Coursework Header Sheet

161454-13

Course BUSI1316: PPD2: Communication & Bus Res Course School/Level BU/UG
Coursework PPD2 Portfolio 2 Assessment Weight 40.00%
Tutor R Dass Submission Deadline 11/01/2010

1 Employment related activity; 2 e-journal download; 3 Class Debate Report

Coursework is receipted on the understanding that it is the student's own work and that it has not,
in whole or part, been presented elsewhere for assessment. Where material has been used from
other sources it has been properly acknowledged in accordance with the University's Regulations
regarding Cheating and Plagiarism.

000532454 Matilda Akinyemi

Tutor's comments

Grade Awarded___________ For Office Use Only__________ Final Grade_________

Moderation required: yes/no Tutor______________________ Date _______________

MATILDA C. AKINYEMI
STUDENT NO: 000532454
TUTOR: RAJ DASS

PPD 2 - PORTFOLIO 1:

TASK 1: PARTICIPATING IN A MENTORING SCHEME AS A MENTOR

DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES COVERED:

On Monday 12th October 2009, my ‘Personal Tutor’ briefly informed me of the

possibility of giving me the opportunity to mentor one of the Overseas student
who needed extra assistance. Perhaps, this was due to my own encounter
during my first year in the course. The first term of my course was really tough
on me. I was enthusiastic about this, but nothing happened for two weeks. On
Wednesday 28th October I received an email from him making it formal with the
supply of the supposed ‘Mentee’s’ email address for contact. He also confirmed
that I could use this as my PPD2 employment activity. I was very lucky and I
jumped on the proposal. I acknowledged my willingness to participate in the
scheme, I also emailed the person in question with my contact details. On
receipt of my email she contacted me through the telephone, and we agreed on
where and when to meet. Our first meeting was on Monday 2nd of November.
We compared our timetables and agreed to meet two times a week; Wednesday
2-3 p.m. and Thursday 3-4 p.m. These days were strictly observed except on
few occasions my mentee had to cancel due to other commitments.

AREAS COVERED:

During the first meeting we discussed and identified the areas of need. I used
my personal experience as a focus point, reassuring her of successful outcome.
We were able to cover several areas in our second meeting, especially on the
effective use of computer for the submission of her course work. On the third
meeting we discussed her concern on group formation and the lack of co-
operation by some students. The fourth meeting addressed the issue of
reflecting on previous work and how to accomplish it. On the fifth meeting we
concentrated on the presentation skills and the use of power point. We also
touched on the importance of effective presentation, including the bad and good
presentations. At the sixth meeting we looked at her work for PPD1
presentation, and the work was very good. We looked at her reflection of the
Greenwich Guide at our seventh meeting. On the 8th and last meeting we looked
at generic issues and her concern on other areas like - Business Planning and
Development. I promised to enable her on our return from the holidays. We also
touched on a personal problem concerning her youngest child in Africa.

PERSONAL SKILLS UTILISED AND SKILLS ACQUIRED:

I have been highly involved in Community activities over the past fifteen years. I
enjoy personal interest in the empowerment and enablement of people through
the support systems such as mentoring and counselling schemes. I was so
excited when I was given this great opportunity to enable another person to
overcome the same problem I encountered in the previous year.
Notwithstanding, every activity has its challenges. We encountered some
problems such as access to the use of the Computer. This occurred on two
occasions. I learnt a great deal from my mentee. She was always calm and
humble. Her personality and handling of issues challenged me greatly. Working
with her has enhanced my listening skills, patience and control. It has also
increased my joy and willingness to be more involved with volunteering
activities.

EVALUATION OF STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES:

I really enjoyed the mentoring activity, and I am very much willing to continue to
enable her. I was almost discouraged during the days we were unable to gain
access to the use of the computer, but her calmness served as a huge support to
me, and we were able to utilise our time effectively in other areas. My greatest
gain during this activity is the importance of ‘being calm’ and in control. Being
calm can heavily impact on outcome. The scheme was successful and I am very
grateful for the opportunity to participate.

Enclosure:

An Endorsement From My Mentee For The Mentoring Scheme.

TASK 2.

