PDD Reflections

Reflections – Week 1 (PDD)

Spent about half the week looking at other projects on the Scratch website and using the “Look Inside” feature to learn more about how they are programmed. Making an effort to understand some of the more complicated code, and searching up tutorials when necessary. Started to actually program my project last Wednesday, and made decent progress. Have already completed jumping and moving controls, and fine-tuning them to fit my requirements. Also making an effort to understand how to create a scrolling screen, however still confused as of yet. Will look at more projects & experiment with various different types of code to make it work.

Reflections – Week 2

I have now gotten used to the program and have begun importing sprites from the internet. For most of this week, my work involved searching for and inserting sprites I found on the internet and like the aesthetic of onto the program. At first, I was just looking up random pictures on the internet, but then I found that by staying on one site that I liked, I could insert multiple sprites at the same time without having to spend extra time looking for them. I believe that this drastically sped up the time it took to find all the things I need. As of right now, I still have not managed to work out the “scrolling screen” that I was attempting to implement, however most of the sprites are complete. Now I just need to program in the behavior for the sprites and design levels and I will be finished. What I realized from this is that when searching for pictures or other important items on the internet, I need to stay organized rather than hopping around haphazardly.

Reflections – Week 3

This week was all about the programming. With all the sprites already inserted, I now needed to program in the coding for the sprites. Although I am familiar with the program, there is still a lot of new and more advanced things to learn and I have not yet mastered some of the things I needed. Thus, I decided to go on the internet and look up tutorials on how to implement the code that I could not figure out myself. I felt that for the most part the tutorials were very concise and accurate, and allowed me to implement features the way that I had intended them. For the most part, I felt that the programming segment of this project did not go poorly. However, one thing I felt could be improved on is to try and implement some of these features myself before looking it up on the internet, as I believe that given enough time I could have successfully pulled it off. 

Re-design the room - Reflection

1. Identifying the problem - 1

I found that this step was mostly skipped over by myself and my team. I, as well as my group, did not feel that it was necessary to delve deeper into the problem, and elected rather to simply break it down without thinking about what the problem entails. Although this choice does not seem to be the optimal choice, I found that the result ended up working out fairly well. However, had we taken the time to identify the problem, we would have most likely avoided a lot of the conflicts that arose during the design and execution phase of the project.

2. Break down the problem - 2.5

Because we started on this project without any rubric nor plan, we did not have a definite idea of the steps to take in the design process, deciding rather to "wing it." However, we spent time doing something that could be considered similar to this step. For the most part, our discussion was focused on the logistics of the situation, ignoring most of the other details that could be considered as “breaking down the problem.” Our group talked about the most efficient way to layout the room, and what could be placed where. I feel that in the future, it would be important to consider other aspects of the problem, such as the expectations of the “client.”

3. Re-define/clarify the problem – 0

I did not even consider this step during our design process, and neither I nor any of my group made any attempt to try and do this. Most of the stuff that could have been discussed in this step was covered in the “break down the problem step, meaning that this one was mostly ignored. I felt that it was mostly unnecessary to follow this step, as ignoring it did not negatively impact our performance; however, it is likely inversely true that not skipping the step could positively impact our performance, making it a good idea to attempt this step in the future. 

4. Dream it/Design it phase - 4

This phase was probably where our group was the most efficient. After being given paper and the tools to plan our approach the best. In this phase, our team collaborated effectively and came up with good ideas together. Because at that point I had elected myself leader at the prompting of Ms. Lees, our team was far more organized and on-task. We were able to efficiently create our plan with minimal delay. Although there was a bit of distraction here and there, I felt that we did this step very well. This makes me think that it is indeed important to have a leader in our group, as once someone was there to tell everyone what to do, the process went a lot smoother and the bumps disappeared.

5. Execute phase - 3
I felt that the execution phase of our plan was fairly well done despite there being some bumps along the way. Mainly the problem was the lack of concentration on the part of a lot of our team. Although some of us managed to work efficiently, others just kind of goofed off and neglected to help. However, because of the concise and accurate nature of our plan and the timely arrival of our classmates, the required work was completed just in the nick of time. However, I believe that we could have improved our efficiency by delegating tasks at the start rather than just doing whatever we saw during the operation.

PDD Proposal

PDD Proposal

My goal for this project is to use the program Scratch to create a functional game. 

Estimated time - 3 weeks - 1 month

Group members - Myself only

I chose this project idea because in Grade 9, I created a game with Scratch in IT. I found that it was a very enjoyable process and yielded a pretty good result. However, after completion of said project, I noticed  numerous ways that it could be improved, although I never followed up on it. Therefore, my current project will be an attempt to improve, flesh out, and re-create a game with a program that I have previous experience with.

Although I have experience with Scratch, it has been a long time since I last used it. Therefore, I will be spending the 2 or 3 days re-familiarizing myself with the program itself. This will allow me to better use the program and be more efficient in the future when building my game. The rest of the time will be spent on creating the game. Some of my big goals for this project is to work out some of the glitches that were prevalent in my old game, improve the gameplay, and finally, use better sprites and graphics to drastically enhance detail and enjoyability. All of these goals will not be easy to reach within the limitations of the program, but I believe that solving them would be a great learning experience and help me better understand the program.

