4th post

The PPAD presentation has now happened. Some observations later. We are now about to start UML with Pat, which should be something new and meaty to get into.

The criteria for this Learning Blog includes an account of what I've learned between blog entries, what has gone well, and what could be improved, as well, for each blog entry(!) to include how I can improve my performance as a learner.

Due to unavoidable illness, the 2nd session of the 2nd Cisco set has been delayed until this week. This frankly means that I've learned little in the traditional sense, but in a softer skill set have absorbed much. The biggest of these things is diplomacy (or complacency?) about when it is easiest to let sleeping dogs lie, and when it is slightly too much effort for not enough gain. For example, I've prepared all of the printed material for the presentation because my (fully attending) colleague and I carved it up that way (he taking on the role of the third of the three components for the presentation, subsequently not used.) The grade given for this aspect was a "B+", which, donkey and carrot style, was given back to me to boost to an "A". I've chosen to not find the time to do this: Work pressures, reluctance because I know the effort won't be reciprocated, and desire to have some "down time" mean that the group will need to be satisfied with this grade for this component.

The presentation went fine. The slides, content (as you'll see in the notes for the slides) and delivery were as expected, and each of my points and slides was presented as expected. Curiously, the emphasis on focusing on less text to reinforce the images was "lost" during the delivery: I didn't read the text from the slides out loud, and I didn't refer to the images I'd used. My two colleagues had clearly put time, energy and thought into their components too, and hopefully this has paid off with a realistic mark.

As far as the team work element goes, I think I've worked out why I've felt so awkward about the whole exercise: Obviously this task is in an educational environment, but the challenge of identifying key "roles" between ourselves is one that is simply not sensible, and nor does it apply in the real world... How often are you forced to work within a prescribed team without your roles being identified from the start? What about when money isn't a factor, but time is (we're not getting paid/making money doing this work, so "real" pressures are a factor)? Equally, and depending upon what level one examines the exercise, those who are unable to donate the required time, energy and application to this task let down the other members; the others (including me) are then forced to make decisions regarding external, uncontrolled/uncontrollable aspects. Being asked to "find" (nominate?) a team leader, and other "workers" etc. is awkward on a level playing field, and as a group, we failed to do this. Had we thought outside the box, the carving of roles (and not discrete areas of "work") would have been better. This still would not have compensated for the poor attendance and dialogue between the team members who were not present. In the real world, the team leader would have been nominated, voted or self appointed, and they would have had the power to fire non-performers. This simply is/was not an option on a degree level course!

As a learner, this has reinforced my opinion that I work best when my responsibilities are clear. If I am expected to make decisions, let me get on and make them. If I am invited to offer opinion, accept my opinion. If I am drafted in to do leg work, let me do it. BUT make sure that the people paid to co-ordinate these activities are aware of all of the factors involved.

As noted in my 2nd entry, I feel that I'm jumping through hoops with this module. Certainly the content covered (being able to present, write and consider) are all important, and I feel that this stuff does need inclusion. We have all passed the group work. Hopefully, these entries and my other coursework/material will support a satisfactory grade for this module.

Perhaps what I'm disappointed with, really, is that the content covered in the presentation task is relevent to our course, and yet we've not really studied it because we've focused on the the form rather than the content too much.

Again, I'm leaving the reader on a low; and my excuse is having spent all of the time concurrently during this module working on a whole new network infrastructure for my day job. Unlike the normal excuse of "communication", I'm blaming this one on time and motivation - the lack of both...