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2 –E- Learning Log 1:

Topic: Critical Thinking and Developing Scholarly Argument:

The lecture explained the importance of critical thinking in arguments. Several areas were
covered which unveiled so many effective ways of being objective and unambiguous.
Argument is simply a point of view or opinion, but a scholarly argument must have valid
reasons or evidence to support the arguments.

In the tutorial we worked in small groups of four, identifying “False Premises and Implicit
Arguments.” The purpose for the exercise was to ascertain the strength of our critical
thinking and the reasons. At the end of the exercise there was open class discussion.
Students shared their choices and the reasons behind them. The outcome was not uniform. I
was very surprised that my team failed the last question. I thought we were right with our
choice. We based our thinking on the availability of several channels and verities. But, we
were not objective enough, the question was on “Quality and not Quantity.” I gained a lot
from the exercise and it has widened my scope of objectivity and critical thinking.

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT – ENTRY 2

Topic: Critical Reading and Note taking:

The lecture demonstrated the techniques of effective critical reading and note taking. “Skim
Reading” was highly recommended especially for academic reading. There were
demonstrations from different slides on how to skim read with accuracy. Emphasis was laid
on the reading of the abstract /introduction, identification of “lead words” and the conclusion.
It was very interesting. Several methods were demonstrated on note taking, but the spider
style attracted me so much because I have been using it over the years without guidance.

The tutorial enabled me to put into practice the knowledge gained from the lecture. We were
given ten minutes for individual skim reading practice, afterwards in small groups to tackle
some questions. I had some problems with my group due to our inability to agree on several
points. Notwithstanding, I was pleased with the outcome of my contributions during the full
class discussion. Skim reading will surely enhance my future learning style

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2 – ENTRY 3

Topic: Structuring And Signposting Your Writing:

The lecture identified signposting as an important method of indicating changes of direction

whether in argument, writing, and road directions. It identified the use of grouping and
sequence signposting as very important. Adequate grouping of ideas that support the
argument need to go together, and the background of sequence must relate to all areas of
important points to the subject matter. When signposting is used accurately, the reader will
be able to follow the position of the writer clearly. Different types of signposting especially in
academic writing include the use of paragraphs, phrases and sub-headings.

The tutorial was centred on the preparation for our forthcoming PPD2 debate. Students were
clearly informed of the importance of individual participation from the planning stage to the
execution of the debate, as part of the team. We were also advised that our research should
consider both sides of the argument in order to be fully prepared for a counter argument on
either side. Eventually, a topic was chosen for the debate, and we were divided into two
groups.

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2 – ENTRY 4

Topic: Communicating Effectively In Groups and Teams:

I was unable to attend this lecture due to no fault of my own. I was stocked in the middle of
the ‘A2’ because of an incident at Black Wall Tunnel. Notwithstanding, I have studied the
lecture slides on the topic. It was very helpful and clear. The lecture covered very important
areas that will enhance effective communication in groups and teams, in the areas of division
of labour, planning and management of groups, individual commitment, time keeping, and
taking responsibility. For the full understanding of the lecture important theories were
recommended.

The tutorial witnessed the practical debate based on; ‘the impact of an increase
in congestion charge for Londoners’. There were two groups for this debate, one
proposer ‘for’ and the other ‘against.’ The debate was overseen by the
‘moderator.’ Both parties participated effectively. There was a feedback by the
moderator at the end of the debate. I personally enjoyed it, especially the
feedback, because it will enable me to reflect on my team efforts in the future.

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2 – ENTRY 5

Topic: CV Personal Statement:

Job Target: Human Resource Manager:

I am a very diligent and committed person with good management skills. I

have a great deal of initiatives. I work very well as an individual and as part of a
team. I like challenges and I have the ability to work under pressure, with the
willingness to take on extra responsibilities whenever necessary. I am sociable,
flexible and adaptable.

My Key Skills Include:

• Volunteering.
• Community Involvement.
• Community Empowerment.
• Mentoring and Counselling Skills.
• Community Project Initiatives and Set-ups.
• Management Skills.
• Co-ordination and Chairing of Meetings.
• Research.
• Report Writing.
• Presentation and Communication Skills.

