SCAFFOLDING INTERACTION DESIGN FOR YOUNG DESIGNERS WAYS OF BRIDGING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE TEAM IN COLLABORATIVE DESIGN PREM PIRAPALA CHANDRAN (firstname.lastname@example.org) Thesis Project (August 2011) INTERACTION DESIGN MASTER AT K3 MALMÖ UNIVERSITY, SWEDEN
PREM PIRAPALA CHANDRAN (email@example.com) Thesis Project (August 23rd 2011) Supervisor: METTE AGGER ERIKSEN Examiner: Susan Kozel INTERACTION DESIGN MASTER AT K3 MALMÖ UNIVERSITY, SWEDEN
Acknowledgements I am indebted to the following people who have made this work possible. My supervisor Mette Agger Eriksen, for her invaluable expert advice over our emails and conversations on Skype. My classmates from Masters in Interaction Design for making my time in Malmo warm enough to last me through the cold winters. The teachers of K3 that I have come to know. Thank you for sharing your experiences and knowledge with us. The team of budding interaction designers (Ian Low, Jonathan Tok, Abner Wong & Benjamin Wong) whom I had the pleasure of teaching to and learning from. This project would not have been possible without their willingness to participate and contribute ideas. The hurdles I faced in getting them to work as a team motivated me to be more imaginative with my experiments. To my brother Ravi, for standing by me to pick me up whenever I fall. Thank you for everything.
Contents Acknowledgements Preface Abstract Chapter 1 Early Ambitions Pg 1 1.1 Project Motivation 1.2 Related Work 1.3 Problem Formulation Chapter 2 Background of Design Teaching Pg 8 2.1 What is Design? 2.2 What is Design and Technology? (as a subject taught in Singapore Schools) 2.3 What is Interaction Design? 2.4 Learning perspectives for Teaching Interaction Design 2.5 The Challenges in Teaching Interaction Design Chapter 3 Workshops with Students Pg 16 3.1 Field studies with interaction designers 3.2 Forming an Interaction Design Team 3.3 Background of Workshop Teaching approach 3.4 Design Process and Time Frame of Project 3.5 Design Theories taught to and applied by students 3.6 Workshop 1 & 2- Setting the Context for Design (Using W5H) with Brainstorming 3.7 Workshop 3- Getting Feedback from ‘outsiders’ 3.8 Workshop 4- Empathising using Social Media (Facebook) as a platform 3.9 Workshop 5- Body-storming using Navigation Devices 3.10 Workshop 6- Prototyping-“Technical Skills for Interaction Designers” 3.11 Workshop 7- Experience Prototyping and User Testing 3.12 Problems and Hurdles Faced during Workshops Chapter 4 Reflections from Workshops Pg 45 4.1 Teaching Style 4.2 Challenges
Chapter 5 Conclusions Pg 47 5.1 Revisiting the problem formulation 5.2 Discussion about Teacher’s role in scaffolding interaction design Chapter 6 Future work Pg 55 References Appendix Pg 58 1- Initial Teaching Plan for Interaction Design Workshops Teaching aids for Interaction Design created by (teacher-facilitator) 2- Persona Worksheet 4- Sym Tools (Bubble Stickers for Sympathising with user/persona) 5- Prototyping Exercise Worksheet Prototypes Created by students 6 – QR codes placed on Placemarkers 7 – Iterative stages of map design 8 – Final Design of Interactive map (with QR codes) created by students
Preface How does an interaction designer pass on their skills in a knowledgeable way to students who are unfamiliar with interaction design so they too can perform as interaction designers? In this thesis, I have explored this question within the set of staging an interaction design project for students to come together and collaborate on as a team. This thesis contends that the work of a teacher of interaction design also entails work as an interaction designer in finding novel ways of engaging students in meaningful design. Intervention from the teacher is necessary when students are not creating their own design materials to work with. For such situations, it is necessary to scaffold the conceptual tools and techniques peculiar to interaction design with tangible aids or ‘props’ as prototypes to find effective ways to elicit and trigger design thinking from the students. This is to initiate their design process so that students can construct their own design space with design constraints. The teacher will find himself moving from roles of a facilitator to an interaction designer as he grapples with the design context the students are designing for and understands his students and their patterns of engaging in design dialogue. Along the way, the teacher tests and fine‐tunes his tangible tools. He draws on his experience to create resources appropriate to the design context, exposing the student team to relevant examples to motivate them in exploring the design space with greater depth and wider scope so that the students can critique their own ideas and make design decisions as a team. Ultimately the teacher learns that the facilitation of interaction skills needs to be crafted concurrently with the design context for there to be progress made by the students. When the interaction design methods are not being applied by the students, the teacher has to experiment with other approaches that will inspire the students to start designing with sympathy for their user. Ideally the teacher should look to ways of placing the students in the shoes of the users they are designing for to evoke a sense of empathy for the needs of the user their design could aim to satisfy.
Abstract How can interaction design be staged for a collaborative studio practice for young designers? This thesis on group design methodologies peculiar to the field of interaction design seeks to answer this questions by investigating how a team of young beginning designers respond to methods and techniques of interaction design (IxD) in the context of designing for a real problem. In my role as a teacher facilitator, I investigate approaches to bridge their communication gaps and create dialogue between team members in relation to the design context for them to design purposefully. Based on the observations of the workshops, I find that while an interaction design curriculum could be planned as a discrete series of design methods and techniques to be imparted to beginning designers, these design methodologies are more effectively staged by framing emphatic experiences for these designers around the context of the actual design problem. Student motivation and interest around the design context is enhanced when scaffold using social media and tangible aids to ground imagination. Gaps in team dynamics and communication are bridged when such tangible aids are left open to co-construction for a shared manifestation in their final forms. ‘Empathy for the user’ is a recurring skill for interaction designers to externalize in their design process to design purposefully. In terms of knowledge contribution, this project shows the potential of methodologies in Interaction Design to be taught to beginning young designers though tools to elicit design dialogue in engaging styles to foster collaborative meaningful design.
