This week our team was successful in achieving all of our stated objectives. Strategies to maintain this level of productivity are discussed later in this post.

Past week’s objectives/achievements:

  • Generate projective timeline of tasks and completion dates
  • Set deadline by which to contact community partner James O’Neill regarding postal code list for CG members
  • Compile list of CGs in the Downtown Eastside (DTES) & Strathcona areas to contact
  • Organize and create list of CG coordinator’s contact information
  • Update blog to incorporate feedback and new community (i.e. remove Yaletown and replace with Strathcona)
  • Listen to podcast / complete blog post

This week, using the “What? So What? Now What?” framework (Rolfe et al., 2001), we reflect upon a significant event that occurred during our initial project development; discuss the causes and consequences of said event; and propose methods for minimizing recurrence of similar events. We will also attempt to incorporate themes and lessons learnt by individuals involved in community-based project development, as shared in the story-driven podcast series The Moth.

 

What…?

   During initial project development, Yaletown was chosen as a neighbourhood of interest in addition to DTES. We believed that community gardens (CGs) existed within a neighbourhood that could provide further insight into the types of communities that coalesce around them. However, little research was done to confirm the existence of CGs in Yaletown, and prior to submitting our final proposal it was determined that there are in fact no CGs in that particular neighbourhood (at least according to the City of Vancouver’s public database). Team morale was significantly down upon realizing that such an error had occurred as well as opinions differing on how to quickly and adequately address this substantial oversight. Occasionally in a researcher or researchers’ pursuit and focus on an issue, things can become blurred upon the periphery, and seemingly obvious points are missed, such as overlooking the well-being of a friend (Msimang, 2014) or the (non-)existence of points of research interest.     

  

So what…?

Consequently, this oversight resulted in group members feeling uncertain about the project’s focus and trajectory, which negatively affected our team solidarity. We would have benefitted from researching the area or subject of study thoroughly, such as compiling a list of community gardens prior to deciding on regions of study. More specifically, we could have researched and confirmed the existence of community gardens in Yaletown to avoid this situation. In order to have successful outcomes, team solidarity and organization are crucial for the study. Through Rolfe et al.’s reflective model, the team recognized and broke down this issue strategically.

 

Now what…?

In order to fix the aforementioned problem, the team researched CGs in other regions of Vancouver close to the DTES. Upon analyzing the list of community gardens in each neighbourhood, the team decided that this project would now focus on the Strathcona area. For the next leg of the study, the team is considering widening the scope to include Mount Pleasant based on responses from CGs in Strathcona. To prevent this issue of insufficient CGs recurring, extra steps are being taken. A newly implemented team goal embodies preparedness, thinking critically and researching topics thoroughly before dedicating large amounts of time and effort to them. Future efforts will also include consistently reflecting on each step before, during, and after it is finished, to ensure that we are on track, and to prevent similar issues from occurring in the future.

 

Upcoming Objectives

  • Contact community organizations by Friday October 16th
  • Contact James O’Neill & Joshua Edwards regardings CG membership demographics  
  • Potentially reduce CGs of interest based on number of plots/membership numbers
  • Visit CGs during flexible learning and/or weekend of October 24/25
  • Complete ethics tutorial prior to interviewing community gardeners

Strategies

Our team employed a number of strategies to ensure completion of weekly objectives. Firstly, we are working towards constructing a timeline of specific tasks with completion dates and assigning tasks to specific team members. Organization will help the team to meet goals by breaking down objectives into smaller, more manageable tasks, and by managing responsibility.

The second strategy involves intra-team communication. We have established expectations for team members to notify the group when tasks are completed or when unexpected challenges arise. Furthermore, our team will continue to have bi-weekly check-ins on Wednesdays and Sunday evenings with updates from each team member on progress he or she has made. This high level of communication will confirm that all group members are contributing and that tasks are being completed in accordance with team expectations.

 

References

Msimang, S. (Speaker). (2014, December 10). A pragmatic idealist [The Moth, Audio podcast]. Retrieved from http://themoth.org/posts/stories/a-pragmatic-idealist

Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., Jasper, M. (2001). Critical reflection in nursing and the helping professions: A user’s guide. Basingstoke; Palgrave, Macmillan.