So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, good night....

Well, here we are at the end of the Communication in the Sciences paper – 119.155.  Having previously enrolled in this paper at the end of 2015 but withdrew, I knew what this paper entailed; group work consisting of a report and a seminar.  None of that made me jump for joy, not even a little.  I dreaded this paper and I probably still would have, had it not been for my team.  Somehow the universe aligned me with a great bunch of people who worked together extremely well.

Prior to the paper starting, I was silently lurking behind my keyboard as different groups found each other.  I thought I had better make my move before I was left as a dreg on the bottom of the ‘communication’ cup.  When Jess put up her post, I jumped on it as fast as I could.

In the beginning

We came together early as we had found our group before the course officially started.  We had a dry run with a skype session which was rather nerve racking, because most of us seemed to be introverted and reluctant to say too much.  We didn’t know then what roles we would play in the group or even that there were roles but we needed a leader.  Jess stepped up which immediately put me at ease knowing that people weren’t going to see my inadequacies had I been picked for that role. This inadvertently put me in a role that now I’m aware of it, I have definitely taken in a lot of instances, monitor evaluator; as to not seem overbearing (a nemesis trait of mine).  It was a role that at times, made me very neurotic.

Every Tuesday, we would skype on big issues and Facebook forum the details.  As I’ve said in a previous blog, if an issue came up, we would discuss it, vote on it and go with the consensus.  It couldn’t have been easier.

Team roles and how they were our strengths

Jess’ leadership style demonstrated traits of a co-ordinator because she was able to motivate and delegate without manipulation or the aggressiveness of a shaper.  The thing is though, while Jess was a fabulous leader and task-oriented, we didn’t actually need a leader as such so she often fell into the secondary role as completer/finisher, right down to the quality control she performed today before she submitting our presentation.

We have all demonstrated traits of the team worker over the course of the paper, which I found particularly comforting and the reason why I decided to continue on with this paper after my dismal grade on the Position paper; EVERYONE picked up the ‘crier’.

Floyd (still can’t get over his awesome name) had originally offered himself up as editor, which was then taken on by Alicia but after we took a vote on what three topics we liked the most, the work load was halved so that Alicia and Michelle shared the editor position.  This proved to be a great decision, as between them the nuts and bolts of the ethical framework and summarising the groups contributions, ended in a report and presentation we were all very proud of.  While Alicia had said that she wasn’t an ‘ideas’ person, she used to rock in like a specialist to bring her own brand of skill and knowledge that contributed to the team immensely. You knew when she said something, it was worth listening to.  Combine that with Michelle’s foresight, social glue, perceptiveness, and wonderful way of taking you away from the communication side of this course by entertaining us with her unusual creature blogs.

Floyd brought a sense of humour to the group that we needed to lighten the mood at times.  He never seemed flustered, even at pressure times, which is why I saw him assume the completer/finisher role many times.  While he says he is introvert, I think he could quite easily be a co-ordinator.  As a team, we spent most of our time somewhere in between being team workers and completer/finishers.  I believe this worked in our favour.

Team weaknesses

Location was the biggest hurdle due to time differences across the Tasman and maybe a life event or two, but they were very minor. Most weaknesses, in my opinion, were my personal ones; and I feel like I ended up overcoming many of them working with these fantastic human beings.

While I never want to repeat a paper like this one, I will recover from the mental anguish it has caused me over the past 9 weeks. The best thing to have come out of this paper has been that it has made me reconsider my opinion of working in groups.

Thanks team, I wish you all good luck for whatever the future holds.  It’s been a great pleasure to work with you all.

Why Science is Cool

On Thursday, Australia Day, Professor Alan Mackay-Sim was named the Australian of the Year.  He got that title because his research was on the nose…olfactory ensheathing (nose) cells to be exact. 

Back in the 1980s, Prof. Mackay-Sim realized the very special cells inside the nose, that most kids pick, actually die every day only to be regenerated again the next day. I wonder how he came up with that idea, hmm? Anyway, he posed two questions; if the cells regenerate daily, do they have the potential to help regenerate other cells like in the spinal cord, and; if it could, could it be done safely in humans?

After years of research, he designed the procedure that took the cells from the nose, purified them and injected into the spinal cord at the top and bottom of the spinal injury.  Around five years ago, a European medical team conducted the first procedure on a 40 year old Polish man who became a paraplegic after a stabbing incident.  Three years on and after some intensive physiotherapy the man is able to walk with the assistance of a frame.

Not content with that, the now retire Professor also campaigned for using stem cells to gain a better understanding of brain disorders and diseases like Parkinson’s, schizophrenia and motor neurone disease. Mackay-Sim and his team have already identified the difference in nerve cell regeneration in bipolar and schizophrenia so it is proving helpful in understanding how the diseases develop in the first place.

It is for this reason, and many, many others why I think science is cool.

ABC. (2017). Australia of the year: Professor Alan Mackay-Sim linked nerve cells in your nose to spinal cord repairs. Retrieved January 2017 from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-26/the-amazing-work-of-professor-alan-mackay-sim/8214882

Blog 7

I wanted to do a blog on something really cool this week and totally unrelated to the group work we’ve been doing but I think I’ve run out of any creativity and freedom of thought.  I’ve looked up every science website to find inspiration which I think has left to find greener pastures.  This leaves me with the suggested topics; oh hum……

How my team is working/not working – frustrations and successes/decision making processes

My team has been working, bloody hard, to get through the huge amount of work we’ve had to do these past months.  Who’d have thought it would have been so full on that my mental stability and stress levels have hit an all-time high.  It has taught me something though, there are actually people out there that want the best for others so they do the best they can for the sake of the group.

