Colaborative Conflict in groups

I find that I've been in collaborative conflict when I've worked with groups in school. I think that most people have found themselves in similar scenarios, where relying on others and recognizing the benefit of working together towards a solution is beneficial to all. This happens in school groups most often. I find that im typically in groups that all want the same outcome, to pass the assignment and solve the problem at the benefit of everyone in the group. On a more recent assignment where i had to work with a group, we used the collaboration style to break up the problem into smaller parts to solve it. We organized ourselves in a way that maximized the efficiency of the group, by having people attack parts of the problem that they felt the most familiar with. I think that this 'divide and conquer' technique demonstrated the worth of working collaboratively in a conflicted situation.

I find that I am much more likely to be in a competitive conflict when faced with conflicts at work. This could be because of the importance most place on individually winning in the workplace, instead of working collaboratively for the best of everyone working. This can happen, and has happened to me, when a coworker feels that moving forward, or gaining points with management as an individual is more important than working together with others to impress management.

Types of public speaking

A forum seems to be the type of presentation that compliments community and small political discussions. A forum is a audience participatory meeting that gives individuals an opportunity to speak on an issue in front of the rest of the audience. It is structured and guided by a moderator that allows for all views/opinions to be expressed. This form of presentation seems like something that allows for the most amount of input, but least amount of depth or background from the speakers. It seems like the usual type of presentation found at a community or PTA type meeting.

A panel is when four to eight experts on an issue discuss problem solving of the issue in front of an audience. This format is guided by a moderator, who keeps time and summarizes the positions and aspects of the speakers to the audience. This seems like something similar to a talk show, and can provide some in-depth, well thought out discussion and problem solving. But could lack creativity, diversity or audience participation.

A colloquium is when three to six experts from diverse/divergent views on an issue, discuss the issue in front of an audience. This type of presentation is different in that the purpose is to identify and work through possible solutions with collaboration of the audience and experts. The moderator purposely encourages audience participation and questions, while keeping the discussion on track and moving along. I think this would be an interesting presentation, bring the mixture of deep knowledge and experience from the experts and the creativity and passion form the audience into the problem solving mixture. Although the inclusion of a type of 'open forum' could possible lead to disruption and getting of track.

A symposium is a series of speeches by experts on different areas of a complex problem. The purpose is to present technical information and complicated aspects of the problem. The speeches and speakers are well polished and experienced. There is no audience participation during speeches, but there may be a separate forum for questions after the speeches. This is the type of presentation style for very advanced, scientific, and technical issues. These can be tedious but very indepth.

If I were to use on of these presentation formats I would prefer to view and engage in a panel. I think this would offer the most exciting discussion on an issue, because it uses a focused group of experts, with good background knowledge on the issues.

Cultural Barriers to Communication

Some cultural barriers to creativity include conforming to group norms, expecting practicality, expectations of politeness or social order, depending upon generalizations and stereotypes to much, and trusting logic and reason to much. These cultural barriers could easily keep a group from being creative in a lot of ways. If a group is to focused on everyone conforming, or expecting everyone to agree with the majorities solution, it could severely dampen an individual’s voice and ability to introduce new or different solutions. A barrier that I find particularly annoying is when a group relies to much on the reason or logic behind a previous solution. This can become an issue when trying to get a group to brainstorm for new and interesting ideas. If the group members think that their solutions are to outlandish or illogical, they are less likely to move forward towards new and useful solution. I’ve found that brainstorming, even crazy or illogical things, can really benefit a group, because it brings up new ways of approaching or seeing a problem. And when other group members see or hear an idea, even an outlandish one, it may spawn a similar but more reasonable solution, thereby building a structure that can create a new idea. I feel as though, like most other people, I encounter these barriers on creativity pretty often. But I’ve realized that a lot of these barriers are around for a reason, and understanding those reasons can be really helpful when wanting to move around them, or see the problem form a perspective other than the “way its always been”.

