20130727, Minutes, by Josef
There are seventeen senior members and newcomers in the gathering at the 27th July 2013. In the session 1 it is estimated that participants should introduce to each other in the first 330 minutes. However, the process should be addressed at the gathering for some participants who ignores the updated schedule and the process had to be adjusted for the following participation by the end of session 1.
In order to assist participants to access the topic discussed in the gathering, participants spoke their opinions of the working holiday dialogues, and the host, in addition, provided related regulations of application and restriction of working holiday. One of newcomers, Yvonne, shared her experience of working holidays in Australia in 2008. The organized procedure and Yvonne’s personal sharing assisted most participants without experiences of working holidays to approach the topic discussed in today’s gathering.
Before the break, the host used several minutes in volunteers as guide in one group. Limited the space in Mos Burger, 17 participants had to be divided into only 2 groups. Kevin and Hope volunteered to be guides and assisted the host to go on the process of the session 2. Then the host requested the wills of participants which group they would like to join. Originally participants were average distributed into 2 groups; each group had 5 persons. Nevertheless, the participants who attended just in session 2 were rushed into the Hope-guided group. Because of the amount of participants in this gathering and the engagement in the discussion in each group, the host had no ability of being guide in groups and noticed the phases of the whole schedule at that moment instead.
In session 2 there are 100 minutes for the reading, comprehension and discussion for the article. The participants of each group had to read one or two paragraphs of the article. At the moment of reading the pronunciation would be corrected and much improved. In addition, it could effectively assist participants to comprehend the content whether they read the article at home in advance or not.
The discussion followed after the 30-minute reading. The five questions were concerned about the article. It seemed to be much engaged in the discussion for the participants in each group. The participants who joined the Hope’s group focused on the question 1, expressed their own opinions and experiences of working holiday as well as made a useful discussion eventually. In the Kevin’s grope the participants analyzed the personalities of the applicants of working holidays and what kind of preparation the applicants should conduct. In the discussion everyone try to compare the ideologies of the Oriental and Western societies and presume their influences to the attitudes of bring-up and education towards their children.
In last 20 minutes of the gathering, the host guided all of the participants to discuss question 4 and question 5. The newcomers, Beck and Leo recognized the meaning of working holiday and would like to spend one-year off and pursue this kind of travel if they were students of universities or colleges. As to the necessity of the intermediary agencies for working holidays, Leo preferred to seek the assistance of agencies to acquire some information and advises in advance. According to the Yvonne’s experience of working holiday, her working holiday at the first time was arranged by agencies, and the position and the environment of accommodation couldn’t match up to promises of agencies. Yvonne said that in her first working holiday she had her personnel network and then organized her second working holiday without assistances by intermediary agencies. In last five minutes the host appreciated everybody’s attendance and participation, and made a brief conclusion as well. The host admired to such opportunities nowadays only offered to young guys under the age of 30 or 35. The young generation of Taiwan should be encouraged to do this kind of travel to broaden your own horizons and cultivate individual potential as well as competence.
I am pleased to host the gathering at the 27th July 2013. After the gathering, I quite understood some steps in my schedule are not fit in with hosting procedure, that seem to be called “SOP” by the members of Club. I am so pitiful to my ignorance. In addition, some participants would question me the decision to the termination of the discussion in session 2 while the rest questions were not mentioned in groups. I my opinion, the duty of the host is to handle the process smoothly to go on; in this circumstance, it seems to be difficult to meet everybody’s need. I believe the hosts would be better achieved than I in the following gatherings. Best wishes to all participants!
Josef