For the game itself, I intend to create a 2-D platformer, similar to the "Mario" series of games. This is a genre that I find not only interesting and simple to understand, but with also a great degree of difficulty. I wish in this game to add some features that were not in the previous game. These include, but are not limited to - scrolling screen, wall jumping, and better moving obstacles.

Warm-up activities reflections

Although all of these activities are, on the surface, very small things, they each reveal deeper personality traits within all of us and are a decent reflection of our characteristics. The first one, concentric circles, was a very obvious but effective tool to get to know each other and ourselves better. This is because it forces us to reveal facts about ourselves that we may not have liked to share or may not have told others without prompting. Doing so not only lets others know you better, but also gives you an opportunity to reflect upon your own experiences.

The second exercise, paper folding, was interesting in the way that it showed how different people interpret the same instructions. Although it may not be a direct representation of an individual's characteristics, it was still a way to reveal differences between members of a group. After the activity, almost everyone's paper turned out differently, which tells us that every person may perceive something differently when given the same instructions, ESPECIALLY when they lack perspective or confirmation from people around them.

The final exercise, the human know, was meant to build teamwork and give people the opportunity to "lead" in a circumstance that might benefit from a leader. However, after completing the activity, I was surprised to find that no one in my group really took true leadership; rather, each person simply gave input that would be helpful to the group as a whole, and therefore each person contributed equally. Surprisingly, we found that this method was very effective, and we managed to complete the activity in a short amount of time using this method.

Personality Test

1. My two main personality types were ISFP and INFP. I feel that the first personality type, ISFP, was a very accurate description of my personality, although both had several correct statements. I found it interesting and surprising that the test revealed me to be primarily introverted, as I always thought I was in the middle. Furthermore, I was very astonished when I received "feeling" rather than "thinking" on my third trait, as I have always considered myself a fairly logical person

2.  I mainly agree with the initial snapshot. Although there are a few pieces of information that I don't necessarily agree with, I feel that it is for the most part accurate, especially about the deeply-held values. This part is especially true, because I find that if I believe in something, I really believe in it, and rarely relinquish that idea unless direct contradicting evidence comes up to refute me. Furthermore, I usually base many of my decisions around my values, which sometimes leads to conflict with others; however, I feel that those decisions are still the right ones to make. 

3. The personality test is a useful way to help one better understand themselves. This is potentially beneficial in all aspects of like, such as when making important decisions on what projects you want to do (in this course and otherwise) and even what jobs seem interesting and what jobs you would do well in.

4. What surprised me mainly is how many people were placed in the same category or similar categories, as I expected more variety in the personality types of the class. I was also surprised that most people were introverted, as I thought that introverted and extroverted people would be about even.

New Planet Debrief

New Planet Debrief

1. I made my decisions in a purely utilitarian way. I evaluated the usefulness of each of the people, looking mainly at two large factors: ability and age. Ability is the first and most important factor to examine when deciding who goes and who stays. For example, if one had to choose between a drug addict and a doctor to go on the ship, one would almost certainly choose the doctor because he/she has skills that are more valuable to a new society. Similarly, if one had to choose between a 25-year old and a 65-year old, one would most likely choose the 25-year old due to he/she being fertile, where as a 75-year old would not be. However, there is a fine line when choosing in which one cannot pick based purely on age nor on ability. A 65-year old doctor would be more useful than a 25-year old drug addict, even though the addict is younger. One must consider both factors before making a decision, and consider whether it is worth sacrificing one for the other. 

2. My group made decisions by examining each other's choices. For the most part, we agreed on who was needed and who wasn't. However, there was some disagreement. In that case, our main course of action was to debate the merits of the specific person in question using the guidelines set out in answer 1.

3. For the most part, our group got Along pretty well. One of the only big problems my group faced was a simple logistics error. When we were talking about who we should pick in the final copy, we wrote down the number of each person on the list. However, there were a few people for whom we accidentally wrote the age rather than the number. This led to some confusion on who we highlight, but was sorted out after we looked through all of the choices.

4. See 2.

5. Our group had no definite leader. Each of our members had their individual ideas, and we each had equal time to share them. No one told the others what to do; rather, each person was free to share their own ideas whenever they wanted. I felt that this was a major benefit to our group because we could work together without having to worry about issues that arise from having a leader, such as control conflicts.

6. My decisions were made in a purely utilitarian way. I did not consider morality or what would be morally correct, such as saving a pregnant woman. Rather, I looked purely at how valuable a person would be to the group, using the guidelines outlined in question 1. Although each individual has values that have been instilled in them from birth sad through their experiences, these individual values must be put aside for the good of the whole. To ensure the survival of the human race, one cannot consider individual morality as a factor.

Inspiring Video

This is a video that I found inspiring.

I found this video fascinating. This is because it covers a topic that I am very interested in - religion. Furthermore, I love that Bill Nye was willing to get up there and talk about such a controversial topic. I feel that Ken Ham's "Creation Museum," although successful, is actually a bad thing, as it is attempting to convinc children to disbelieve well-documented scientific research in favor of 2000-year old stories from a book. I was very happy to see that science is "fighting back" and spreading the truth of scientific research. Finally, the debate itself was very engaging and interesting in itself, which made it even more interesting.