hcid2011 - Creativity for open spaces - Dr Sara Jones (HCID)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

hcid2011 - Creativity for open spaces - Dr Sara Jones (HCID)

on

  • 1,444 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,444
Views on SlideShare
1,444
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
4
Downloads
8
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Freemind is a Java-based mind mapping package available for Windows, Mac and Linux.exports to PDF and the obscure scalable vector graphics format as well as the likes of HTML, JPEG and PNG.
  • Historical focus on lone geniusNow more interest in social creativity - eg IDEO:’ We believe in the importance of neighborhoods and communities in fostering innovation’ - builds on Scandinavian tradition of participatory design - also Elizabeth Sanders customers  consumers  users  participants  co-creators - also in line with trends to user-led innovation now employed in development of consumer products, games and software eg IBM and Sun in user-led open source projectsLeads to interest in the design of work practices and spaces etc.Our particular interest is in use of technology to support this.
  • Children love the technology!Lots of production blocking:One boy in group 4 (year 3) appeared to have extreme difficulty in taking turns, and turn-taking in this group was enforced by the teaching assistant (eg ‘No X, let Y have a go!’), sometimes with some difficulty. Strategies for domination included one child holding their finger down to ‘lock out’ other users, as well as simple use of force, pushing each other’s hands out of the way.
  • Video quality acceptableAudio more of a problem‘The audio quality I just couldn’t hear….. When you concentrate on talking to me that’s fine, but when you chat I didn’t know what’s going on’‘I could hear some noises in the background. I wasn’t sure if they were discussing between themselves or if it was a noise.’Communication not perfectAble to get attention when needed, able to interrupt, able to express own ideas, but harder to understand othersSketching on the whiteboard more of a problemDifficulty creating and manipulating objects on the screen, due to problems with both surface and softwareSome lack of awareness of activities of others – especially for remote participants
  • Product design using physical artefacts and lots of sketchingAccording to Schön (1983), as summarised in Johnson and Carruthers, 2006, pp1002:The ‘language of designing’ includes drawing and talking – sketching enables experimentation, and when the designer talks about designing, this allows reflectionA designer designs by utilizing her/his repertoire of examples, images, understandings and actions from existing knowledgeAt a certain point, the designer evaluates her/his ideas by considering desirability of their consequencesAccording to Resnick et al, NSF workshop, 2005Support exploration: easy to try things out, then backtrack; make functionality self-revealing; pleasurable and fun; sketching; trying ‘what if’s’.Low threshold, high ceiling, wide walls: easy for novices; possibility of ‘power use’; support for wide range of outputs.Support many paths and many styles: ‘hard’ and ‘soft’; ‘left brain’ and ‘right brain’.Support collaboration: teams of different talents; foster community.Support open interchange: seamless operation with other tools; data import/export; extensibility.Make it as simple as possible – and maybe even simpler.Choose black boxes carefully: primitive elements available determine outputs.Invent things that you would want to use yourself.For collaborative creativity:From Schön (see week 6): the ‘language of designing’ includes drawing and talkingFrom Resnick et al (see week 6): support collaboration: teams of different talents; foster communityFrom Mamykina et al, 2002: enable groups to devise shared language and understanding, and to share knowledge resourcesFrom Fischer et al, 2005: enable development of Communities of Practice and Communities of Interest eg through externalisations or boundary objectsTechnology must supportNatural interpersonal interactionTransitions between activitiesTransitions between personal and group workTransitions between tabletop and external workUse of physical objectsAccessing shared physical and digital objectsFlexible user arrangements (sitting, standing etc)Simultaneous user interactionsFrom Warr and O’Neill 2005:Reduce or eliminate production blocking by allowing multiple users to act in parallelReduce evaluation apprehension by making ideas anonymousORReduce social loafing (or free riding) by attributing ideas
  • Whiteboard with projection used mainly for viewing: search for inspiration, individual contributions to group work, shared resources, records of previous work etc – this year’s students used Google wave and Yahoo groups to continue work between sessions.Whiteboard with projection and recording is for doing: for design discussions that can usefully be recorded eg physical annotation of digital resources, work with 3d objects, demonstrating potential interactions. Videos can be podcasted and linked into moodle wikis. (Now have bigger tables to facilitate round table discussions.)Whiteboard used for additional note-keeping, brainstorming
  • Different space - tablesdifferent capabilities - no videoDifferent training
  • Spaces were:All physicalMainly digital with some physicalMainly physicalMore specific suggestions on use of stations to support techniquesLooking for more case studies

hcid2011 - Creativity for open spaces - Dr Sara Jones (HCID) hcid2011 - Creativity for open spaces - Dr Sara Jones (HCID) Presentation Transcript