1 Chapter 1 Early Ambitions “The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” Alvin Toffler It is always useful for the reader to understand the motivations and context for a thesis project. In this chapter I explain my interest in pursuing this project of imparting Interaction Design skills to beginning young designers for the reader to understand why I feel there is a cause for teaching interaction design for the greater good of design education in preparing designers for making a difference to the world for the better. I come from a product design teaching background having taught students (12-16 years old). My motivation is to engage these students in collaborative team work where they were thinking and acting as interaction designers. I wanted to see how they respond to designing for a real problem and cooperate with each other to realise the design they had conceptualised using interaction design techniques. The learning for me is to understand how interaction design skills can be meaningfully imparted to these students and how collaborative team dynamics can be encouraged. I have entitled my thesis as such because of the nature of teaching design to students without design background. “Scaffolding” is a teaching technique to support and motivate learning when concepts and skills are being first introduced to the students. In my product design teaching such supports may come in tangible forms such as templates and guides or something conceptual such as exemplars or guided tasks that can assist the student in picking up the design skills. For teaching interaction design, I am looking at how I can support the learning of skills by the students in a way that motivates them to make design decisions independently and collaboratively as a team. 1.1 Project Motivation My motivation for embarking on this project is two-fold. Firstly, it was my experience with teaching a subject known as “Design and Technology” in Singapore. During student project- work for this subject, my observations of the students were that they tend to work on their own and their design focused on physical form and function. The nature of the subject content and examination modes demanded their exposure to workshop technical processes using tools and equipment which tested their artisan skills at applying the technologies of structures, mechanisms or electronics to fabricate a 3D artifact that has tangible functional product value. The skills focus on sketching and modifying physical form to adapt its façade to fit it to a desired use. When stepping back to look at the design process, in many ways I feel that the
2 focus of the design process anchors solely on the outcome of the physical nature of the product serving its functionality. The image shows an example of my student’s work in designing an artifact that can pick up balls fast from the practice range. He uses the inspiration he gets from the rolling action of a fabric cutter, adapting that movement to the product form he has in mind. Page from a student’s portfolio Secondly, I am intrigued by the nature of the design process in Interaction Design. There is a focuse on the use qualities where desirable features in the interaction with a digital product or service are conceptualized, inspired to enable humans to experience reality differently. The experience is not something conformed to a static 3D form as in the product in Design and Technology, but has a wider context in its effects on human behavior such as in service design and critical design. It also anticipates how the products and services will mediate human relationships and affect human understanding. To contrast the outcomes between design processes that take place between Design & Technology and Interaction Design, I compare a product students of mine have made in Design & Technology and a project I had worked on the Masters in Interaction Design course at Malmö University.
3 Travelling Voices‐ Sound Installation at Malmo Centralen A USB powered Lamp made by A sound installation called my 14 year old students in “Travelling Voices” in response response to a design brief of a to the design brief of creating a creating a design for a night lamp. sonic experience for commuters at the local train station to. This The student learnt project made us brainstorm as a • Aesthetics-Shape sketching team, using techniques of techniques using paper and pencil • body storming, • cardboard modeling • sound ethnography • using handtools on plastics to • user testing with our prototype craft their project idea There is no fair way to compare design project outcomes which are using different modes of design thinking and design processes. However it can be said that the sound installation project has a degree of complexity and consequence in its design that provokes people who interact with it in a richer and more dynamic way than the USB lamp. It leaves an impact on the user as an ‘experience’ which is non-functional in the traditional utilitarian way, In “Travelling voices”, the memory of sounds from the city is recollected in a unusual setting of a toy train that engages the users in a thought-provoking way. It creates a fresh experience of background city sounds that would normally be ignored. The project stands out from the desk tidy because of the design techniques that were explored to arrive at the final form. We worked as a team where we brainstormed for ideas of the experience. We debated about the qualities for the desired experience. We bodystormed using props in the classroom. We did sound ethnographic studies at the different locations to pick out the sound qualities peculiar to the location that reminded people what was distinct about the location. We prototyped the experience using the sound recordings we made and tested the experience with users to fine- tune the physical nature of the experience before the fabrication of the final installation. Above all, my learning was how we pooled our different talents and skills into the project leading to its completion and success. In the design process, conflicts arose during our
4 debates of the desired qualities of the user experience, but these were resolved by using techniques of interaction design. This made me ponder about how a team can work collaboratively and productively when designing for interaction. We started with some wild ideas, but gradually these were filtered to something realistic determined by our individual levels of expertise, what we can do and cannot do with our own competencies and how we merge to each other’s conception to reach a consensus in the final design. In the following section, I will describe the related work in the field and how it has influenced the framing of the final questions for the problem formulation. Chapter 2 will be an understanding of design teaching and compare the design processes within D&T and Interaction Design. Chapter 3 will a round-up of all the design methods used throughout the project; both those used by myself as a teacher-facilitator and those by my students in their own design process and will give a detailed account of what transpired in the workshops. Chapter 4 will be a survey of the reflections from these workshops from a holistic perspective. Chapter 5 will be a conclusion where I return back to frame my findings in relation to the questions I posed in the problem formulation. In Chapter 6, I suggest future work for the project and how interaction design could be facilitated in school curriculums.
