melanie worked in a group where there were
more goal-oriented peers (sharks or owls), she was more productive. Additionally,
Melanie did not get into arguments and was agreeable to others. I had often witnessed her
smiling and she appeared at ease when working with her peers.
Lastly, like typical bears, Melanie was more concerned with whom she worked.
However, this was not consistent in all of her groups. When she was asked how she
handled conflicts best, she responded: text message I followed up with her about her
response. She told me she worries that students can become upset with her if she speaks
her mind. During this stage of their lives, adolescents are trying new things as they seek
to define who they are and who they want to be. Because they are spending more time
with their peers, the opinions of their peers generally carries more weight that that of their
parents (Marshall, R.M, & Neuman, S. 2012). As countless teenagers are, Melanie is
highly concerned about friendships.
Lastly, for smoothing bears, which hold high value on relationships, feeling
included is a high priority. Melanies answers in the Identifying my anger activity
depicted her feelings about exclusion. Her response to the statement, Im angry when
was, when my friends wont tell me something. While Melanie did not self identify as a
smoothing bear, it is clear that she meets many of the characteristics of one.

J ason, the Withdrawing Turtle
Withdrawing turtles share the same lack of desire of work as the smoothing bear,
however, they differ in that they also lack concerning themselves with the feelings of
others.
Withdrawing turtles are often described as having both their relationships and
goals of low importance when working in groups. This can be caused from a
number of obstacles. In my data, a withdrawing turtle:
o May struggle academically
o Disconnected to content.
o Lack self-advocacy skills.
o Quieter, withdrawn, and not typically social.
o Lack self esteem/self worth

Jasons self reflection

Through his own reflection, Jason identified his qualities accurately. He
recognized that he could be withdrawn in groups. Additionally, Jason was hard on
himself. Other students, who also identified themselves as turtles, mirrored the same
statement. Briannas response: Turtle- I was a turtle because I didn't say much. I just
went with the flow. Another student Sarah wrote Turtle- I was withdrawing today
because I was worried that no one would like my idea.
Propaganda
Poster
Literature
Circle
Discussion
Create your
own
Government
Historys
Mysteries
Turtle- I mostly
withdrew from
the conversation,
but I also talked.
Turtle- I didn't
talk a whole lot.
Bear- Because I
just talk and
thats it.
Fox- Because
we had the
same ideas
When he filled in the answer to the prompt, I feel angry when. His response was
when my friends call me stupid. I believe that Jasons self struggle with valuing his
ideas led him to withdraw and not participate. He struggled with attention and drive.
However, when motivated, he would accomplish his work. He has one or two good
friends in the class. It is important to note that with turtles, their thoughts need to be
valued. In Jasons December 5
th
reflection, Jason described himself as someone who
compromised because he had the same ideas as his peers. I think that his self-motivation
came when he feels appreciated by his peers.

Jasons peer reflections
Jason often had struggles when he worked with his peers. Jason is diagnosed with
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, so often times his central issue in groups was
focusing on the task. This led to frustration from group members. He is undoubtedly
distracted and often distracts others. Peers have complained to me about his behavior in
groups.
Because avoiding turtles neither steer clear of conflict, nor are they task driven,
group members are often frustrated with them. For the Historys Mysteries Project; his
partner said, Jason wasnt really getting work done. His partner described him by
saying that didnt do any work and that he was a turtle. I was laid back because I wanted
to get things done and did not really care if [Jason] did not want to work This also
proves that Jason, when working with another student that is just as withdrawn, he works
well with them. It is noted, for this same activity, Jason described himself as a
compromising fox because [my partner and I] had the same ideas.

Teacher reflection
Jason is a high-energy student, capable of doing work; he often struggles with
thoroughness in his work. His work would be rushed to ensure assignment completion.
On the surface, Jason appears to have nonchalant attitude towards work. However, under
the surface, I believe Jason internalizes his frustration. I distinctly remember when I
returned an assignment he scored poorly on, he put his head down on the desk and
immediately shoved the assignment into his backpack. It was the first time that I had seen
him externally frustrated about his work. When I followed up with him a few days later,
he shrugged off the incident. Withdrawing turtles also keep emotional energy tied up in
fear resentment and hostility (Johnson & Johnson 4:5).
Another contributing factor to students who withdraw during conflict is due to
past group interactions that had enduring effects on students. When a person has
experienced negative outcomes in conflict situations, a state of learned helplessness
results in which the person believes there is nothing he or she can do to create a positive
resolution of a conflict (Seilgalman, 1975). Jasons past history with peer group
interaction, showed Jasons apathy toward group work.
Jasons group interaction, self reflection, and peer interact meet all the criteria for
a withdrawing turtle. Unlike the turtle, compromising foxes have vastly different
characteristics.

Taylor, The Compromising Fox
Compromising foxes are described as finding equal importance in relationships
and goals.
They have strong negotiations skills.
They focus on the problem and not the person (Johnson & Johnson, 4:11)
Foxes typically are friendly and excel academically. They have high social
intelligence and great intuition
Foxes often have strong leadership qualities.
Lastly, they are willing to sacrifice some of their goals while persuading others to
give up part of theirs.

