Associate Name: Liam McDermott
Main Advisor and OP Reviewer: Jennifer Dauksha-English

Output Packet #:  	4	Year: Pre-Capstone
Date Submitted: March 1st, 2014
Date Reviewed: March 17th, 2014
Mark: 71
Grade: B
Time Spent on Review: 3.5 hrs

Liam,

Thanks for being patient as I reviewed your OP 5 first and then came back to this one! I love that you focused this OP on design - well done!

My review is broken into these sections:
1. Evaluation Form (attached)
2. Comments Per Section

Required next step: 
- Next OP I want to see more editing.

Recommended next step:
- In future OP's I'd like to see you work more on introducing/integrating sections of the OP.
- Find a way to highlight best practices so they are crystalized for yourself and the reader - I like your use of color so maybe more of that?
- Go deeper with world view and benefits to the field.
- Consider more ways that you can track your experiments and interventions.

I respect your integrity in managing your pathway. You're doing great work. I'm glad to be your advisor and look forward to you joining the Advisor circle!

Cheers,
Jennifer

OP REVIEW-------------------------

1. EVALUATION FORM-------------------- 

(attached)

2. COMMENTS PER SECTION---------------
Prologue -
- Good context and welcome text.
- I like the topic you choose.
- What does NCDC stand for in regard to catering gig?
- Good table of contents with overview of each section.

4.1.1 - Designing OPs -
- Good intention setting using templates.
- I like the section on why we design.  I would define it first before sharing recommendations.
- You end with stating full circle yet i do not think you've explained enough about design to make that statement. Could you perhaps add examples here? Examples of design models and actual designs I think would help the reader see it's iterative nature.
- When you add something like the OP structure - explain why you added it - feels really fragmented to me as is with no context. for all I know you created this mind map or it was given to you.
- I'm glad to see you created your own design model. How does this compare to other models? Were there gaps in the other models that didn't work for you? Why did you decide to create your own process?
- I think this bit on design process might need to come before the stuff in the left column - is this being read left column then to right?
- I agree with the improvisation element to design - I think a liberating structure managed with dynamic adaptability are both key to good designing.
- Interesting that you focus on repetition, I agree with you but also see that anything in life can be designed. Repetition of tasks are just one pattern. What are other patterns? Where else in life are patterns repeated - I think it would help if you gave examples.
- Ok so now I see that in the section how and why we design an OP - you refer to guideline map. To me though I went down left column and felt very confused y its placement there.
- I'm glad to see here that you do get into which tools you use!
- I'm pleased to see your goals and action items though I'd like a statement as to why you included them. 

4.1.2 - OP Outcomes -
- Nice I like that Gaia U has helped you see the value of using articulated next steps!
- When you mention that outcomes on this page are different then in core report - say why.
- I look forward to having more conversations with you on design as a process. I'm glad that you're clearer!
- I like the 3-part lens.

4.2.1 - CR Design -
- Excellent focus on efficiency!
- When you create a best practice I encourage you to highlight it in some way, maybe a color or icon.
- Nice approach to move from brainstorm to seeking patterns. Then I appreciate how you take that template and put it on an actual context - a specific event that has framework/constraints of its own. 
- I'm unclear about how these maps overlap/intersect.
- Same feedback on goals articulation - add a statement for context/integration.
- There are some formatting and typos in this page and on the maps. Odd break under points of intervention (sentence split in two lines).
- I love the intervention point around you as a designer!
- Nice action items as an outcome - consider putting them all in the same active tense - the first one doesn't jive with the other 12. Also, as with goals add a statement for integration.
- As with goals and actions - add a lead in sentence to OBREDIMET for overall context and integration.

4.2.2 - CR Outcomes -
- This page needs a mini introduction - feels fragmented.
- Lot's of cool outcomes you're tracking.
- I agree we design how we design. 
- These feedback loops I think are helping you be a better learner, designer and doer!
- Communication!!

4.3.1 - Commentary -
- Again, I really appreciate the shift in your pathway/project focus,
- Glad to hear about the increased capacity with digital literacy.
- Liam as learner and leader an interesting outcome - and I noted that this was the thread for your presentation. I feel that you as an action learner have just gone up several notches!
- This is the first time I got what the DC in NCDC stood for - maybe I missed ti elsewhere.
- Professionally - when you say you'd like design as part of your work - what do you mean? You want to do consulting on design?
- I'd love to hear bait more world view on the concept of design as a tool or form of manifestation. What are the oppressions on both sides - to design or not to design?
- Nice review of how you incorporated Kate's feedback. I like when you said you felt seen - that's a good feeling.
- Yes design has a lot to do with decision making!
- It is fascinating that with a shift in the focus of the OP the location of process reflection shifts within the Op template. The most important bit I think is that we as OP creators must clearly articulate the intent of each section/the OP as a whole.
- Thank you for so clearly demonstrating that you engaged with my feedback. It's clear to me that you especially stepped up to the challenge with design as the focus of this OP.  The quality of your OPs are improving dramatically since OP 1.

4.4.1 - SE OP -
- Could I suggest that instead of putting annotated bib up as something the reader must download - perhaps put it in a google doc and then link it?
- Put the date of your guild sessions.
- I like the amount of experimenting you're doing with this process. How are you tracking what works and what doesn't?
- With the Digiphon - can you share any best practices? You said you gained a lot of digital literacy.
- With process skills I'd like to hear more details on the first two - the depth of sharing of best practices on MTMP is what I'm looking for all around! Thanks for adding this.
- I have the same feedback about the formatting of the resource review of this OP as I do with the previous OP I reviewed - it's just hard to read as it's laid out - consider using a document instead of worksheet.

4.4.2 - SE CR -
- I like that you kept OP and Catering related evidence separated.
- I'm glad to see bait of reflection on benefits to the field - next time consider going even deeper.

4.4.3 - SE Journals -
- Complete