5 1.2 Related Work Before embarking on this project, I conducted online research to find out whether Interaction Design skills were taught to children or teenagers in other programmes around the world. This led me to Project Interaction (http://urbanomnibus.net/2010/09/project-interaction/). This project is an after school program that teaches design skills to high school students in New York to help change their communities. This website was helpful in providing a structure of how to plan my curriculum program for my students. An important observation from this curriculum is how the lessons were crafted around a context familiar to the students in their immediate environment to motivate them to make a difference. This was an important idea to me to give my own students a real design context to work with issues that matter to them where they could test their ideas with potential users to get feedback. Also, the issue of the technologies that the students could work with was something that worried me. I wanted my students’ imaginations not to be restricted by technology. They were not at a cognitive stage to do physical prototyping with microcontrollers such Arduino. Working with mobile technology and web applications was something more achievable and realistic within their skill level. I didn’t want my project to be a simple rehash of applying the formula of the curriculum from Project Interaction to my own students. The context was different. As a knowledge contribution, I was interested in uncovering what were the hurdles or gaps that surface in team dynamics when designing for interaction and how such obstacles could be overcome within my role as a teacher- facilitator. I also researched into existing frameworks of teaching interaction design as a guide,which I will cover in more detail in Chapter 2 1.3 Problem Formulation This project was a self motivated inquiry into understanding how methods and techniques peculiar to interaction design can be adapted by a team of young students (in this project, four 15-year old boys). The motivation stems from my experience in design teaching where most of the time the students are working individually making design decisions justifying their rationale to only themselves. My concern is that current design pedagogy practices has to evolve to challenge these students to collaborate in teamwork addressing real life problems where design can make an improvement to people’s lives. In a section on the future roles of designers, Lawson sees designers as professionally qualified specialists who “try to involve the users of designs in the process” by identifying “ the crucial aspects of the problem, making them explicit, and suggesting alternative courses for action by the nondesigner participants” (Lawson 2006, p.30). In his book, ’Design for the real world’, Papanek talks about situating students as teams grappling with real problems. By working collaboratively, they are able to better frame a problem based on their personal opinions to synergise a design outcome that could fit user needs better than simply designing individually. However, collaborative team design presents itself as an entirely different animal with its own fangs that may need muzzling and a leash to control the team dynamics in a productive way. For this project I see myself as the
6 project owner controlling the leash and trying to tame and understand the nature of my ‘pet’, which is a team of young teenagers aspiring to be designers. For my problem formulation, I conceived it as 2 stages for my workshops with the team of student volunteers. Stage 1 How can interaction design methods be effectively staged for young students to understand? This question comes from my experience in teaching design. Comparing the two subjects (design & technology with interaction design), the immediate difference is that the methods in interaction design focus on human-centric approaches to investigate and aid the design process. There is the idea of using tools and techniques to engage and pose in a dialogue with human stakeholder(s) in the early stages of the design process to reach a convergence in a design with overlapping ideas from both parties. I have captured these notions visually in the comic graphic below using Charlie Brown and Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes as character profiles to show the contrast in personalities and attitudes. Interaction Design as a Dialogue between Designer and Client/Stakeholder In D&T however, this human centric approach is minimal. Its methods are steeped more in designer oriented ways where the designer operates within their own bubble, making decisions mostly independently and individually (evidence of their work is provided in Chapter 2). Hence for this project, my aim was for my students to work on an interaction design project as a team collaborating to address the same design situation by applying methods from Interaction Design.
7 Stage 2 How can interaction design be facilitated for a group of individuals to function as a team? Sustaining young teens’ interest in an interaction design project challenges the teacher-facilitator to experiment with different modes of teaching to appeal to the students’ different styles of learning. By working with a small team; at a macro-level, this project allowed me to engage in interaction design practice of posing incomplete prototypes of teaching aids to the students for me to understand the patterns in which these students learn and adapt these teaching aids to communicate with each other. In the diagram below, I attempt to capture the role of these aids as pieces in a jigsaw that bridge communication gaps between the members in a group for them to function as a team. Interaction Design as a studio practice with dialogue between team members scaffold with aids to bridge communication gaps
8 CHAPTER 2 Background of Design Learning and Teaching In this chapter I explore design in general and the two types of design I am familiar with (Design &Technology and Interaction Design). I explain within these two designs, the salient features in thethinking processes that are undergone by student designers and provide a background of thepedagogies to show how the design motivations from these two approaches of design yield differentoutcomes. A background literature related to interaction design teaching and learning is covered tojustify the approach I took to impart interaction design skills to my students. I conclude by explainingthe design process I adopted for this project.2.1 What is Design? Before comparing D&T with Interaction Design, it would be prudent to come to an understanding ofwhat design is to see how it is approached differently from the ‘design & technology’ and interactiondesign perspectives.Most definitions of design share three recurring themesi) it is understood to be a process,ii) it is goal oriented andiii) it is to set in a motion a ‘course of events that are aimed at setting existing situations into preferredones’. (Simon,1996: 111).The last theme implies a sense of dissatisfaction with current situation which motivates a designer toresolve it. The design process is triggered by an identification of a design problem which are termedas ‘wicked problem’ (Buchanan, 1992) where the indeterminate nature of its constraints leads to anexploration of the design space as a range of possibilities (elaboration) leading to a reduction of ideasthrough decision making (Buxton, 2007). This process is captured diagrammatically below (Laseau,1980). Design process moving from Elaboration to Reduction
