sprint 1

During the first day of the red group meeting we explored some of the supports and taboos in the rules of cooperation. Firstly, the following chart shows some of my thoughts.

For the team rules I think the main thing is revolution, innovation and critical spirit, on top of that respect history and culture is also very important, for jealousy and lazy is what I do not tolerate. (It’s not copy, it’s plagiarism in the negative section.) I think sharing is also very important, only when peer workers communicate deeply with each other can they uncover the inner workings of the project and can successfully carry it through to the end, and compromise is also a must when communicating, too much blind ego can lead to a breakdown of the group discussion and affect the progress and quality of the project.

 

Interrupting others expressing their views and disrespect for others is not to be tolerated. At any stage of group discussion and reflection we need to listen to the suggestions and ideas of others, and if we have different perceptions we need to point them out in a reasoned manner rather than just dismissing them.

In the make gold workshop I presented the idea that building on a spiritual level is the real gold, which led to a brainstorming session and the final outcome.

 

During the exchange of group discussions, our group also maintained a rational and critical spirit to analyze the golden recipe of the other groups.
Another problem we had during this group meeting was how to balance the time and place of the meeting, as the group members’ addresses and working hours could not be matched, and after discussing this to no avail we opted for a vote. We created a voting machine and implemented a policy of voting for a minority of the results, which I believe was a very useful tool when we could not confirm the work process of our peer group.
The red group members all have different backgrounds; I specialise in visual design, while others have backgrounds in interaction design and contemporary art exhibition research, and others have interdisciplinary backgrounds, such as broadcasting, finance and Chinese language and literature. We had a few conversations about our areas of expertise so that we could get a clear idea of the division of labour for the subsequent collaboration. For example, during the initial theme selection and development phase of the project, brainstorming could be carried out by colleagues with a relevant background (art), as such people have a great ability to jump ahead in their thinking, and after the development of extension points, systematic aggregation and statistics could be carried out by colleagues from the data and statistics category, and then colleagues from the history and literature category or relevant science category could discuss the background culture of the research subject and the feasibility of the technology implementation. I think this approach is not only suitable for our Red Group, but also for most peer work groups today.

Comments

s2419012 says:

In the Make Gold workshop, your group’s production process is very unique, the idea that building on a spiritual level is something no other group has ever thought of. I would like to see you describe more about your group’s discussion of Basho meeting and Make Gold, you can try to record and write down your thoughts. I think your group’s idea of assigning suitable work to peers with different backgrounds is very powerful. It can help the entire group to work more efficiently, while our group has not thought about doing that, we all work together on each task.

s2449532 says:

The logic was clear and knew what they needed to do to maximize the effective use of each student’s background, so that the cooperative division of labor did serve to maximize what I think must have been a breakthrough day in the first week of cooperation, increasing the efficiency of learning afterwards.

s2321841 says:

Your post is really detailed and I can see that your group discussed a lot of content. I really agree with one of the points you made when you wrote “Interrupting others expressing their views and disrespect for others is not to be tolerated. It is really rude to interrupt others as soon as you have a new idea, and I agree with your writing.

s2325791 says:

In the description of sprint 1, your group has a very organized discussion. We can see that your group has a cooperative spirit and good logic. Each member of the group is good at his or her own part, and digging out his or her own advantages can help the group complete the task better.

s2414944 says:

It was our first time to cooperate, I think it is also some time to be acquainted.

Leave a Reply