What went well?
(The progress I made; what was achieved and done)

I received feedback regarding the first article from my editor this week. Unlike my expectations on how this process would look like, my article required an overhaul to befit its purpose within journalism. Thus, I spent most of the time to receive my editor’s feedback, adjusting the article entirely to cut and add pieces. There were many parts that I overlooked on how the readers would perceive the information, requiring more context on certain parts while other portions remained too ambiguous to be explained in a single article. Surprisingly, this process took more time than it took for me to first write the article.

This unexpected change in my plans led me to push back in searching for a possible interviewee of the second article. Instead, I spent this week to focus on editing this first piece while organizing resources for the nuclear energy journalism guide on the side.

During the stay, I unexpectedly met a scholar and researcher from the United States studying Physics and History of Science. Here, I was able to share a lengthy conversation, including the subject of nuclear energy. Despite her lack of experience in dealing with nuclear energy, I was able to gain some insight on the Physicist’s perspective regarding the discourse. This conversation was not cited nor addressed in any of the articles, but it was a valuable opportunity for me to add in the nuclear energy journalism guide about opportunistic meetings that may contribute to other journalists’ works.

What could have been done differently?
(Things that did not get done and/or could be changed)

The main thing I could have done better would be my mindset in receiving the feedback of the first article. Despite realizing my own limits and weaknesses over the weeks as I continued this project, the feedback that the first article required an overhaul was an unexpected result. As I am a student who have found writing essays relatively easier than other tasks, receiving positive feedback – I struggled to take this feedback in a stride. I struggled to immediately focus on moving on from my issues to fix the article, resulting in delays and repeated edits. If I could have quickly recovered to graciously accept the feedback, I believe I could have brought a much better result within a shorter time period.

What did I learn about myself when working with others?
(Contributions, behaviours and values I exhibited)

I had believed that I do not fear from admitting my mistakes and faults. Although I had difficulties in showing vulnerabilities, I was never afraid to admit what I had done wrong. Such reflection is what allowed me to give constructive feedback and receive them in the past. However, I realized that even when I receive constructive feedback that prompts me to grow, there are issues that I undoubtedly experienced in absorbing them. Despite my own admittance of the faults, I still struggled to act out to amend them. Such experience allowed me to reflect on my past in giving and receiving feedback. Unlike my initial belief that we should all receive feedback and move forward, requiring patience and time to absorb them for growth was another step needing bravery and determination. This understanding allowed me to change my perspective in collaboration.

What did I learn about leadership?
(Leadership attributes and insights I developed)

I learned that leadership requires patience. Speed is considered a necessity in the modern world as change and development continues every day. The time limits always require individuals to continue moving forward even when they do not wish to. In my experience, such pressures are what allowed me to continue the tasks regardless of how I felt as a team member. It allowed efficiency and quality of the work. Yet, as I was given the flexibility of time to take in the feedback before returning the work for a new review, I found myself dissecting the issues I had. It took a longer time for me to fix the problems, but it also allowed me to teach myself what the issues are and why they are considered as “issues” to fix. It did not result in an ‘efficient’ work, yet it allowed me to grow as I learned more about journalism. Such insight allowed me to understand how important the quality of patience is as a leader. Although prioritization of speed may bring in quick results, perhaps, patience will be the quality that will allow people to grow.

What do I want to develop or focus on next?
(What I still need to develop)

In the coming weeks, I will spend time on reaching out to possible interviewees. Although I did not receive feedback on the nuclear energy journalism guide as of yet, I will continue to brainstorm in how I may add more content so I can quickly work on it once I do receive the edits. Unexpected delays are found, but I hope to take this opportunity to develop myself further as my program advisor have decided to flexibly work on this project.