Pairing and Feedback Cultural Blog.
We'll this weeks cultural blog is going to be a little wonky. As you can see from the title, some of the questions I need to address are about feedback I've recieved... and that's the wonky bit, when I've checked on Socrates (the feedback program), I am yet to have recieved any feedback. This could be a good thing, or a not so good thing. Feedback is really important to not be "shouting in =to the wind" and to removed the inherant human mistake of "i thought that was what I was suppose to do".
In typical Phill fashion though, I won't let a lack of knowlege to "boldly tread where angel fear to tip-toe", as the saying goes and address the questions posed as best as I can.
<- What was it like to pair with others to solve challenges?
It was overwhelmingly a positive experience. From the simple undestandng of learning the remote communication tools to the additional knowledge of both soft skills and technical, I gained vast amounts of courage and ability from every pairing session I've had. After reviewing each one, I've noted that both my confidence and knowledge have had a huge boost
- Was something particularly fun or rewarding?
Probably a little off topic, but I just have to metion that the crowns, breads and other gimmicks contained in google hangout had me in absolute fits of laughter, probably at great expense to the pairing sessions task-goals, but of great help to any feelings of nervousness I was experiencing. On a more serious note it was quite rewarding to "share the load" when dividing the tasks by driver and navigator, mostly due to the relief of not having to do all the flow, thinking and control simultaneously
- Was something frustrating and difficult for you?
The lag, as is always present through remote and long distance phone calls is quite counter-intuative to the way we all communicate. Most people wait a second to see if the person has finished talking before pointing thier own point of view accross. When the line-lag is around a second it sets everyone up to pause and talk at the same time. This can be combatted by streching the'normal" gap to over a second, but when dealing with a lack of video feed and a slightly reserved pairing partner, the gaps of 5 second there and back can lead to a detriment of communication flow. I mention video feed because most communication happends via body language and such that one can tell if someone is nodding along with the conversation that they aren't about to go active, requiring the first person to pause in their flow. Vice-versa, when someone is about to interupt with what maybe a game changer - their body and facial expressions give clues (or 'tells') to this arounf about 5-10 second before they need to jump in.
- How did you feel when you read your feedback?
As I noted before, I haven't recieved any but I could have a stab in the dark here.
If the feedback is honest and it points out a weak-point or opportunity for improvement that I was unawear of, right-off the bat there would be some denial on my part. Even if I was awear of the "OFI" feedback, the next step would be feeling stink about it, the shame that I could exhibit off-putting behaviour. Then I would review the feedback and try and locate and place the event(s) that generated the feed back. That would probably lead to a light shade of denial along the lines of "Oh, I didn't mean that/ in that way". From there the rollercoaster gets better as then comes acceptance. Following acceptance is noramlly an erge to "put things right", which is normally exhibited by an attempt and fundamental change in that behaviour. Climbing upwards as the behaviour changes and I see repeated examples in myself of that change being born, I start feeling pretty awesome, knowing that based on others opinions focused on making me a better person, I am.
If the feedback is all positive with no opportunities for improvement, I normally feel like I must be too-overbearing in order for that person to have not given more open and honest feedback. I have never sought feedback to know where I am doing good and so, positive feedback again starts the shame / grief rollercoaster as highlighted above but with probably a not so deep curve to it and a shorter length of time.
- Was the feedback you received helpful to your learning?
The feedback Ive recieved during the pairing has been very helpful and removed roadblocks of both technical knowledge as well as furthering and adding to my some-what small knowledge base
- Based on the feedback you've received, what are you going to do to improve next time you pair?
Based on my own feedback to self, I will have a list of firm objectives and a timer as both of these have been in need of attention. Some sort of "don't get distracted and tangent" cue, would also be of benefit.
- How was it to write feedback?
In some respects very easy and in others very hard. It's hard to write specific positive feedback and also difficult to write kind negative feedback without feeling your making a sh1t sandwich. When there is already a rapport with the subject of feedback it becomes so much more simple yet more confused. One always has to be on guard of giving feedback that is an expression of ones ego saying "I wish you were more like me" and instead try to give feedback that is more in line with "this is how you can become closer to how YOU want to be percieved".
- What was most difficult for you when writing feedback for your pair?
When two people sit down to talk, there are always six people present. There are the two as the think they are, the two how they think the other is and the two as they truly are. My greatest difficulty in writing feedback is making sure that I address all six of these people, while taking into account that "everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, both true and false in some sense and neither true nor false, in some sense." So, we have 6 people multiplied by 4 mutually dynamic communication streams of perception. When taken into account that 'reality is a gamble', perception is Key and so the greatest difficulty is to say big things small enough not to get diffused by the chaose highlighted above.
Overall, what do you think of using pairing and feedback to guide your learning?
Very effective tools, if used correctely. As novelty is to memory, peer-group is to behaviour. Peer-group analysis works best when it becomes wider in it's perspective and takes into account not only the peer-group but also the the wider cultural perspective it sits in. By this I mean that in isolation peer-group analysis always tend to get to the de-basedemnt of human kindness, (google the human behaviour experiemnt), but, while kept in open society remains the most effective behaviour modification technique avalible to us all. Although it isn't a self-righting mechanisim, the boat can keep afloat by the meta-feedback analysis present at EDA and a stipulation heavy on: you get out what you put in.
