Final Self Assessment – MI1

Today marks the conclusion of our research into the position of family in the TV landscape.

It’s safe to say its been a diverse experience.

The presentation went well last week to the cohort, however it felt at times like we were losing the audience. This perhaps could have been improved through a greater rehearsal process in order to pin point the aspects of our research we wanted to convey with authority.

In terms of analysing my practice I will begin with the role I took among the group:


Initially my role, as with the other members of the group was essentially to nail down the crux of our research project (which you can see me working through here, something that is included in the final project). What are we going to be exploring, and how are we going to do it? Over time, I felt that I moved into a producer type role, as I note in ‘We Have a Primary Source!’ and ‘Primary Sources – Gaining Our Own Insight Into The Industry’ blog posts. This generally revolved around the website and conducting meetings to make sure we were on track as a group. It also involved highlighting key areas of the research with Brian and deciding who would be best to dig deeper into the areas.

So too, I aided Inocensius by editing his section to improve its flow, incorporating around 2 hours work. His ideas and research were fantastic, yet at times would get lost in the context of his sentences.

Each member was responsible for their section of the website, mine being the wrap up ‘Family in the TV Landscape’ and ‘A History of Television’. However, as producer this involved conducting final touch ups.

With regard to the presentation we were able to work together as a team to compile our research and present it to the cohort, myself being influential in deciding the structure of the presentation and the choice to present as if each of us represented a family. Each member worked greatly to improve the content of their section in this context.


Undoubtedly I have been made aware of strengths and weaknesses in my research practice. This project forced me to properly work collaboratively with the research of my group members, yet also take the initiative in deciding certain paths the research needed to take. For example, Ino and I discussed exactly what was needed for his section, as noted in ‘Researching Television’.

However, I feel that this approach may have at times hindered the project. By specifying sections we perhaps didn’t each garner the insight into the project that one would have hoped. In this case, I feel it is necessary to attribute some of this to the grey area we existed in as we grapled with mapping, rather than answering, through research.


Collaborative strategies such as Facebook, group meetings and consultations with Brian were influential in guding our project. The Facebook group allowed us a place to communicate and mediate certain issues we were all facing, and also allow us to post progress reports.

If we were to undertake this project again, I feel it would be beneficial to set higher targets earlier on. Without implementing a timeline or goal list it was very difficult to keep track of deliverables, and indeed enforce whether these actually needed to be delivered.


Problems faced involved communication, clarity of concept and delivery.

Communication problems arose through not implementing the proper strategies to aid in communication. Ie, a group message, Email, facebook notifications. At certain times this involved members missing meetings. However, we were able to come together in the final few weeks in short succession to deal with loose ends that had surfaced.

Clarity of concept – these problems invovled a lack of clarity with regard to the crux of the project. At times we would be confused as to where exactly these project needed to delve, hence why meetings with Brian, as noted here, were so helpful.

Delivery problems arose near the end of the project. Especially with regard to the presentation. Hence a variety of meetings were called in quick succession to deal with this issue and make sure we were all on track to deliver the various aspects of our project.

    Connections & intersections

The greatest learning outcome from this course has been in my ability to function as a guiding member of a group. Whereas previously I have been influential in the content I have been able to provide, here I felt that I was of more of a help to my team in my ability to highlight key aspects of the project and keep the project in line.

That being said, I was made aware of certain tendencies I have to want to answer through research. So too, a tendency to forsake my own time in favour of the group, hence leading to a lesser breadth of work from me.

Through the link of RMIT we were able to gain an important Primary Source for our project. However, in future projects it would be much more beneficial to stoke the fire much earlier on in order to gain more networking opportunities and hence gain more involvement from contacts in the industry.

The above will certainly advise me when I enter into a research group situation in the future. It is clear that without set roles, goal setting and a determined effort to achieve the connections the research needs to then a project such as this may end in failure.

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 4.24.43 PM

    Overall Grade: D

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s