Taylors Self Reflection
Taylor described herself as a fox very accurately. She often gave up her strong
work ethic to make certain the group worked collaboratively. Like most compromising
foxes, Taylor reflected on how she stepped into a variety of roles when was
necessary to ensure group harmony.




Taylors peer reflection
Naturally, many students are drawn to working with foxes. This is because of the
adaptability in collaborative learning. When students consistently meet in the middle,
they are more flexible when working with peers. Not surprisingly, Taylors name came
up six times in the project choice sheet. Feedback included. I like working with Taylor
because she works hard and is nice. Johnny wrote, Taylor and I worked together on our
debate [in sixth grade] and we got along really well. For the Historys Mysteries project,
her partner wrote, My partner was fun to work with and I liked how our picture turned
out. This statement reiterates that there was flexibility and drive when working in a
group setting.

Teacher reflection
Taylor is a high achieving and humble student who has gained respect from her
peers. Many students look to her as a leader on our team. While she is not as vocal as
Propaganda
Poster
Literature
Circle
Discussion
Create your own
Government
Historys
Mysteries
Fox- I think I was a fox
today because I felt like a
mixture of some of the
other ones. For example,
towards the end of the
conversation we started to
get off task. I was a turtle
then, but then had to
become a shark to get
everyone working again

Fox-For me, It really
depended on the part of
the meeting. In the
beginning, I was a shark
since I volunteered to be
the group leader. But
when we're working on
the sheet, I was more of
a turtle-fox since I was
a little withdrawn

Shark- Because I
got a little bit
forcing sometimes
and took control, a
little too much.
Fox- I think that I was
a fox because there
were times when I had
to be a shark so we
could finish our work.
Other times, I was an
owl when our product
or pictures were
falling apart.
some of her peers she is not afraid to voice her opinion. Because of the compromising
foxs natures, Taylor was a student that could be put with a variety of types of students
and ensure productivity. When I had surveyed students who they wished to work with in
the project , Taylors name came up four times. Many students like working with Taylor
because she has a great attitude. When I spoke with Taylor about how her Literature
Circle discussions were going, I found her answer true to form with compromising foxes.
Me: How are your literature circles going? Do you like them?
Taylor: Yes, I do. They are really great. Although, sometimes its hard to get
students to talk.
Me: I know exactly what you mean! What, though, do you do in that situation?
How do you get quieter students to talk?
Compromising foxes typically like working in groups. They have the capacity to be
flexible in working with a variety of personalities. Additionally, foxes identify when to
step up and lead and are willing to step back if others are eager to lead.

Marcy the problems solving Owl
Quite similarly to the compromising fox the problem solving owls share many of the
same characteristics. Unlike the fox, the problem-solving owls are more strategic in
resolving conflicts. They tend to be more rigid and less flexible. Nevertheless owls can
negotiate very well to ensure all group members needs are met.
Problem solving owls place high value on both tasks and peer relationships.
They maintain interests and try to finds ways of reconciling them with the others
interests.
Solutions are sought that ensure all group members and goals are fully achieved.
(Johnson & Johnson, 1995 4:3)
Effective communicators
Have the ability to understand group members needs


Marcys self-reflection
Marcy has identified herself as a shark fifty percent of the time; other data shows
strong traits of an owl. It is clear that she values both working hard and getting the work
completed as well as making sure all group members are working towards the common
goal. This was most apparent from looking at student reflection.

Marcys Peer Reflection:
While owls share many of the leadership qualities as the compromising foxes,
owls have one stand alone quality. They negotiate well. The most compelling argument
Propaganda Poster Literature Circle
discussion
Create your own
government
Historys
Mysteries
Owl- Today I was
compromising
because I was trying
to get everyone to get
along.
Shark- I was a shark
because I was focused on
my work.
Shark- I was a
shark because I
had to get my
group partner on
task.
Owl- I went with my
partners ideas, but
kept it simple. I
didn't want to take
over the project, so I
stepped back
that supports Marcy is the owl came from a peer. This was written in reflection sheet
from the Im feeling Conflicted video project. Marcys group member, David described
working with her as wonderful. [At one point during the project] Isaac and I clashed
over the editing because it was being [difficult]. It was taking three hours to load, but
Marcy and me did the acting (disputants) and Isaac did the behind the camera work. Even
though, we didnt get along, Marcy and I made sure that every one worked together.
Marcy took the time to make sure each member that was involved in the conflict
ended up working together. Additionally, her partner and her agreed on their
collaboration for the Historys Mysteries project. Timothy stated: I was thinking of
things to use that my partner didn't. Marcys reflection for this project was I went with
my partners ideas, but kept it simple. I didn't want to take over the project, so I stepped
back. This is compelling because she showed her value of both the task as well as her
partners ideas.

