Individual descriptions
Jonathan Kamke (JK): 
JK seemed distracted this milestone.  AE and I gave him an opportunity to make up for a previous week where he got significant late points, but in this makeup project (reporting on state of research from google scholor) he was late again.  His sketches seemed done at the last moment and frankly I had a hard time figuring out what they were conveying.  He contributed nothing to the milestone paper other than editing abilities and the 10 writeups of the product idea paragraphs.  This last set of meeting minutes also had minimal content and I thought, an unfair description of an argument we were having on why I thought the current line of discussion was off-task and how we should refocus on getting what we had in the agenda done.  In these disagreement cases, the notetaker should try to portray both sides of an argument, even if he is involved.  He did have a good idea about how to organize our existing product paragraphs to be included in the excel table that ranked our ideas, and this saved us some time.  He also contributed well to our initial product idea brainstorming session.  Finally, we found out on Sunday about the due date being different from what we expected.  JK called me to let me know, and I appreciated that.  However, in this "crunch time", he did not do anything extra to help the team, as both AE and I did.

JK is good at thoroughness of editing and he can fairly often have interesting thoughts to share and contribute to the team.  But the manner in which he is so sure in his thinking and the fact that it seems difficult for him to consider alternative viewpoints makes it difficult to listen to him.  However, I sometimes have this problem myself.  He has a fairly good attitude, though at times not so if it was a discussion about how he isn't coming through in particular areas.  I believe that he still does have the tendency to focus overmuch on things that I don’t consider important, but it is possible that he just has a different but still valid viewpoint.  I still feel that a weakness of his is that he procrastinates tasks, and does not consider enough before making a decision.  I believe his attitude overall about the team is that he likes being a part of it, but the procrastination makes it harder for him to contribute from lack of preparation.

Andrew Evenson (AE):
AE did a lot for this milestone.  He was instrumental in consolidating our product ideas and assigning them to the appropriate people for fleshing out and sketching.  He has a good sense of priorities in a meeting environment, but he is also friendly and not a taskmaster.  He organized and wrote much of the milestone paper, other than the conclusion and the writeup/discussion of my evaluations.  He came through at crunch time with at least a rich evaluation of his sketches with an ancillary member of our user community.  I would have preferred an interview in the environment and/or with a core member of the community, but again, he had to work and at least got something good .

He is good at sketching in an distinctive and nontraditional way.  This complented well with my experience-based sketches.  He has a good team attitude and works well.  I have the feeling that he is just as interested in learning and doing a good job rather than a score.  For the most part, he has followed through on what he has said that he wanted to do.  Other than the weakness described in the first individual project report I produced, I can't add anything here.

Travis Krick
Like others in the group, I contributed to the initial brainstorming product session despite having to write down notes on all of them at lightning speed.  At crunch time, I thought hard and executed well (I thought) to make sure that my sketches conveyed the experience of the product ideas, but I tried to leave things open as well.  I also committed myself to getting some good evaluations of the sketches in the mall environment.  Finally, I thought that I contributed at least my share in the final milestone paper, but not as much as AE, certainly.

I’m (I learned this myself while trying) strong at not be afraid to interview in, and I can be outgoing but focused in such situations. I can also orient quickly in a meeting and know which topics we should consider first.  I’m average at brainstorming in that I sometimes become my own devil’s advocate, but when my ideas eventually are said they are usually well thought out.   I have a weakness that I can sometimes be rather abrupt, which in some cases is misunderstood as abrasive.  I will try to become better at this.

Teamwork description
Our teamwork was ok.  It started out well with a great brainstorming and celebration session.  The next meeting with just AE and I went well, as we addressed feedback from you from our first milestone and set aside a solid agenda for the following week.  The next week's meeting did not go as well.  It seemed that JK didn't want to write thorough notes so much of the discussions were uncaptured in detail.  At that point, we had all 30 product ideas and we needed.  We did a fair job in this, but I thought some of the discussion time spent was oriented towards discussions we'd already had.  We did come through to set aside product ideas to sketch and who would do them.

Other than the timeline discrepancy and having to reprioritize and reorient quickly, we had some communication problems in our team.  Some of this was because JK missed a meeting and wasn't up to speed at times.  Some of this was also due to differences in priorities in the team members.  To mitigate this, we will need to take extra care to be to meetings on time and prepared, and to convey that that is of utmost importance to all members of the group.

Overall, I still think that we are all open and work together well, as evident in the initial brainstorming session.  

Reflecting on the milestone as a whole
1.	What were the interesting or challenging parts of the project so far? 
The challenging part of this milestone was eliciting feedback on our sketches.  It also happened to be the interesting part, for me.  We had a commitment to try and find acquantainces in our target population in order to get initial feedback, but this was interrupted by the discrepancy between our internal timeline and the actual timeline.  So, we had to do our best in getting evaluations.  This took one form for AE, and one form for me.  I considered it an interesting opportunity to try to tightrope walk on the line between being overly intrusive with my population and too shy to try new experiences of engaging my population.
2.	What was the most important part of this milestone and what did you learn from working on it?
The most important part of the milestone was diverging product ideas that centered around our understanding of the target population and environment.  I learned some of our ideas (good thing they were the lowest rated of the 10 sketched) tried to enhance or address wants/needs of the population, but they did so in a manner that the population seemed inauthentic.  This was the case for both RoboDog and VisiGoggles.  We also learned that although mall walking can be a very social experience, the type of social experiences we were sketching (in general) did not elicit good feedback.  In these cases, we should try to rethink how to enhance existing social experiences rather than throwing together people who don't know eachother.
3.	How did this milestone reflect things that you have learned in the class readings and class discussions? 
This milestone was very much about divergence and brainstorming ideas first, and then following up with making appropriate choices of methods to get feedback on our sketches.  "Getting In" was helpful in this regard, and so were the papers on working with the elderly.  Since most of the readings were about user context and how to understand relationship dynamics in a user context, this was helpful.  The Buxton paper also helped in orienting us around the concept of discardable sketches about which we can get quick feedback in order to converge.
4.	Have you met any of your course goals? Which ones? Why or why not? 
One course goal I have is to be able to shake off apprehensions I have about interacting with people.  I’ve always been an introvert, but mostly because large social situations are about things that I’m not interested in, not because I don’t enjoy talking with others.  I’ve shown that I can interview effectively without embarrassment, so I’d say that this goal is fairly well accomplished.
Another goals is that in team situations in other classes they have normally have not gone well, and I wanted to change this for this class. This is partially due to my extra commitment to do what I can to help the team and myself in this project, partly due to my good partners, and partly due to the nature of the accountability provided through the strict and process oriented structure of the meetings.  This has gone ok so far, but we did have a few missteps.
5.	For all but the last milestone: What do you need to do differently for the next milestone? 
This time, we will align ourselves with the true deadline.  We also just need to get more interaction and feedback with our target population, so we need to focus this first meeting of milestone 3 and think of novel ways to get this feedback.  We will not try to alienate JK, but rather reaffirm his being a whole member of this team and expecting that he follow through.