9 2.2 What is Design and Technology? (as a subject taught in Singapore Schools) Design & Technology (D&T) is a subject I teach to the 13 to 17 year old students in the school inSingapore where I work as a full-time teacher. It is a subject that is an essential part of the schoolcurriculum at lower secondary(12-14 year olds) and a subject the students can opt to do at their uppersecondary level (15-17 year olds) . This subject introduces to them methods and techniques indesigning for physical form and function where they realize a 3-Dimensional artifact which theyfabricate in a design workshop by using physical tools and equipment. Students learn conceptsrelating to mechanisms, structures and electronics and apply them in their product designs. Below arethree photos showing products designed and fabricated by students in a graduating class. Sliding Book case with Electronic Alarm Spring activated magnetic catch Collection Box Cutlery DispenserThe methodologies in the design process focus on thinking skills and graphic skills which are recordedin a paper based portfolio as a log of the thought processes in realizing the artefact. The focus of thesubject is applying fine craftsmanship skills starting from design forms conceptualised on paper, formtesting with 3D cardboard modeling to fabrication using tools and equipment in the technical workshop.As a teacher, my role in the subject is to craft lessons that engage students to think like designers withbrainstorming techniques for a design theme and advising on appropriate research methods anddecision making, Finally there is the technical precision required in realizing their chosen ideas withworking drawings and workshop skills to fabricate the final design and evaluate the effectiveness of it. Testing function Conceptualising form by cardboard modeling Workmanship skills with by drawing hand held tools and equipment
10 Asking Questions to Analyse Identification of Problem Understanding with freehand sketches, notes, pictures Clarifying, organizing, focusing Design Specifications Precise written statements Compare, contrast, interpreting Research Fabrication Recording Information & Data using Sketches , notes, diagrams Ideas Sketching Ideas using a variety of techniques Decision Making, Clarification, Predicting Evaluation of Ideas Notes and Sketches Development of Chosen Idea Show how product is to be made using sketches and exploded views Organisation, goal‐ Working Drawings setting and monitoring Orthographic Drawings , sections and presentation drawings Planning Procedure for Realisation Charts and diagrams to show material requirments and stages of production Looking for Cause and Effect, Testing and Evalutation Record testing and evalutation using sketches , photo graphs nad notes Design Process Graphic Skills (and related Thinking Skills in though bubbles) (Adapted from Renwick in Wong et al, 2004,10) The thinking skills and graphic/sketching skills at different stages in a design and technology project arehighlighted in the table above. In summary, design and technology shows the following qualities as adesign discipline • Students work independently on their idea, consulting with the teacher • Design process poses the design situation from the start and product form by looking at existing forms and how to modify or adapt them to new forms to serve the design specifications. • Students work with resistant materials of wood, plastics and metal. • Sketching ideas on paper and representing forms with cardboard modeling. • Workmanship skills using craftsman tools and equipment
11 2.3 What is Interaction Design? Interaction design as a design discipline has been described by its proponents in different ways.“…..shaping digital products and services focusing on the qualities of their use” (Lowgren,2007)“….the design of acts that defines the intended use of a product“ (Hallnäs & Redström,J,2008)“....design for behavioural change” (Kolko,2009)The different views stem from three different schools of thought of Interaction Design, the technologycentred view, the behaviourist view and the social interaction view (Shaffer, 2011). Lowgrenemphasizes interaction design to distinguish itself from other design disciplines by its focus ondigitality and aesthetics with the “the growth of goal understanding throughout the process instead offreezing it in an early specification” (Lowgren, 2007).The underlying essence in Interaction Design tome appears to meet a need by thinking about it holistically, and applying techniques and methodspeculiar to interaction design to investigate how best to meet this need. The process is marked instages by ”identifying needs and collecting requirements to develop alternative designs to meet theserequirements, to build interactive versions of the design solutions so they can be communicated andjudged” (Lantz et al, 2005). These stages are non-sequential and designers will find themselvesmoving in between them in reframing the problem as they search to find an optimum solution.Based on all these descriptors, I chose to explore teaching interaction design with the aim of thedesign process to be mediated with methodologies peculiar to interaction design, and the outcome todisplay aspects of digitality which had added dimensions of spatiality and temporality for the studentsto design for (Kotzé & Purgathofer, 2005). By this I mean design considerations for issues of spaceinhabited by the users (both real and cyberworld) and the time taken for interaction to occur.2.4 Learning Perspectives for Teaching Interaction Design There is considerable vast literature with regards to teaching and learning approaches for InteractionDesign but most tend to frame it in relevance to HCI (Human-Computer Interaction). Based on theliterature survey, I narrowed it to three different opinions of the teaching of interaction design thatconcerns itself with the holistic view of Interaction Design as a design discipline that concerns digitalproducts and services and their qualities of use. (Lowgren, 2007)Opinion 1Sas (2006) suggests four approaches in learning relevant to the teaching of interaction design. • Apprenticeship and teaching by paradigmatic examples Apprenticeship takes place as a dialogue between the teacher and the students. The teacher performs a think aloud of tacit knowledge and demonstrating using examples through which the mental model about the task and the application supporting the task becomes explicit to the students.
12 • Constructivism Students construct their own understanding through experiencing things and reflecting on their experience. Meaning is not transmitted by the teacher but created by the student through their own activities.• Situated Learning and Communities of Practise Situated learning considers that in order for learning to be successfully acquired, knowledge needs to be presented in an authentic setting which facilitates social interaction.• Experential Learning The teacher’s role is to create the learning environment in which students can experience, reflect on experience in order to understand it and experiment with this understanding. Opinion 2Agger Eriksen (2009) proposes a micro-material perspective for specific co-design situations, which issuitable for framing a real problem tackled by several designers working collaboratively with oneanother and/or a client. The challenge for the teacher-facilitator then is to stage these materials in away that allows framing by the team of students that leads to a meaningful collaboration. Staging thedesign situation from a framing of focus of why (aim) and what (focus) to explore collaboratively, itextends to the format of exploring design materials by turn taking or parallel explorations. Thesematerials can come as basic forms or predesigned specific to the field studies or project.