TASK 3:

TOPIC: REFLECTIVE REPORT ON CLASS DEBATE – THE CONGESTION

CHARGE SHOULD BE
INCREASED TO SUPPORT THE LONG TERM ENVIRONMENT
CONCERNS:

BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THE GROUND WORK:

The seminar for the 23rd of November 2009, concentrated on the preparation of
the debate for week 12. We were briefed by the tutor on the planning and the
execution of the debate. He emphasised on the process of a formal debate and
the requirement for the development of critical argument for the debate. A
format of presentation was clarified especially the importance of addressing the
‘House’ in a particular manner. Essential guides were given to us for adequate
preparation on: Planning strategies, Identifying Individual Roles, Identifying Key
Points and using them effectively, Working as a team, and preparation for both
sides of the debate. The structure of the debate was also specified and how long
it will last. We concluded with identifying the members for each team.

PREPARATION FOR THE DEBATE:

According to Tuckman, a good team should observe certain stages such as:
Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing and Adjourning. None of this was
observed in our team. No coherent team was formed, and roles were not
identified. After so much frustration and the debate day fast approaching, I
volunteered to co-ordinate whatever members could send to me. The co-
ordination was tough. I was really mindful of not overloading our argument; I
had to make choice on what to include. I was seen as being ‘domineering’ for
making this choice. This did not bother me because I was making every effort to
cover our shortcomings. I could have worked better and less stressful if
members were committed. There was totally lack of interest. There were several
opportunities for us to meet if we had shared the same interest. No sense of
responsibilities were shown by members, and that made the process very
difficult. I saw two members of our team (Shammine and Abeda) for the first
time on the day of the debate.

THE DEBATE DAY:

We met briefly before the debate and the team nominated me as ‘First Proposer’
and Sofna as ‘Second Proposer’. From the outcome of the debate, it was a good
choice. We performed very well, bearing in mind that we were unable to finalise
the areas of presentation until few minutes before the debate. The tutor
commended our efforts but stressed on the lack of referencing our findings at
the bottom of each slide. I pointed this out to my team but they referred me to
the general referencing at the bottom. Personally, I referenced the areas I
covered; the incident on the 30th of November 2009, the Tokyo Treaty, and the
commencement of the implementation of Congestion Charge in London in
February 2003.

DEBATE OUTCOME:

Our presentation was very clear. Our ability to apply a holistic approach created
the means for us to argue our points beyond the normal subjective framework.
Our key points in the argument included the effect of carbon emission on human
lives and its long term implications. Our research was not based only on
financial gains and short term outcomes. According to Cottrell (2005) page 12,
critical thinking skills require good attention to detail, hence the holistic
approach. We identified the effect of pollution on climate change through
carbon dioxide, and relative CO2 emission from various fuels, on human lives
including its impact on our environment. Just as in the danger of passive
smoking on people’s lives which was denied for so long until 7th of April 2003,
when research exposed that passive smoking at work kills three people
everyday, more than work place accidents. This was also the problem of
Asbestos Exposure and the high rate of cancer risk it carries for several decades
before some actions were taken. All these serve as strengths to our argument
because it looked at things objectively. The main weakness in our presentation
was the non inclusion of the references in the body of the research as directed
by the tutor.

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DEBATE:

The key point made by the other side was their argument of the congestion
charge being concentrated on only one percent of the Greater London. That was
in support of our argument that the congestion charge should be expanded to
other areas of Greater London Authority in order to have effect. Their strength
was on their ability to follow instruction and reference their findings
appropriately. Their weaknesses included their limitation to see things beyond
business gain. Their approach was very subjective and it failed to cater for long
term consequences. The presentation by the second Opposer was not adequate.
She failed to speak to their points, rather she simply read her script. I did not
follow her argument.

CONCLUSION:

I learned a lot on effective arguments from my experience on this debate. My

first shock was Timothy stepping down as one of the Opposers. That was a
tactful move to attack our confidence but it did not work. I was very happy in
our ability to pull things together within a short space of time. At times people
work better under pressure.

References:

1. Cottrell, S. (2005) Critical Thinking Skills. Palgrave MacMillan.

2. http:// www.google.co.uk/search = carbon + emission & meta=
3. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health 2925633.stm
4. Richard, B (2004) Effective Organisational Communication Perspective,
Principles and Practices, 2nd Edition. Pearson Education Limited.
5. www.cancer.gov/concertopics/factsheet/risk/asbestos.

Enclosures:
Research slides ‘For’ The Increase On Congestion Charge In Greater London
Authority.