Group Lessons Learned

• Feeling conflicted – because of the division of our project team. Wanting to be able to work actively on both sites and feeling bad that there just wasn’t sufficient time for everyone to work on everything.
• Sense of urgency for Second Chance installation because of defined deadlines (trips) vs. more relaxed approach with RUM since it is local and we could run over there whenever.
• Group split along project lines at installation.
• Flexibility a necessity on so many different levels.
• Misgivings about sustainability – different vibes from site coordinators in terms of computer knowledge and ability to keep computers up and running – felt more confident in Kim Irwin’s abilities than of the volunteers at Second Chance.
• Learned to appreciate what we accomplished and then let it go.
• Training: anything overly formal/technical or too detailed wouldn’t have been beneficial – had expected to do more intensive “training” with Sharon during the third visit, but she was gone.
• At Second Chance, with only 90 days to stay, managing the learning curve has to be a top priority if the conditions of staying (job seeking/school/resume-building) are going to be met
• Our best hope is that people using the lab at Second Chance will be able to use the Internet to job hunt, work on resumes, do schoolwork or research, etc. In terms of really gaining marketable computer skills, this is not a goal of the shelter, and as such is not what we expect clients to learn. Just having exposure to a computer is a step in the right direction.
• Idealism vs. realism – knowing that these computers may not be used in the way we had envisioned, but that they will make a difference even if only a small way
• We all have different levels of competency with computers and we had to accept our abilities and find our niche within the team