13 Opinion 2Fallman proposes a research model where the “combination of design practice, design studies anddesign exploration is what distinguishes interaction design from other disciplines with related interests”(Fallman, 2008). I have chosen to include the model albeit it being a research model because forinteraction design to take place, there has to be an aspect of research done by both the teacher and thestudents; for the teacher to facilitate the skills to the student, and the students to have grounding in theirdesign process of where their focus lies at any point in time. Design work and research is interwovenand accordingly design work becomes inseparable from research (Koskinen et al,2008). Here I havetaken Fallman’s research model and added verbs in red to explain how each perspective manifestsitself. Adapted from ”The Interaction Design Research Triangle of Design Practice, Design Studies, and Design Exploration” (D. Fallman,2008) As can be seen, all approaches have some semblances to each other. Reflection is common featureto all the approaches discussed above, and can be seen as reflection in action (thinking while acting)or reflection on action (thinking after acting) (Schön,1983). Reflection in action has three maindistinctive features: involves learning by doing, coaching and a continuous dialogue between coachand student.For this project, I approached it by merging traits from the different approaches to create triggerswhich serve as starting points to initiate the design process for both the students and myself.What is lacking in the research found is an application of these learning frameworks to the domain ofgroup dynamics within Interaction Design teams. For this a more comprehensive source of literaturecan be found in the “What Designers Know” and “How Designers Think” (both by Lawson, Bryan). His
14 views are expressed from an architectural design perspective, and as interaction designers can beclosely afflitiated with architects,(Lowgren, 2007), the opinions in these books were important forframing my observations of my student design team.2.5 The Challenges in Teaching Interaction Design Interaction Design poses a challenge in being taught because of the very nature of it being a processof creativity, a faculty of the human mind still yet to be fully understood. The most challenging aspectsof the discipline to facilitate are the problem specification, feedback and assessment (Sas, 2006).Within the domain of the problem specification, educators and students have contrasting stakes in thelearning process. While students prefer more structured problem definitions, educators prefer toprovide just enough details to allow scope for exploring the design space to challenge the students.This creates a situation of tension and resolve between the students and teachers as they engage indialogue of problem setting and solution finding in reframing and restructuring the problem. Feedbackis necessary to progress, students need to organise their work within and outside their mentoringsessions. Teachers need to know when to step in to provide their experience when making keydecisions along the design process. Evaluations for design outcomes and design process are difficultto be objectively assessed. This is because design is about envisioning and implementing a future thatcan react in sometimes unpredictable ways to other constraints in the design space which may nothave been considered before. As such, it becomes impossible to tell how good a design is until it hasmatured. The best gauge would be to continually involve users in the design with prototypes in thedesign process.2.4 Design process for Project The design process for this project was inspired by the design model proposed by the Design School atInstitute of Design at Stanford.
15 Design Process Model (adapted from Design School, Institute of Design at Stanford)This model was used was because it gave a good foundation to build my teaching upon as I myself amnew to interaction design. This design process model allowed me to maintain a consistency in myframing of my problem formulation from two perspectives. Firstly it was to understand how the teamshifted between thinking modes in exploring the design space, and secondly how I as a teacher-facilitator needed to create design materials to scaffold those transitions.It could be said that at a microlevel the students were using the model for their own design problem, while at a vantage point, I wasusing it to test the effectiveness of the tools I created for the students to use.In the next chapter I explain about the different workshops I conducted with my classmates in Malmoand my own students in Singapore.
16 Chapter 3 Workshops Conducted with Students This chapter explains the empirical evidence I gathered from the initial field studies I conducted withmy classmates and the workshops which I conducted with my students. I explain how theseworkshops were conducted, the outcomes and also my observations of the dynamics of the team andthe decisions I took in my role as a teacher-facilitator. I have kept an online blog(http://www.premixd.com/thesis/) throughout this project with my comments following each workshopsession I held with the team of students. This was to keep the impressions and observations I madefresh so I can read them again to make insights in relation to the issues I have raised in the problemformulation.3.1 Field Studies with Interaction Designers in Malmö For my initial field studies, I wanted to understand about the role tangible tools could play forinteraction designers in the design process. This was relevant to my research as it would help meunderstand how interaction designers use things to communicate to themselves and others.For the test tools, I created a set of styrofoam shapes with plastic over it for writing on. The hexagonshapes were inspired by the molecule shapes in a benzene ring that could fit together in any flatsurfaced orientation. The shapes were given to three of my classmates and they were asked toexplore how the toolkit could be used in their own thesis project. Matthew used the shapes to assignmeaning to it based on the relevance of the shapes to his design space. For example, he took thehuman shape and labelled it as a user. Xun made use of the hexagonal shapes as building blocks bywriting and drawing on it to merge and test different ideas together in a design synthesis approach.Silvia used the hexagon shapes together with post-its to create a tree like structure that showed abranching of her thoughts. Interestingly, when she was doing this, Xun joined in to shuffle some of thehexagons to pose different ideas to her. As their ideas became refined with discussions, they updatedthe hexagon shapes with new content on the plastic covering. Categorising personal thoughts Creating Relationships Synthesizing ideas
17 Sanders propose that tookits are specific in their purpose and “creating and refining the generativetoolkits is a design process by itself” (Sanders, 2010, 6). In participatory design, tools and techniquesneed to be understood in relation to purpose and context and customized accordingly (Sanders et al2010, 196). The observations from my field studies seem to suggest that generic tools could beadapted by designers to their design problem and even work as a platform for collaboration throughsuch distinct cognitive acts such as categorizing, creating relationships and synthesizing. However,the tools are insufficient on their own. Some qualities are lacking in the medium which can only befound by the designer when they face hurdles in their communication such as when Silvia decided touse post-its. This prompts the designers to adapt the toolkit in novel ways to fit their needs. When Irepeated the same experiments with my students team in Singapore, they used the hexagon shapesto slot images of the most prominent locations in the school. When this was mapped out, it identifiedcommon meeting points showing how different destinations can be reached from the same point.Post-its were placed over it to give directions and this led to a possible layout plan of the schoolbuilding as a map of interconnected hexagons. This suggests how an open tool can be adapted to acontext in unexpected ways depending on the context of design situation. 