  • Information Spaces for Creative Design
    HCID Open Day
    April 19th, 2011
    Sara Jones
    Centre for HCI Design and
    Centre for Creativity in Professional Practice
    City University London
    saraj@soi.city.ac.uk
    http://hcid.soi.city.ac.uk/people/Sarajones.html
  • Team photos
    Neil Maiden
    Kristine Karlsen
    Kos Zachos
    Helena Sustar
    Meirion Williams
  • Outline
    Background
    Creativity research at City
    Techniques
    Creativity workshops
    Technologies
    Software tools
    Interactive surfaces and digitally augmented spaces
  • Context
    Interactive system
    requirements and design
  • Creativity research at City
  • Creativity research at City (contd)
    5 year RCUK research fellowship: Creativity and the development of interactive systems
    2 year JISC-funded project: Information Spaces for Creative Conversations
    Centre for Creativity in Professional Practice
    Masters in Innovation, Creativity and Leadership
  • Techniques used in creativity workshops
    Constraint removal
    Challenging boundaries
    Creativity triggers
    Analogical reasoning
    Solution presentation
    Storyboarding
    Divergent
    Convergent
  • Structuring a creativity workshop
  • Structuring a creativity workshop (contd)
  • Creativity workshop process and outputs
  • Creativity triggers
  • Creativity triggers
  • Constraint removal
  • The challenge in developing creativity support tools
    ‘preserve appropriate elements of existing knowledge work [creative practice] while shaping new technologies and then integrating them into the workplace’
    Shneiderman, 2000
  • Schön’s view of activities to support
    According to Schön (1983) :
    • The ‘language of designing’ includes sketching and talking – sketching enables experimentation, and when the designer talks about designing, this allows reflection
    • A designer designs by utilizing her/his repertoire of examples, images, understandings and actions from existing knowledge
    • At a certain point, the designer evaluates her/his ideas by considering desirability of their consequences
  • Design principles for support tools
    According to Resnick et al, NSF workshop, 2005:
    • Choose black boxes carefully: primitive elements available determine outputs
    • Support exploration: easy to try things out, then backtrack; make functionality self-revealing; pleasurable and fun; sketching; trying ‘what if’s’.
    • Support many paths and many styles: ‘hard’ and ‘soft’; ‘left brain’ and ‘right brain’.
    • Support collaboration: teams of different talents; foster community
    • Support open interchange: seamless operation with other tools; data import/export; extensibility.
  • Some useful tools are already out there
    Google wonder wheel
    • allows you to follow
    associations of interest
  • Mind mapping
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/freemind/
  • Sticky notes
    http://www.labnol.org/software/create-affinity-diagrams-with-sticky-sorter/5465/
  • Compendium
    Compendium is ‘a knowledge map software tool for visual thinking’
    We used it in a constraint removal exercise to map out constraints, ideas and their pros and cons
    http://compendium.open.ac.uk/openlearn/screencasts.html
  • Combinformation
    For searchingfor inspiration,
    organising ideas and
    exploring combinations of
    ideas
    http://ecologylab.cse.tamu.edu/combinFormation/
  • Antique
    Analysts reason with analogical services retrieved by AnTiQue to invent previously unspecified requirements
    These requirements are ranked as more creative by domain experts
    (Zachos et al 2008)
  • Cris
    • Analysts do a scenario walkthrough
    with Combinformation providing creative stimuli
    • Requirements generated are judged as more creative
    (Karlsen et al, 2009)
  • Support for collaborative creativity
    Historical focus on lone genius being replaced by interest in social creativity, ‘co-creation’.
    We believe in the importance
    of neighborhoods and
    communities in fostering
    innovation
    IDEO (Kelley and Litman, 2001)
  • Additional design principles for collaborative support tools
    From Mamykina et al, 2002: enable groups to devise shared language and understanding, and to share knowledge resources
    From Fischer et al, 2005: enable development of Communities of Practice and Communities of Interest eg through externalisations or boundary objects
    From Warr and O’Neill 2005:
    Reduce or eliminate production blocking by allowing multiple users to act in parallel
    Reduce evaluation apprehension by making ideas anonymous
    OR
    Reduce social loafing (or free riding) by attributing ideas
  • Our first exploratory study
    With children doing a design task (designing a classroom layout) on a multitouch table
    Lots of production blocking!
    Also evaluation apprehension
    Social loafing not such a problem
