Supporting Transitions With Creative Software Engineering

1,324 views
1,269 views

Published on

Clare Hooper

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,324
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
498
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Supporting Transitions With Creative Software Engineering

  1. 1. SUPPORTING TRANSITIONS WITH CREATIVE SOFTWARE ENGINEERING Clare Hooper University of Southampton & IBM UK www.twitter.com/ClareJHooper
  2. 2. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? Accessibility of things that make a difference (the web, mobile phones, social technology) Disabilities Poverty Cultural aspects Greater richness of experience What happens if we have Google maps in the woodland? Social networking at the swimming pool? Picnics on a website?
  3. 3. TEASING APART, PIECING TOGETHER TAPT: for transition of experience Motivation: make available emotional aspects of social sites Tease Apart: understand an experience. Analyse it on various levels (including design and experiential aspects) Piece Together: a creative tool to generate ideas. Brainstorm, build scenarios, check
  4. 4. THE STUDY Full details here: Comparative http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18778/ evaluation (3 approaches, 3 design tasks) 43 software engineers working in small groups
  5. 5. METHODS TAPT Scenarios/personas: representative of current practice No method: neutral baseline
  6. 6. TASKS: TRANSITIONS FROM… Wikis to a museum Microblogging to a care home for the elderly Picnicking to the web
  7. 7. RESULTS: DESIGNS Wiki-inspired museum wings (interactive walls, touchscreens, whiteboards) Microblog systems (TV, web, tablets, voice, noticeboard) Picnic websites (food delivery, shops, social spaces)
  8. 8. RESULTS: PARTICIPANT RESPONSES Positive Negative Rating (/5) TAPT Structure; Rigidity 3.77 analysis; abstraction Scenarios User-focus Rigidity 3.79 No Method Freedom; Lack of 4.15 lack of support for structure; creativity ease of use
  9. 9. DISCUSSION (1) No Method highly-rated dislike of structure? The other methods had different strengths (analysis, user-focus) Tension between freedom and structure
  10. 10. DISCUSSION (2) Participants’ value-judgements likely affected by methods used Ongoing work: blind expert review of artefacts for objective insight (Also: case studies into TAPT’s applicability in various domains… e-learning, pervasive computing, social technologies)
  11. 11. CONCLUSION Inevitably, all methods support creativity in different ways Strengths and weaknesses of each are still being revealed They might fit together well Abstracting experiences with TAPT frees us to be creative TAPT is a valuable tool for re-providing physical or digital experiences via novel, accessible mechanisms
  12. 12. THANK YOU Questions? clare@ecs.soton.ac.uk www.twitter.com/ClareJHooper

×