3.2 Forming an Interaction Design Team “…that design is often a collective process in which the rapport between group members can be assignificant as their ideas.” How Designers Think (Bryan Lawson) In the book above, Lawson talks about the phases of “forming”, “storming’ and ‘norming’ which ateam undergoes before they have gelled substantially enough to ‘perform’. A team is not a merecollection of individuals. Rather, there is a synergy that emerges beyond the collective individualtalents that manifests itself as a higher order of complex behavior. This behaviour can yield itselfas conflicted or cooperative team dynamics. While conducting my workshops with the team ofstudents, as a teacher-facilitator I became aware of what Lawson was saying about howindividuals in a team contribute to the fusion of a group dynamic that gives birth to some norms inbehaviour.During the workshops, I started to notice the how these phases showed themselves in the types ofconversations that ensued. By conversations here, I am referring to the dialogues that happen bothbetween the team members and the team members with their design materials. I explain in moredetail the types of design conversations that surfaced for each of the phases in chapter 4. For thischapter, I focus on explaining the events that unfolded during the course of the workshops I stagedfor the team and the outcomes.The Interaction Design (IxD) Workshops were staged within the school premises, mainly thedesign studio which is a room. I started teaching Design and Technology (D&T) as part of theschool curriculum from January 2011. Three weeks into the school term, after settling into the
18 school environment, culture and getting to know the students in my classes better, I beganrecruiting students who would have the time to engage themselves in this after school activity oflearning about Interaction Design. I spoke to the more engaged students in my D&T classes andfour of them expressed interest and at that time said they were able participate in this after schoolproject. I made it known that they would be designing for the school and learning new techniquesof designing, aside from what they covered in Design and Technology. To motivate them, I saidthat designing for the school could leave a legacy that their very own children who study here couldadmire and something to be proud of as a contribution to the school. The Team of 15 year old Interaction Designers (from left Abner, Jonathan, Benjamin and Ian) The team members were all classmates and have known each other since the start of the year 2011. Before I began my project workshops with them, I did some character profiling to understand their backgrounds to better craft my workshops to appeal to them. This understanding could help me as a facilitator to see look for commonalities that could bridge the communication gaps I mentioned in my problem formulation and motivate them to collaborate as a team. As I found out later, this was useful in looking for teaching approaches that would engage the students in collective information gathering. Below I have summarized what they have written and spoken to me about before we started the interaction design workshops. An important question I had asked them was to get their feedback about what design meant to them and why they were interested to do this course in interaction design. It is important to understand that these students have been familiarised with “Design and Technology” a year earlier when they were 14-year old students. However while that course introduced them to some of the ideas of what Design is, their actual hands on approach focused on workshop artisan skills using hand tools and equipment in a project to fabricate a USB powered lamp which followed a standard template design and they did not practice any design creativity in the making of this lamp aside. Hence, my job became more challenging in guiding these students to think like designers with creative thinking.
19 Feedback from students Question: Student Question:What does design mean to you? Why do you want to learn interaction design? Jonathan To me Design is where innovation and I want to see how people creativity comes together. It is when a product react to the products I is pleasing to its targeted audience. design. Ian Design is the aesthetics and how an item is I wanted to learn new things. made. It also shows how things work. I want to learn about the Design is something that is useful in everyday problems faced by others so life because designing objects can make life Abner I can do something useful in much easier. life. Design means creativity to me and serving I want to serve the school. Benjamin people’s needs.Based on their responses, it is evident that their understanding focuses on the physical form of aproduct satisfying the needs of a consumer. In particular, they emphasise on the aesthetics of theproduct form to be purposeful and pleasing. Comparing with their responses with why theyvolunteered to participate in the interaction design workshops, they said they were keen to learnabout how people respond to their ideas. This feedback was important to me in my role asteacher-facilitator as the human element would be explored in participatory design to see how co-design could be staged between stakeholders and the members of the team to fulfill this desire tohave their ideas given feedback by potential users.3.3 Background of Workshop Teaching Approach In this section I explain about the design teaching approach I took to teach interaction designmethods to my team of D&T students.Provoking these young designers to shift their understanding of design from a focus on ‘formand function’ to ‘space and time’ requires re-looking at the design materials used to engage
20 them. In teaching D&T, I would make use of images to provoke them in a Socratic style ofquestioning where I would ask observational questions, “where do you think this is?”, “what doyou see?”, “is there a problem here?”. These questions are to help create a context which wouldinspire the student to develop the designer eye in identifying a need to be addressed with theform of a physical design. To engage collaborative team design requires a higher level order ofprovocation in the design materials used. This is mainly due to the design context not beingentirely specific in pointing to an obvious outcome for all. The challenge lies in creating a moremacro view of the design situation that moulds a more holistic understand of the design spacewith its constraints.The IxD lessons were originally planned as a series of workshops with my agenda of the topics Iwas going to teach to the students and the deliverable outcomes of each workshop. Thisoriginal plan is outlined in “Appendix 1-Initial Teaching Plan for Interaction Design Workshops”.The plan of the project timeline was to have introductory workshops where the tools andtechniques of interaction design were taught in 1 hour workshops after school and crafted inrelation to the context the students decided to design for. However with the students’ conflictingafterschool activity schedules, I had to modify this plan to accommodate for their schedules andadjust my teaching methods to be flexible to their needs. This I did by making design decisionstogether with the team ad-hoc on what they felt would be an appropriate course of action to takebased on their present position in the design space at each stage in the project. While originallythe workshops were planned to be content driven, with the intention of exposing the students toa wide array of IxD methodologies and letting them decide on the methods to use for theirdesign situation, but as the project progressed, our meetings became more task driven once thestudents were clearer about their design solution and felt ready to test their ideas with potentialusers.This surfaces an important approach to take where the teacher’s role within a design teamadapts changing from an instructor (teaching content) to a facilitator (teaching the application ofthe content to the context of the design problem) to an advisor/observer (mediating the teamdynamics in their decision-making). This transition in my roles was necessary so as to notinfluence my own design decisions on the team, but step back as an observer to their designdecisions and see what needs to be done to widen the team’s design options to make a well-informed choice in the design space. During the course of this project I found my roles movingbetween these 3 states within the team.
