Your group has already clarified a community issue, ideated, developed a solution and written an implementation plan. Today you are reflecting on that process.

If your notes or group are incomplete, rate from what you observed or from the Collaborative Task documents you do have, and name in the reflection where you could not compare.

"We worked well as a team" is what every group writes when the question is soft. It teaches nobody anything. The useful material is where four people who sat in the same room rate the same stage differently, and why.

Three terms shape today's reflection. Read them before you rate anything.

This is a three-part main step. You finish holding a real portfolio entry, not a vague team summary.

Before Part 1 ends, create or open a document called Collaborative Task Process Reflection in your Strand 2.1 portfolio folder and set three headings ready: Ratings and moments, Disagreement stage, Stage I carried.

Part 1: private audit (about 10 minutes). Use the self-audit on this page. Rate how your group handled each of the four design-thinking stages: clarifying, ideating, developing, implementing. Every rating needs one named moment from your actual collaborative work (a day, a decision, who did what). A rating with no moment does not count. If a stage was not completed, rate from what actually happened and mark the moment as incomplete, naming what was missing. If your notes or group are incomplete, rate from what you observed or from the Collaborative Task documents you do have. Stay private in this part: no asking teammates yet.

Part 2: group compare (8 to 10 minutes, hard stop). Sit with your group. Read your four ratings and moments aloud. Do not argue people into agreement. Find the stage where you disagree most. Ask which stage each person predicted would split the group, then hear the outlier out. That disagreement is the reflection. One person scoring developing at 2 while everyone else scores 4 knows something the others may have missed. If a member is missing, pair notes with a peer and still compare two honest views, naming in your write-up where you could not fully compare.

Part 3: write your process reflection (about 15 minutes). In your Collaborative Task Process Reflection document, write under the three headings:

• Ratings and moments: your four ratings, each with the named moment behind it
• Disagreement stage: the stage your group disagreed about most, and what you learned from that disagreement
• Stage I carried: which stage you personally carried, with one sentence of evidence, plus one transferable skill that showed up in that same moment

Copy your ratings and evidence out of the interactive into that document. Nothing on this page is saved for you.

This entry is raw material for the ALT 3 reflection on the collaborative task later in the strand.

Talk these through with the person beside you, or work through them quietly on your own.

• Agreement across all four ratings feels comfortable. Why might that comfort be a warning sign rather than proof the process went well?
• Look at the transferable skill you claimed in the stage you carried. Would a teammate who watched you work agree that moment shows that skill? What would they say instead?

If either answer changes your mind, add one correcting line under Stage I carried in your Collaborative Task Process Reflection.

Today you reflected on the collaborative design-thinking process with evidence, not slogans.

• You rated clarifying, ideating, developing and implementing, each with a named moment
• You compared ratings with your group and treated disagreement as the useful material
• You named the stage you personally carried, with a transferable skill tied to the same moment
• You started or completed your Collaborative Task Process Reflection in your Strand 2.1 folder (copied from the audit, not left only on this page)

That document is source material when you build skill evidence for ALT 3.