Finding creative solutions

Creativity can mean a multitude of different things. This diversity of what it means to be creative help a lot when trying to think of an example of creativity, outside of working in some artistic way. During my jobs I find that there are constant opportunities to find a creative solution to a problem. This occurs most often during my job at the coffee shop. One thing I’ve found out about working in food service and coffee for a while is that there is always a problem that needs to be fixed, or something is always broken. I’ve also found out that it’s in these chaotic that my strengths in creativity come to surface. I’m constantly collaborating with other managers to figure out a better way to make drinks, improve our speed, or fix a broken machine. More recently we had an issue with our menu, and couldn’t figure out how to fit in all the prices, and who was going to hand write the prices to match the pre-existing font. I suggested that we should try and match the font on a computer, print out some samples, and use the one that matches best. Using printed out prices turned out to be the quickest, most efficient solution to the problem. Looking back, I think this fits in perfectly with how the book describes creativity. The other manager was stuck on the problem by only looking at it form a certain perspective, thinking that the prices had to be handwritten and match the old font exactly. I was able to bring a new perspective, and knowing that a multitude of font are available because of graphic design experience, was able to help find a solution. I’ve found out through working in a lot of groups and teams that I really enjoy collaborating and taking a fresh perspective on old problems. I was glad to read in the book that sometimes you have to throw out old notions to find a new solution, something I always try to do.

"Giving" your attention

How to basically “give” your attention to someone. To take your attention and focus it solely on what they are saying and how they are saying it, hopefully resulting in the highest possible transfer of meaning between you and the person. But I think that one of the most useful tactics the book offered was how to receive feedback. Receiving feedback is tough, I think partly because most of the time, you really don’t want to hear what other people have to say about you. You might be willing to hear it sometimes, when your properly prepared and in the right context, but it can still be hard, as feedback for most people carries emotions. I dealt with getting feedback a lot during my time as an Art major. It took awhile to get used to the critiques and opinions of others, and not shirking off their advice as insignificant. But after awhile you realize that the reason feedback is so important is that others can see things that you never did, and usually in a totally different, unexpected way. This is a huge benefit in art, and most other areas. The biggest point for me was to realize that feedback is a sharing of perspective, and should be listened to intently and given a lot of weight, because feedback is hard to give as well as receive. The steps given by the book about receive feedback I see as very useful. Taking deep breaths, slowing your thoughts down, relaxing, listening, not interrupting, are all great steps to take in order to receive feedback on something. Making sure to let the person know that they’ve been heard is also very important, building an understanding and relationship between you and the giver. I think that the last piece of advice is one of the best, that if you don’t understand or like the feedback, ask questions from the give that can possibly make it clearer or more constructive.

Memory & Communication

I think that the most common mistake I make during listening relates to my memory. I’ve found, time and time again, that things that come up in conversation slip my mind. I think that the book offered some useful tools for my improvement in this area. The book talks about the distinction between short term memory and long term memory. Short term lasts from 1-60 seconds, during which time the brain decides if the info received is important enough to file over in the long term memory. The long term memory is an unlimited storage space for all types of information, relevant or ridiculous. But, as mentioned in the book, the info coming from short term must gain entrance into the long term through processing, processing that isn’t being taken up by distractions, and interpretations on what is or isn’t important. I think this is where my problem arises.
I’ve often had trouble with the simple conversations. A good example is in my home. I used to constantly be at odds with my mom over things that I needed to do or what she had asked me to do. And where the conflict typically arises is over the details of previous conversations, as she typically is able to recall little details about the conversation, while I typically remember the entire meaning of the conversation. I guess this would pin me as a “big picture” person. I think my problem with listening is that I usually concentrate on the entire scope of the discussion, what it was about, where it was, but most of the time not so much the exact terms and words. I don’t think this is technically an uncommon or bad thing, but it can prove annoying when trying to remember specifics of a lecture or conversation. After reading over the chapter, I think that a way to improve this part of my memory would be to up to make sure I’m adjusting the level of importance of each conversation accordingly. It’s important for me to recognize that the conversation is important and dial in my focus and therefore my memory.

Quick Rundown on Semantics

One concept that I thought could be discussed is the concept of semantics. Semantics studies are guided by three principles that look at the construction of meanings in language. It examines the fact that words alone have no power in meaning, but rather are given meaning as symbols by people. The idea that the words we use have no intrinsic value, except the value we assign to them as individuals, cultures, and societies is very significant. It helps one to understand how confusion and conflict can erupt over language. We are often face to face with disagreements over the importance of our words, and how we use them. A word or sentence that means very little to one person can easily carry much greater significance to another person. When people come to agree upon what a word means, and continue to agree on it, a real meaning for words is developed. I really enjoy the idea that the meaning to words lie in people, not in the words themselves. It helps me understand and realize that if I want to successfully communicate with others, I need to get an idea of how significant the words I use, and how I use them, are to others. A interesting example of this concepts could be found in the movie Citizen Kane (1946). In it, we are given what is, to the viewer, the meaningless word “rosebud”. It is only after watching the film, and understanding the significance of the word to the character, that the importance of using it in the movie is realized.
Other concepts of semantics state that language is a symbolic representation of reality, and it conveys meaning for our observations, inferences, and judgments. The main idea is that words we use are not actually the reality, but they stand in for the realities that we live out everyday. To me, this concept seems fairly simple on the surface. The word cup is obviously not the actual cup, but a representation of such that allows me to communicate to others a meaning for the thing I put my coffee in. Just as the fact I drank coffee this morning cannot be re-lived, or experienced by other individuals, but I can only convey what occurred through the language I use to tell them about the event. This idea follows the previous concept that the meanings we have are in people, not the words. This concept proves true only when individuals understand, transfer, and interpret symbolic representation for the words used.

