"
Team:Edinburgh/Human/Conversations
From 2010.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 175: | Line 175: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <h2>conclusions</h2> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | These diagrams give an idea of what was talked about in these conversations. They achieve a couple of things. Firstly, they help me, as the person focusing on human practices to get to know the team I'm in (I was a late comer to the competition) and everyone gets to know each other. This has been a surprisingly open and honest group of people. Everyone gets a say and, while there are some stronger personalities, there has been no need for a leader. Secondly, the team gets to assess how they see themselves from individual and disciplionary points of view. By bringing these things into the open people are more likely to ponder on them later which reinforces the awareness of what's needed for a multidisciplinary and multicultural team to work well together. This should put them in good stead in later endeavours. | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <br> | ||
<center><a href="#top" class="dir"><img width="100" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2010/9/9f/Ed10-RTT.png"></a></center> | <center><a href="#top" class="dir"><img width="100" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2010/9/9f/Ed10-RTT.png"></a></center> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Revision as of 01:25, 28 October 2010
Conversations
These conversations were designed to encourage self-reflection and analysis of things we may take for granted. This creates the possibility for new ways of thinking, resolving and interpreting situations, problems and ideas.
collaboration
Collaboration has been a key part of the iGEM experience for the University of Edinburgh team.
identity with colour
While some of these conversations seemed arbitrary at the time I continued to encourage the team to question their perceptions of themselves and the people and their environment.
geekiness
flirting with science
conclusions
These diagrams give an idea of what was talked about in these conversations. They achieve a couple of things. Firstly, they help me, as the person focusing on human practices to get to know the team I'm in (I was a late comer to the competition) and everyone gets to know each other. This has been a surprisingly open and honest group of people. Everyone gets a say and, while there are some stronger personalities, there has been no need for a leader. Secondly, the team gets to assess how they see themselves from individual and disciplionary points of view. By bringing these things into the open people are more likely to ponder on them later which reinforces the awareness of what's needed for a multidisciplinary and multicultural team to work well together. This should put them in good stead in later endeavours.
Throughout this wiki there are words in bold that indicate a relevance to human aspects. It will become obvious that human aspects are a part of almost everything in iGEM.
