♦Progress to Date♦

◊Week 2

Objective:

1. Project allocation and group member reveal. Introduction and work out “Work Term Reference”

Achievement:

We had our first group meeting and managed to get to know each other better. We worked on our expectations and personal goals for the course. As part of the “Work Term Reference,” we allocated specific roles to each team member including communicator, editors, organizer, and note takers.

 

◊Week 3

Objectives:

1. Meet with community partners and discuss the project further. Clarify any unclear points and expectations.
2. Writing introductions for the first blog post assignment.

Achievements:

We met with our community partner Teya Stephens, R.D., and were briefed on the project and assigned the community neighbourhood to be trialled. After the meeting, we managed to achieve a better understanding of the project and of their gained an idea of what they expected from uss. As mentioned, each group was assigned a neighborhood to trial the Vancouver food asset map and we were assigned to trial the map with the UBC community. It was a great honor for our group as this is the first year that Vancouver Coastal Health involved the UBC community in their project and we are excited pilot it! We are eager to meet our new community partners in UBC who work on improving food security on campus. Additionally, we also wrote and published our first blog post.

 

◊Week 4

Objectives:

1. Plan out project proposal
2. Find possible community partners to contact

Achievement:

During tutorial time, our group finished the outline of the project proposal and received preliminary feedback from both Will and our TA, Francisco.  During the week, we completed around 30% of the project proposal details ready for final feedback from our TA. Mostly, we tried to make sure that our method for conducting the map trialling and also contacting food asset was detailed, as map trialling is a randomized trial and generally needs to be time efficient.

 

◊Week 5:

Objectives:

1. Receive feedback for project proposal and complete project proposal for submission.
2. Contact Teya Stephens, R.D. for the possible changes we are making to the basic guideline to completing the project, making sure that they are acceptable changes.

Achievement:

We analyzed our TA’s feedback of our proposal and proceeded to make the necessary changes. For better organization, we assigned specific sections of the proposal to group members that will be finally edited and compiled by the editors of the group. We made sure to communicate with the course instructors for any clarification needed in terms of requirements for the proposal report, making sure of its completion. Despite our busy schedules, we are proud that we managed to complete the report and submitted it on time.

 

◊Week 6

Objectives:

1. Start contacting community partners for their possible participation in trialling Vancouver Food Asset Map.
2. Update the Excel documents on the list and details of food assets related to free or subsidized grocery items.
3. Attempt to  find new food asset of free or subsidized grocery items.

Achievements

For this week, we did not  manage to achieve all of our weekly objectives. Rather than starting to update the excel sheet,  we focused our time on organizing some administration matters for map trialling. We converted the traditional map trialling feedback form from its original Word document format into an online Typeform for better data collection management, thus preventing any loss of data samples and faster execution on the survey day. Additionally, we organized an e-mail format to contact community partners regarding their consent to participate in trialling Vancouver Asset Map. Currently, we are waiting for the response of community partners. By doing so, we believe that it will save our time from visiting community partners that do not wish to trial the map and also to prevent “unwelcomed visits.”

 

♦Moment of Significance♦

◊What?

Until a week ago, we still felt like we were strangers to each other. We all thought of questions like “what should I do ,or not do in the group? Should I speak up? Will someone be offended?” These were critical questions as we were not familiar with one another. We did not know the personality, talent, and amount of effort that each member would be bringing forth. As a result, creating the project proposal was a long process for us, as we were very careful with one another and not everyone was on the same page.

 

◊So What?

As a group, we found the TEDTalk by Tim Harford very interesting and relatable to our group work. In “How Messy Problems can Inspire Creativity”, Harford provided an anecdote of Keith Jarrett. One night, Jarrett had to perform with a broken, out of tune, almost inaudible, and supposedly unplayable piano in front of an audience of 1400 (Harford, 2016). Consequently, Jarrett made last minute changes to the way he played his pieces. He avoided the missing and out of tune piano keys, used lower keys to project more sound, and stayed within the midrange to create a “soothing, ambient quality” (Harford, 2016). Despite the setbacks, the recording of this performance ended up being his best-selling record to date. Much like Jarret, our group was in a seemingly disadvantaged position. We all understood the importance of the Food Asset Map in our community and did not want our group difficulties to hinder this community project. However, this video served as a reminder that we could competently complete this project, even if our group was not cohesive yet.

Harford also addressed the benefit for working as a group with strangers. He mentions that working with strangers enhances the quality of the outcome because it forces us to take things slower by putting more effort into understanding the task that we are working on. Furthermore, it allows us to learn more about each other. Gaining this understanding for our group dynamics was very important as this eased our minds. It allowed us to focus on how to make things work, instead of constantly worrying about why things did not work out as smoothly as we wanted.

 

◊Now What?

After a meaningful group discussion, we all agreed to embrace these little difficulties. We decided to take the time to understand each other’s point of view and to more openly discuss what we want to contribute, as we realized that we are actually a very well rounded group with diverse talents. Unlike before, we will not assign tasks to each other but rather proactively volunteer – like piecing puzzles together. We will continue to focus on the strengths of both the individuals and group rather than letting the weaknesses affect our performance. Furthermore, we are confident we will be able to take this lesson into future group work, be it in class or in the workplace.

 

♦Future Objectives and Strategies♦

◊Week 7

• We plan to collect information about free or subsidized groceries within UBC community by contacting our community partners via email. We will also update any outdated information on the map, also complete any incomplete information.

 

◊Week 8

• Familiarize ourselves with the asset map by trialing and using it as a group before we start the survey with other people.
• We plan to evaluate the Food Asset Maps by figuring out the specific time during this week’s flexible learning session, and doing the survey at the 3 spots on campus with UBC community members.

 

◊Week 9-12

• Present data to Teya Stephens, RD of Vancouver Coastal Health.
• We will analyze the data collected and start working on our report and presentation, to be completed by Week 12

 

♦References♦

TED. (2016, February 2). Tim Harford: How frustration can make us more creative. Retrieved from      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7wF2AdVy2Q 

 

Click on this link to view our Project Proposal and learn more about our project.