Chronemics and Proxemics

There's a lot of knowledge one can gain about human communication from understanding the concepts of chronemics and proxemics. Chronemics outlines the idea that the significance of time, and the interpretation of time, is a cultural creation. It looks to study how different cultures use, manipulate, and interpret time, thereby explaining the differences and helping small groups understand how people can interpret time differently. It is particularity important to small group and team communication because it helps a group understand how to orient and direct a group with different or irregular time perceptions. I find that chronemics is a dynamic and interesting concept that helps one understand that the meaning and value of time, something we all take as natural fact, can have multiple interpretations and meanings across cultures. It allows for a group, and a individual, to anticipate and account for differences and conflict that may arise when trying to schedule or facilitate group interaction.
Proxemics is another useful concept that offers just as much understanding into the dynamics of interpersonal and small group communication. Proxemics deals with the space between individuals during communication. It specifically looks at the distance of people communicating in relation to the level of communication they are involved in. This is a fairly understandable idea for most of us, as we all feel that we have a certain amount of “personal space”, and feel uncomfortable when it is encroached upon. Proxemics simply labels and organizes these feelings we have on communicative distances and helps us understand how to influence communication through it.
I think that trying to define universal laws that cover all cultures when trying to understand their chronemics and proxemics is out of the question. I feel that there is no way you could concretely say that a certain level of regard for time, or disregard for it, is the right way. I think that significance is not something that can be enforced, or ruled over. People will always hold differing feelings over how their time should be managed, and the proper way to incorporate time into groups. The same goes for the proximity of individuals to each other.

Principles of Non-Verbal Communication

I found the eight principles of nonverbal communication to be a useful explanation on the factors of communication that most of us take for granted and do autonomously. The principles outline the minute interactions that are continuously carried out during group communication. I think that understanding nonverbal communication as a system of principles creates manageable actions that one can think about and act upon during interaction inter personally and in small groups. I found the two most interesting principles to be how interpretation of nonverbal communication is guided by the context and power relationship in which they are sent, and the statement that women, in general, are more sensitive to sending and receiving nonverbal cues. These two concepts, at least in my own life, seem to always be true.
Understanding that nonverbals can be interpreted differently depending upon the levels of power between the parties, or the environment in which they are sent, is a valuable thing to know. I think that we all have an intrinsic understanding of this concept, as we are constantly exemplifying it. An easy place to find context/power playing upon our nonverbal would be at work. Our workplaces, as environments, contain many societal and cultural norms that may change or restrict our use of nonverbal. Understanding how these norms and regulations on the signals we are sending in a workplace context is important. Say you were to send a emblem at work to someone that placed more significance upon the context of non verbals in the workplace , you might get into trouble. Something like winking and smiling in the workplace could be interpreted much differently by a coworker than by someone you meet in a bar.
This bring me to the next principle about nonverbals that I find constantly happening in real life. The principle stated that women are more sensitive to sending and receiving, and responding accurately to non verbal messages. I've noticed that this principle proves true fairly often. Girls I hang out with constantly seem to notice cues that I would have never noticed. I've also noticed that this sensitivity can be a double-edged sword, because sometimes over interpretation of signals can produce more confusion than needed. My mother and I are constantly battling because of this. She seems hypersensitive to nonverbal communication that she perceives me to be sending, and this can often cause conflict over the meaning of the signals. However, I don't want to generalize or overstate that this principle is always true, because I think that another big area of confusion between men and women is that men think that women are perceiving every little signal they send.
This goes to show just how important understanding nonverbals can be. We can become much better at avoiding confusion if we improve our abilities to properly recognize, interpret, and send nonverbal communication.