Teacher Reflection
Marcy fits the characteristics of the owl because she was able to understand group
members needs as well as placing value on the work. Much like the compromising fox,
Owls tend to ensure that the group members are getting along; all the while the work is
getting done. Owls tend to have a great balance between the social life and work life;
students who can get their work done while talking to their peers, can generally be owls.
Marcy has a very optimistic attitude and high social status and is well liked by
her peers. She is very hard on herself to do well in school. She is very reflective and
charismatic. She can sometimes get too stressed out when working in groups with
students who arent as driven. She tries to make sure that all students are trying to get
along with one another. While this isnt consistent with her chart, I found that when she
reflected on her literature circle question: What went well in your group? Four out of her
five responses were everyone got along and participated equally.

Final reflection on animal identifiers
Within the first week of school, I made sure that the students were able to grasp
each of their roles. I showed the grid and I had them fill out the: What is your conflict
management style? The students scored themselves based on their answers to the
questions. Introducing this early on in the year developed a common language
surrounding their behaviors. It is important that I let students know that they could be all
of them and each time, depending on when issues arise.
Additionally, I think that it was suitable that I used the exit cards frequently. They
were filled out often and the students were used to reflecting on their actions. This also
created a common language that was infused into my classroom culture.


A word of caution
When describing each of the animals to the class, the shark, turtle and bear were
very easy for the students to understand. They were very tangible characteristics that
seventh graders could grasp. I had described those three in the following ways:
Turtles seem to not think too much about the work, nor do they care about
getting along with people in the group.
Sharks really like to get the work done, and dont care about the other
students in their group.
Bears dont concern themselves with getting the work done, but like to talk
more to their group members during the activity.
When it came to the problem solving owl and the compromising fox, I found myself
having a difficult time in describing them. At one point, I explained the fox as a
combination of all of them. This disconnect, I believe, led to a bit more confusion with
the roles.
What I should have done was have students experience each of the animal
characteristics in a scripted role-playing activity. Rather, I briefly told the students the
information and expected them to grasp it. The chart below is thought provoking because
there were many students who identified themselves as compromising foxes. This
supports the idea that students may not have fully grasped each of the roles. It wasnt
until three months in when students were able to provide concrete evidence of their
thoughts.
Another opportunity I missed was to define more clearly to the students that the
animal identifiers are not behavior qualifiers. Rather, they are how they behave in
conflict. I wasnt necessarily transparent on explaining it. This led to students thinking
surrounding their behaviors rather than how they react to disagreements.

September 8th
Animal Identifier Total Number of Students Males Females
Forcing Shark 9 5 4
Avoiding Turtle 5 4 1
Compromising Fox 13 4 9
Smoothing Bear 14 9 5
Collaborating Owl 7 2 5

Student fox replies in September show a mixture of confusion. These students
explicitly connected my words with their actions. More importantly, they were unable to
reflect, and I felt as though they were just parroting the information that I shared with
them.
Other students were unable to accurately identify the characteristics of an owl and
described characteristics from other animal categories. This was particularly concerning,
as I felt that the first step in creating a culture of open communication in my classroom is
to create a shared language. If the students couldnt identify how they handle conflicts,
there would be no shared language.

Student FOX responses in September:
I was all between because it was not a big project- Isaac
I think I was a fox today because I felt like a mixture of some of the other ones. For
example, towards the end of the conversation we started to get off task. I was a turtle then,
but then had to become a shark to get everyone back on task.- James

Because sometimes I was saying to keep to the protocol, and sometimes I was
socializing-Peter

I found a similar pattern with the owls. In the beginning of the year, there was
some confusion on the role of a problem-solver and what they do. However, over the
course of the data collection, the students began to self identify. I believe that this
occurred when the students participated in the Im feeling conflicted video activity. This
will be explained in-depth in a later chapter.


Use of animal identifiers in the classroom, it is not an end-all-be-all in
determining how students will behave in conflict. Animal identifiers serve many great
purposes: First, they help the students reflect on how they act when engaged in a
disagreement with a peer or classmate. Secondly, it helped shaped my class in building a
culture of communication in creating a positive-conflict environment. Students self-
identifying their behavior opened the lines of communication and allowed for conflict to
thrive in a classroom.
However, there are some pitfalls with using the grid to identify student behaviors.
It is especially vital to consider that teachers could potentially use the chart to label or
categorize students. Additionally, the students could use the identifiers as a way of name
calling or antagonizing. Lastly, students could self-identify and therefore categorize their
behavior and feel forced to stay within that animal identifier. For example, a turtle could
stay in the mindset that he/she would always handle conflicts turtle. It is essential when
implementing this in any classroom, teachers are aware of the labels that could
potentially lead to stereotyping. It is important that students know that they can be all of
them at certain times during certain situations. Teachers truly need to know the varying
and complex communication needs of the students, not exclusively using the animal
identifiers to understand how students behave in conflict.







Some student OWL Responses in September:
I was a problem solver because the group was playing around and [had to get them on
track]- Justin
This is because I would talk to everyone and then I would get us back on track- Juan