With not having much experience in groups, I dreaded this paper.  The thought of having other people that I don’t know read my work was embarrassing for me because I’ve always worried that my skills were not up to scratch.  But how wrong was I?  This team has shown me how to be proud of my work, have given huge amounts of support and encouragement; something I’ve never experienced before in many aspects of my life.  I must admit it’s pretty cool.

The team comes with different skill sets that just seem to gel.  We’re able to give advice and listen and negotiate and get on with it.  In the early days I’m sure there were a few frustrations.  I know I had a few.  Mostly with myself and how I couldn’t communicate what I needed to to the group.  My topic had a wickedly huge scope and I believed that my topic should have been phrased differently.  I couldn’t help but feel like this may have affected my relationship with the group, even if it was just my own perception.  Nevertheless, I got over myself and the more I read the more I convinced myself to let go of the old. 

I’ve really enjoyed the decision making in this team.  It’s been extremely natural and easy.  Someone brings something up, we negotiate, we vote, consensus, action. 

The team’s successes far outweigh the negatives and I hope that it shows just how great our ‘team work’ was, with an awesome grade.  Regardless, I think I will come away with a totally different perspective on working with others and; to my team I would like to thank with immense gratitude.  I don’t think I would have gotten this far without you guys xx

The dilemma of being a monitor evaluator...

I haven’t really had much experience working in a team while completing my degree.  It’s normally been a sports team, some form of work team but never a study group team.  I found my role in this group somewhat meh.

I can be pretty reasonable at leading…when I have to, which isn’t often. I tend to take a step back as not to get hit by all the shapers out there.  When I do fall into a leadership position, I try to guide rather than ‘boss’.  

Normally, I believe I am the coordinator but after listening to the different roles online and working on assignment two with my group, I think I may have fallen into the monitor evaluator role, not that I think my team thinks me unpopular….or they could and they’re being very nice about it. I would totally get if they did. I have been slow to get concepts, attempted to think critically which ended in a headache.  I’m not particularly charismatic and I am definitely not the leader.  And that’s okay to me.  I am way out of my depth and when I feel like that I want to disappear into the background and watch from afar, every now and again throwing pieces of me into the mix (does that mean I’d make a good specialist?).  Probably not, I don’t have any specialised knowledge I can just chuck in there. I’m sure that my team have had to take deep breaths and ‘cope’ with me like Louise mentioned in her lesson.  Sorry crew…my bad! 

I think normally I would fall into the coordinator, team worker and completer finisher roles.  I definitely would find it difficult to work with shapers, plants and implementers, let alone be one.  Not that they don’t have their place, of course, only none of them are mine.

One thing that came to light after listening to Louise go through the different roles is how happy I am to be in the team I have.  Despite my new role of monitor evaluator role, I think we work well as a team.  We are supportive of each other, bounce ideas of one another and rock at getting things done.

In the News tonight...

This week I've decided to write on my own topic.  

I came to read an item on the Guardian a week ago when I was deliberating about how I feel with the topic I'm contributing to for our group assignment. France introduced an opt-out policy on organ donation, meaning an individual's decision on whether they donate their organs is now considered a 'presumed consent'.  This is a pretty big deal and has the potential to increase global donation levels dramatically. 

Individual autonomy recognises that a person should be able to live their life according to their own motives and reasons, free from manipulation so this change in law challenges that ideal.  Fortunately for those that choose to, there is a 'refusal register' and since this law was passed 150,000 people have signed up.  Previously, doctors had to consult families if the individual had not expressed a desire either way so presumed consent takes care of that and takes the onus off the family members, especially during traumatic times.

The United Kingdom has one of the lowest consent rates in Europe, citing that the biggest obstacle still remains relatives' vetoes; one of our other group subjects.  The opt-out may be further extended that if an individual belongs to the register then family will no longer even be asked.  As it is, in Scotland, family must complete a retraction form that records the reason they decided to veto their relative's decision.  

When this news hit Australia, Organ and Tissue Authority (OTA) said Australia was unlikely to follow suit due to the culturally sensitive issues surrounding the multicultural and multi-faith of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.  Transplant chief exec Chris Thomas explained that "compulsorily acquiring" organs denigrates the altruistic acts of donating into a "system of mistrust and misunderstanding".

While there are no such laws in New Zealand, this may change in the not too distant future as New Zealand has an extremely low donation rate and so I assume they will be keeping a close eye on the happenings in France after this latest law change.  Whether the low numbers are as a direct result of culture, religion or being uneducated about the facts of organ donation, it will be extremely interesting to see what the results from our survey can tell us.

Buzacott-Speer, E. & Seselia, E. (2017). Opt-out organ donation unlikely to become reality in  Australia despite international trend. Retrieved January 2017 from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-04/australia-unlikely-to-follow-opt-out-organ-donation-policy/8160718

Willsher, K. (2017). France introduces opt-out policy on organ donation. Retrieved January 2017 from https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/02/france-organ-donation-law