White Priveledge

I feel that White men privilege is something like a huge, mysterious cloud of meaning that looms over our society, covering some in its shadow, and passing by others unnoticed. I think that it refers to the underlying conception that puts white males in positions of authority, literally or figuratively, in the minds of people. It spawns from the dominance that the white male has pushed over others throughout history. One could say that a white male has typically been behind every western conflict that has ever arisen. Slavery, oppression over native Americans, women, immigrants, all seemingly resulting from the great white man's objectives. the results and reconciliation of all these conflicts have the white man in today's world in a precarious position. White man privileged has become something that those who are not a "white man" can never experience. It is having confidence that you will probably never be the victim of oppression, subjugation, or tyranny. That you will always be represented equally, politically, as well as in the media. That people will never question your authority based on gender or race. Its this weird thing that seemingly gives white men these additional rights, ones that are not written, and are rarely brought up. I think its an interesting concept, and one that does affect me personally, being one of these white males. Although i could go and say that "oh, this cant be true! because I've had to struggle just as hard blah blah blah.. Life's unfair for me to!", i know that saying that wouldn't be true. I know that there ARE things out there that I'm unaware of, that I dont have to worry about, being a white male. Ive rarely if ever have to consider if how I;m being treated is related to my skin color or gender. I dont really have to worry about being a victim of racism, or aggression, based upon me being a white male. And I can always be sure to find something in the media that represents me or my group.
I entirely agree that this concept is part of the way we communicate. Whether its evident or not. But as I've realized through many classes and experiences, that sometimes the things that are the most important, are often unseen. And white privileged is a form of unseen oppression. It symbolically places the white male ideal upon all other peoples, making it some "gold standard" of being. But unfortunately, one that most can never achieve. I feel that the best way to deal with this silent oppression is to bring it to light, open it up, be aware of it and try to change it.

Getting Stereotyped

I think that the majority of people have, at some point, been stereotyped for some reason or another. This is a fairly common happening, and as Harris(1999) states, " Stereotyping as a form of categorization is part of the human condition(p.72)." Understanding this, I figured that it would be easy to think of a time when I've had to deal with stereotyping. But it was tough. And I realized that for me, a middle class white guy in a fairly suburban area, the situations of stereotyping could seem minor compared to those that outside of my own particular context. I think that when i have been stereotyped, it hasn't been for negative things really, and if it had been I didn't really notice. i think that the majority of times i notice some type of stereotyping its in "good fun", but rooted in these notions of who can or cant do what. I often catch crap for wanting to go out and dance when i go out with a group of friends. This is influenced by Number 1: That guys aren't supposed to dance, as it is an effeminate thing to do, and Number 2: That white guys cant dance. Both of these work into Harris's ideas that stereotypes perpetuate myths about groups of people. The first one is stating that to dance is to lessen your masculinity, and that those who dance for a profession, or out of fun, are innately less "manly" that others. Although these assumptions and stereotypes are constantly being challenged by today media, with movies where male lead characters retain their masculinity while being passionate about dance, thereby changing those stereotypes constantly (Billy Elliot, Step Up). So for me, the idea that i should or shouldn't want to dance, although going against a stereotype for a guy, isn't really a big deal anymore. I think that although people may always use stereotyping as a means of categorization, that one day it will slowly dissolve to the bare minimum of usefulness. Because as we become a more and more diverse culture, integrating and globalizing, we realize that stereotyping is an ineffective means to predict peoples behavior.

Figuring out problem solving

Discussion on problem solving. I think that the outlining of how to make a choice in the decision making process to be particularly valuable. I think that understanding how and why we make the decisions we do can be an integral part of being a better communicator as well as improving the outcomes of so many scenarios we find ourselves in everyday. Because we are problem solving creatures by nature, our minds seem to have been built to find solutions. Over time though, and through the expansion on more and more ways to solve problems, our brains nowadays can sometimes be overwhelmed with to many choices for a solution. I think that a Harris(1999) outlines a great system for making a rational, effective, and promising choice.(p. 150) One of the things I liked about her questions for small groups when faced with making a choice was that it isn't a short list. Good decisions can sometimes take a long time to make. They are most likely thought out, considerate, and logical decisions that help get the group from point A to point B effectively. The first part of the system asks "how well does..." the solution interact with the rest of the problem, or the solution already in place. Knowing if a solution is really going to meet all your goals, how well it can meet those goals, and accommodates all the restrictions with the least amount of trade-offs , is an important level to meet when looking for the right choice. But, finding those win-win situations is rare, especially in groups. There are typically a multitude of choices, and not all of them negative, each having their own pros and cons. Just think of the last time you tried to decided upon what food to eat with a large group. What everyone wants to eat may be different for everyone, but everyone may agree that each choice sounds appetizing. What do you do when all the choices sound promising? What about looking at the underlying pro's and con's of each meal choice? The cost, distance, and level of service, are all parts of each choice to consider, and something we all have done without ever really thinking about it. Being able to better understand how choices are made, and how to make the best one, can be hugely beneficial in this simple situation, as well as majorly complex ones. Just don't try doing it with politics or religion with people, it might get ugly.