21 Instructor (teaching content) Facilitator Advisor/Observer (teaching application (mediating team dynamics of the content to the in their decision‐making) design problem)In narrating what happened in the workshops, I have taken on 2 voices; one as the instructor withmy pre-conceived plan of the interaction design skills I intended to impart to my student assumingthey would know how to apply it to the design context, and another an observer of the challenges Ihad faced in imparting such skills. I have documented the sessions in the format of workshopexperiments where I start explaining with what and how I had planned to teach the design skills,then what actually transpired and finally what challenges both the team and I as the teacher-facilitator faced. I have reserved a separate chapter on reflections and insights gained from theworkshops to chapter 4 to form a holistic understanding of the design process undergone by theteam. I have taken this approach as I find it will assist my framing of future interaction designprojects with students in with a more thoughtful experienced approach.3.4 Design process and Time Frame of project The design process focused strongly on a learning and thinking-by-doing approach where switchingbetween reflective modes helped in refining the design methods to try out more effective approacheswith the students. The design process was inspired by the design model proposed by the DesignSchool at Institute of Design at Stanford. Design Process Model (adapted from Design School, Institute of Design at Stanford)
22 The reason this model was used was because it gave a good foundation to build my teachingupon as I myself am new to interaction design. This design process model allowed me tomaintain a consistency in my framing of my problem formulation from two perspectives. Firstly itwas to understand how the team shifted between thinking modes in exploring the design space,and secondly how I as a teacher-facilitator needed to create design materials to scaffold thosetransitions. It could be said that at a micro level the students were using the model for their owndesign problem, while from a macro perspective, I was applying the model to test theeffectiveness of the tools I created for the students to use. A framework for the design process provided a starting point as well as possible approaches totest out the techniques and methods of interaction design in a real context for the students todesign for.The starting point was project framing (interaction design education). Due to the vastness in theresearch scope, establishing the frame helped to streamline the research and formulate theproblem as a co-dependent stage process where the techniques of interaction design were to bemediated by investigating how group communication can be facilitated in response to a realdesign problem. The framework of interaction design education suggested conducting interviewsand user studies with provoco-types to learn from and observe how students adapt generic toolsto their own interaction design problems. Time frame for the project was fairly significant as itinvolved some initial interviews and field studies with interaction design students at K3 in Malmo,Sweden for 1 week in December 2010 where the findings from the initial fieldwork wereconsequential for the teaching aids to use for the workshops with young students in Singaporefrom February to August 2011. The project in Singapore faced numerous postphonements andinterruptions to the original plans as it was staged as an after-school activity since other schoolevents had more precedence for the team and it become difficult for all to meet as a teamregularly. In some ways, it could be said that design decisions were made due to time constraintsand the design space could have been examined more deeply and widely.3.5 Design Theories taught to and applied by students The following are design theories that were taught by me and applied by the students to varyingdegrees in the course of investigating the design space. Each of the theories is explained anddiscussed with its relevance to the entire design process.
23 BrainstormingBrainstorming is a technique to leverage on the collective thinking of the group by engaging witheach other, listening and building on each others’ ideas.For this project, brainstorming was framed using the “How-Might-We method”. Specifically for thedesign context of improving the navigation experience of the school, this was framed as “Howmight we improve the navigation experience of the school” and “How can we help new-comersadapt to finding different locations within the school?”Participatory DesignParticipatory Design (PD) is an approach that involves the users of the design within the designprocess. The user is directly involved in the development of the design by providing inputsthroughout the process. This techniques is used mainly for designs which require strong focus onuser needs, and is especially appropriate for environmental considerations and context basedproblems (Schuler & Namioka, 2003).For this project, the team learned this technique and applied in the design process to elicitfeedback from potential users of their design concept. This level of participation in the initial stageswas at a superficial level as the team was not able to show their improved designs to the sameusers for further feedback, but with subsequent users, the technique yielded constructive feedbackwith testing the mock-ups that were already created based on opinions from earlier users.BodystormingBodystorming is a participatory method for developing ideas in a physical setting. People exploreideas and interactions physically, sometimes with the help of props such as images to create asimulation of the environment and context of the interaction. Bodystorming takes ideas frombrainstorming off from the whiteboard or paper to put them into physical action to conceptualiseand test ideas. While on the whiteboard or paper, there isn’t any limit to how far one can go with anidea. But with bodystorming, the physical limitations are uncovered to help shape ideas withphysical design constraints. This is used in the researching stages of studies, and allows forobservation and analysis of any problems or issues encountered that can be addressed in theproposed design solution. It is a method of exploring ideas with improvised artifacts and physicalactivities to envision a solution (Oulasvirta et al, 2003).For this project, bodystorming was vital to explore new ways of interacting with navigation devicesto ‘think-out-of-the box”. It helped the team in thinking of fresh ways of combining other artefactstogether with their redesigned paper map to see how the level of immersion from a simple papermap could be enhanced to create an entirely different experience for the user.
24 Experience prototypingExperiential Prototyping is the “the experiential aspect of whatever representations are needed tosuccessfully (re)live or convey an experience with a product, space or system” (Buchenau & Suri,2000). It is relevant to understanding existing experiences, exploring design ideas andcommunicating design concepts (Buchenau & Suri, 2000).For this project, prototypes were posed to users from the initial stage of the project to get feedbackof the limitations of current design examples so that iteratively, thoughtful enhancements could bemade to these designs to make them more effective in their purpose. As the team was aiming todesign a navigation system that would actually be implemented, the fidelity of the prototypespitched to the user was at a high end to address any fine details and enhancements that should bemade to the map and viewing experience of the user.3.6 Workshop 1 & 2 ‐Setting the Context for Design (Using W5H) with Brainstorming Conducted on: 21st and 28th February 2011 (1 hour each session at Design Studio) For this introductory workshop, I wanted to stage the context in which the students would bedesigning for. Jonathan brought a cut out of an article that had appeared in the local newspapersabout how students in one of the local universities had designed an electronic system to help newstudents find their classrooms (refer to figure below). The team members were interested in theexploring the idea of a navigation system that could be designed for their own school campus tohelp newcomers to the school adapt faster to familiarizing themselves with the various facilities.They thought this would be especially useful for new students and teachers to the school as theyhad often found me asking them directions to different locations on the campus and personally itwas something they had gone though themselves as new students to the school. As teacher-facilitator, I thought this would be a worthwhile venture for them to design for because it was aproject challenge they had set for themselves and hence would be self-motivated to design for it.
