Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Answering questions is always important but what can be overlooked is the response. This is especially important when discussing new strategies.  

This week, one of my teammates came up with a new strategy.  Of course, when deciding how to answer a question is also very important. In a group atmosphere where you trust everyone. You can give as much detail is needed for them to understand. We also questioned if it would work out, discussing the risks involved and is it worth it. This only strengthened the original idea and we decided to do it. What was a key talking point was how we were going to tell our subsidiary. Transparency is key to keeping a good relation with the other team but we can’t reveal everything. As said in Alison (2018), we decided “it would be less damaging to refuse to answer the question” in terms of the specifics of it. All we could say is that we are doing something. In term of a transparency spectrum, we are somewhere in the middle of secrecy/transparency.

Questions can help build ideas but it is also important to answer them correctly. As we are nearing the end of the semester, what we do next is all the more crucial.


Brooks, A.W, 2018, The Surprising Power Of Questions, pg 60-67 Retrieved from:


  1. Hi Sachin

    I am very sorry but I am really struggling to understand your journal this week. I am confused as to what your issue was - was it coming up with a strategy, was it decision making, was it communication with another team?

    Daudelin (1996) offers great structure when analysing a problem, and I see you have used it in some of your past journals, I would suggest continuing on with that. 

    I would also recommend proof reading and citing the correct article in your journal.

    Best of luck.


  2. Hi Sachin,

    The journal seems exceptionally vague as to what is the issue. Indeed, you seem to ramble across many different ideas in quick succession. 

    You need to format your writing to convey your point to the reader better. Daudelin's (1996) four-step analysis structure is a good way of ensuring that all your key ideas are broken up and in their own section. This would provide a better flow.

    You have multiple grammatical mistakes throughout your writing. Perhaps take a few moments after completing it to proof-read for errors.