Violating a group norm

I think that the majority of people have felt the cold sting of violating a group norm at some point in their lives. Depending upon the scenario, violating a norm can be rather easy, and may pass unnoticed to you. This is the type that I typically end up violating. To me, norms in groups establish a structure. Having a structure to a group, allowing for the modeling of how things are, or should be done, is typically essential for the group to function cohesively. These can come in the most common forms, like the acting out of different relationships in workplaces. Because, although it is sometimes established externally, how we are supposed to interact with coworkers or bosses is something of a norm. In a stricter, more supervised environment, having the utmost respect for your boss, and understanding your "place" at work may be the norm. But norms in a workplace can vary from environment to environment. The norms of a laid back, smaller business may be different from a larger, more professional, corporate environment. Understanding how norms in groups can fluctuate is important in these types of situations, as you wouldn't want to show up to your bank job in shorts and flip flops, something you might of done at a surf shop. Jobs could be just one area where norms dedicated to how you look, act, and talk are an important part of a traditional, established system of doing things that that can be a snapshot of the norms for a larger system.How would throwing a wrench into these norms disrute the system, or affect you? Wheres another place where the norms might be different from the one's we're used to? How about family? Has anyone ever tried introducing a new friend, girlfriend, boyfriend, or whatever into your family? It can be an awkward time for the friend as they learn to adjust to new group norms. Cultural differences can also play a huge part in this awkwardness, imagine bringing your urban girlfriend to meet your rural family. What kinds of norms between the two would clash?
Like I said earlier, I usually find myself violating the more concealed group norms that I happen to find established around me. Sometimes though, I do this on purpose, especially if i find the norm to be archaic or illogical. Ive found that exposing these oft ridiculous norms we carry around is a good way to bring them up for discussion and interpretation. I like to know why we do the things we do, the reasoning behind the "that's just the way it is" mentality. This gets me in trouble sometimes, but that's OK, trouble's just part of the norm.

The Norms of SJSU

Since I was a student at San Jose State for only a short period of time, its pretty hard to distinguish any norms. I also dont think i know enough of the student body to really get an idea of the norms that have been established or are underlying. One norm I have established since starting here is with the administration. They are tough, not tough like "biker bar" tough, more like "tough luck" kinda tough, so I guess basically just cold. The reason I see this as an established norm is that many of my interactions, and other students as well, with the administration have left us jarred. This is probably because many students lives clash with the harsh admin environment that is San Jose State. And I don't blame them, the workers in the offices I mean, for they are just doing what they've been told to do, or what they find works, which is being strict on deadlines, finances, and help. This is the only norm I could think of for something at San Jose, and I dont know exactly how many other students feel the same or not.
When I'm not at school, I find the norms that me and my friends share to be subtle, and slight. This may be because I've become to in-tune to the ins-and-outs of being in this particular group that no longer see the specifics of our interactions. I think a norm that we are constantly playing out is our phone calls. We keep em short. This might be attributed tot he fact that the group I'm talking about are all my guy friends, but that's a whole different communication class and subject. But yeah, we don't spend a long time on the phone, and we are more than likely to get bored, speed up the conversation, or hang up, if one of us forgets this. This understanding that we have has come over years of being in proximity to each other. We've never really had a reason for having long talks, even when we were all going to different colleges. Like I said, this is probably a more gendered norm, but, its one that has proved itself time and time again. ..Actually someones calling me now.
Till next time.