    Adults may be different?!
  • Another exploratory study
    With adults doing a design task (sketching the user interface for a mobile calendar/clock application)
    2 – 3 team members working together on a multitouch table, and 1 in a remote location using a tablet PC
    Team connected using Adobe Connect and Skype
  • Mezatop
    Purpose-built interactive surface is supporting
    wider range of studies
  • Further exploration of digitally augmented spaces
    Inspired by product design involving physical
    artefacts and dynamic sketching
  • Creative Design Station capabilities
    Whiteboard
    Whiteboard with projection
    Whiteboard with projection and recording
  • Creative Design Stations in action – year 1
  • Creative Design Station use – year 1
    Viewing – sharing previously identified or created artefacts
    Planning, recording
    Doing – co-designing or building
  • Creative Design Stations in action – year 2
  • Creative Design Station use – year 2
    Joint work on creativity techniques eg brainstorming, challenging boundaries, creativity triggers, storyboarding.
    Shared access to reference materials from online spaces, inspirations from internet searches.
    Joint creation of written materials in online spaces.
    Shared access to physical artefacts.
    Private and joint creation of outputs eg storyboards.
  • Ongoing work and future plans
    Further evaluation of techniques and technologies
    - looking for more case studies!
    FP7 MIRROR project:
    supporting learning at work through creative problem solving
    combination of mobile apps and on-line discussion fora
    Discussion after this!
  • Online forum for further discussion
  • Please get in touch!
    Sara Jones
    Centre for HCI Design and
    Centre for Creativity in Professional Practice
    City University London
    saraj@soi.city.ac.uk
    http://hcid.soi.city.ac.uk/people/Sarajones.html
    @svjaok
    Online discussion at:
    http://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=7274f
    I’ll tweet the link!
  • References and Related Reading
    Shneiderman, B., 2000, ‘Creating Creativity: User Interfaces for Supporting Innovation’, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, vol 7, no 1, pp114-138
    Johnson, H and Carruthers, L, 2006, ‘Supporting Creative and Reflective Processes’, Int. J. Human-Computer Studies, vol 64, pp998-1030
    Shneiderman, B, Fischer, G, Czerwinski, M, Myers, B and Resnick, M, 2005, ‘Creativity Support Tools: A workshop sponsored by the National Science Foundation’
    Schon, D, 1983, The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action’, Basic Books, New York
  • References and Related Reading
    Hewett, T T, 2005, ‘Informing the design of computer-based environments to support creativity’, Int J Human-Computer Studies 63, pp383-409
    Zachos, K. Maiden, N., ‘Inventing Requirements from Software: An Empirical Investigation with Web Services’, in Proceedings 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE08, 2008
    Karlsen, I.K, Maiden, M., Kerne, A., ‘Inventing Requirements with Creativity Support Tools’, in Proceedings REFSQ09, LNCS 5512/2009, Springer, 2009
    Centre for HCI Design
  • References and Related Reading
    Streitz, N et al, 1999, ‘i-Land: An interactive Landscape for Creativity and Innovation’, CHI’99
    Arias et al, 2000, ‘Transcending the Individual Human Mind—Creating Shared Understanding through Collaborative Design’, ACM ToCHI, 7(1), 84-113
    Sugimoto et al, 2004, ‘Caretta: A System for Supporting Face-to-Face Collaboration by Integrating Personal and Shared Spaces’, CHI’04
    Centre for HCI Design
  • References and Related Reading
    Rogers et al, 2006, ‘Extending Tabletops to Support Flexible Collaborative Interactions’, IEEE Tabletop
    Hilliges et al, 2007, ‘Designing for Collaborative Creative Problem Solving’, Creativity and Cognition 07
    Buisine et al, 2007, ‘Computer-Supported Creativity: Evaluation of a Tabletop Mind-Map Application’, LNCS 4562/2007
    Mamykina et al, 2002, ‘Collaborative Creativity’, CACM 45(10)
    Fischer et al, 2005, ‘Beyond Binay Choices: Integrating Individual and Social Creativity’, IJHCS 63, 482-512
    Warr, A and O’Neill, E, 2005, ‘Understanding Design as a Social Creative Process’, Creativity and Cognition 05
    Centre for HCI Design
  • References and Related Reading
    Fischer, G, 2004, ‘Social Creativity: Turning Barriers into Opportunities for Collaborative Design’, Proc 8th Conference on Participatory Design
    Gumm, D, et al, 2006, ‘Distributed Participatory Design – A Case Study’ Proc Nordichi workshop on DPD
    Farooq et al, 2005, ‘Supporting Creativity in Distributed Svientific Communities’ Conference on Supporting Group Work
    Fischer, G, 2005, ‘Distances and Diversity: Sources for Social Creativity’, Proceedings of the 5th conference on Creativity & Cognition
    Centre for HCI Design