Bifurcation points

Bifurcation points. I think that we've all experienced this concept at one point or another. Harris (1999) describes Bifurcation points as threshold periods in the decision making process of groups. The idea is that groups cross levels, borders, or thresholds of agreement and understanding at certain points, which sometimes comes into conflict with individual members times of suggestion.(31) Essentially, this states that a group can only reach a collaborative understanding of something at a certain point, and be ready for input regarding the subject only at that time, regardless of individual understanding levels. The main example given is when, during a discussion, one member makes a proposal or gives and idea, and the rest of the group overlooks it or doesnt fully understand it at that point. Its not until later during the group communicative process that the idea is proposed again, sometimes by a different member, but being essentially the same, and the group excepts it. This can be a frustrating experience to endure for most people that see themselves as the initial "idea person". It can leave the person feeling overlooked and devalued as a member of the group. But, as Harris states, it has more to do with the timing of the proposal and the groups proximity to the "decision threshold". Simply put, sometimes a group is ready to decide, sometimes its not. This may be due in part to the groups understanding of the discussion, or their comfortably with the situation or idea. People like to be sure of things, especially in groups, and they most often don't like surprises or underdeveloped proposals. So, although one may have the answers a little earlier and be ready to share them, sometimes its best to wait a little till the group is ready to hear them. And, if you wait till after they've got a couple ideas in mind, you can spring your amazing, awesome proposal or suggestion on them in the end and be the coolest person ever.!!!

Entropy and Equifinality

After looking over the terms and explanations of entropy and equifinality I took some time to understand how they are interrelated to each other as parts of a bigger system. Entropy is the compulsion of groups to decay, whether it be mentally, relationally, or organizationally, it comes in many forms. Its basically the premise that without newness or change to stimulate the groups energy or focus the groups attention, a group will become chaotic and dissolve. The book establishes that to prevent this, new energy, or change needs to be inputted, but not to much. I thought of entropy in groups a statement of group evolution. As the group grows, it needs to adapt and rearrange to survive, either that, or it gets eaten. Now, just like real evolution, those changes and adaptations that need to be made to stave of entropy come in many different forms and are and expression of equifinality. But as the group makes these changes they need to check that they dont make to many or make them to fast. Understanding that changes and innovation need to be made and can be made through a variety of different avenues is important to group collaboration.

Keeping Groups Focused

Ive found out through trial and error, through life and friends, that keeping a small group cohesive and focused is a tough job. The book describes the different aspects of systems that make up small groups as little pieces to a bigger pie. I think that the idea of small group interactions as living, diverse, complex systems works well when we understand how easily they can fall apart. The book talks about how interdependence of group members creates a stronger group bond, as each member of the group relies upon the other members for support.
This idea reminded me of a common game that is often played as a camp or school activity. Its a great test and example of how interdependence on each member of a group works. The activity was when you take all the members of the group and form a tight, standing circle. The group is then supposed to sit down at exactly the same time on the person behind them, while supporting the person in front of them. Its a tough game to get right, and the majority of the time you ended up on the ground. But it was great when you could get it right, and got exponentially more interesting as the number of people increased. (I think the biggest circle Ive ever been apart of was about 40 people) . The activity exemplified the good and bad of small groups. If everyone was in alignment and on the same level as the other members, the outcome was good. But when even one member of the group faltered, was out of time, or out of place, the group might be able to sit, but not for long, and eventually you crashed down to the group.
Another area I've found that is very dependent upon a cohesive group system is in football. I played football in high school as a lineman, who are the guys responsible for either protecting or attacking the quarterback and running backs. As part of the team, myself and each guy beside me had to have a perfect understanding of what we were doing each play, and I relied upon them for support the same way they did me. But just like any complex system, sometimes we didnt communicate properly, or make a bad call, and the quarterback got sacked. Oh well. Live and learn and keep playing.

The first.

Hey peoples.
I'm Nick.
And, as my name suggests, I like to be outside. To me this means expieriencing as much of the outdoors, people, and things the world has to offer as I can.
Academically, I have a degree in communications studies. I have prior state school experience as a graphic design major at a Cal State down south. About halfway through that major I decided to move back closer to my home of Santa Cruz and switch majors to something just as interesting but more diverse than design. I still have a heart for design and art, which I hope to combine with what I learned as a comm major to make an impact on the world. So far I'm really loving Communications. I find it a very interesting blend of many of my favorite social sciences.
I've worked at a doctors office doing assorted IT jobs, at a coffee shop being a barista, as a student assistant to the Comm department designing posters and other stuff, and in a diverse range of marketing fields. With that schedule I keep pretty busy. I spend most of my free time either outside hiking on trails in Santa Cruz, hanging out with friends, or having a drink and reading at a coffee shop, usually the one I used to work at (which is great and worth a visit).
And yeah, that's pretty much all.

So, Till next time.