25 The team knew they could not change the school campus architecture, but perhaps they could comeup with a better navigation system to address this need of students and visitors to the school findingtheir way.We used a whiteboard using the W5H approach to understand the context of the problem better(who, why, what when, where and how). Below you see an image of the outcome of our discussionswhich was recorded on the whiteboard. I found this method a useful way to focus our discussion byraising relevant points of discussion and drawing links between related points. From the image, youcan see that the ‘what’ issue was purposely left out as I wanted the students to take images of thecurrent navigation systems within the school so we could discuss about them and address theirlimitations orconceive an entirely new navigation systemIt is important to understand that while the team was aiming to create something achievable with theirdesign, I did not want the students to think in terms of solutions right away but rather be critical of thecurrent systems used in the school to get a better understanding of the actual problem.
26 Discussions from WH5 for understanding design contextIan surprised me the day after the 1st workshop by showing me a circuit he had wired together (wewere at that time teaching basic electronics in class for an individual D&T project). He was confidenthis idea was ideal for users to find their way around school until I posed some questions that madehim realise the shortcomings of his gadget. What concerned me was that he was already thinking interms of solutions independently and this made me think that I had to intervene as a teacher-facilitator to ensure the team do not commit prematurely to a design idea before investigating thecontext in which they designing for as thoroughly as they can. I felt I should create some aids toencourage dialogue between team-members so they could collaborate in idea sharing. Ian showing his high fidelity navigation circuitAs I saw it, based on my 1st workshop with this group of students, they were motivated in wanting tocreate a better navigation system for their school campus. They were able to understand the contextof the problem that they were designing a system for different categories of users with different needs(students, parents, new teachers and visitors). They were also able to think in a broader perspective toconsider relevant issues to the design context, such as rain affecting the route choice of people. Mybiggest concern, was that they seemed to have individual stakes in this project and were not
27 communicating as a team with each other to argue out their ideas and work collaboratively in mergingtheir different viewpoints for a collaborative design.As homework for the 2nd workshop, the team was told to keep individual diaries of their movementaround school and take photos of different locations around the school that interested them. Inparticular I told them to take photos of the current navigation systems within the school so we wouldhave material to discuss about. However I soon began to learn, from working with this team, it waschallenging to get them to follow through with team tasks. Sensing they might come unprepared for the2nd workshop, I brought my own photographed images of the school maps for them to discuss about sothat the session would not be a waste of time. As I had anticipated based on my experience with themfor D&T lessons, they did not take their own photos and had come unprepared not even having loggedtheir movement experience around school in their diary. This posed a challenge to me of how couldthey relate to the users they were designing for by empathising with the experience of being in theschool environment for the first time. The images used were shown as a slide presentation(http://www.box.net/shared/ljmsdokn2m) and printed without captions for them to discuss.From the team discussion of the images, three distinct issues emerge that they wanted to address.Placemarkers used in the school that were pointing to destination points were confusing to look at. The2D map layouts was not helping people locate important venues in the school. The floor directoryplans did not help in locating the classroom at each level. Placemarkers with 2D Map layouts Floor directory at confusing arrows Classroom blocks For these images that I had taken and printed to be more engaging, I placed them behind transparentcovers on backing boards so the team members could write comments on them. This method helpedthe team to recognise the school map layout as being divided into sectors where the classrooms werelocated in a separate block from other facilities such as the swimming pool, church and admin block.This posed as possible starting point to design a more effective navigation system than the current 2Dmaps and place-markers around school where people knew the name of the location, but just didn’tknow which direction they should be heading or how to recognise when they have arrived there.
28 Ian and Jonathan talking about school images Abner and Ian writing on the overlays What and How of my plan • To stage a context for design using W5H approach (who, what , when, why, what and how)-minus ‘what’ so they don’t start thinking in terms of a solution immediately but understanding the design context more. • Use images of school as a starting point for team discussions. • Getting the students to make a diary as a probe of their navigation practice around school. What actually happened • The students didn’t take their school photos they were supposed to but they used the ones I prepared. • The students didn’t keep diaries of their movement citing that it interfered with their school activities or they forgot to keep it updated. Challenges I faced • The students were not applying the knowledge taught to keep diaries of their movement around school. • I wanted to create dialogue between team members so they could collaborate for the design context • I wanted to trigger past experiences and memories of the students as new students to the school to emphatise with the user’s feelings of being lost in a new environment. Insights • Images spark dialogue between team-members • Images work better when they can be easily commented on by writing annotations and visuals.
29 3.7 Workshop 3‐ Getting Feedback from ‘outsiders’ Conducted on: March 7th 2011 1 hour at Design Studio following interviews with visiting exchange students) To follow up from their own team discussions, I thought it would be good for the team to getfeedback from outsiders unfamiliar with the school building. The team decided to interview Frenchexchange students they were hosting in the school. The team showed them the current school mapto get their opinions. There were two separate interviews, one conducted with a single exchangestudent Max, and another as a group interview with four French students. interview with Max Solo Interview with groupIn a post interview team discussion, the members raised these observations.Max may have found the 3-to-1 interview a little intimidating. Due to the language barrier, he foundhimself having difficulty in expressing his opinions to the interviewers. With a group interview, it waseasier to get useful feedback as the French students were better able to express their differentideas to each other and reach a consensus to communicate to the interviewer. The group interviewshowed a greater comfort level between those interviewed that led to more constructive feedback.One idea that emerged from the group interview was the inclusion of photos of landmarks within theschool map and to make the map 3D to make the spatial arrangement more coherent than thecurrent 2D plan view layout. Based on this feedback, I showed Ian how to use Google Sketchup(3D modelling software) from which he created a 3D map layout which took a week to complete.Below I show the modifications made to the current school map layout. Enlarged views areavailable in the appendix. . 3D map (using CAD) Original 2D map (1st iteration)
30 Unfortunately the French exchange students had already left before we could show the abovemodified maps with them. Nonetheless, it provided a good starting point to show others to gettheir opinions to improve on the ideas.To me as a teacher facilitator, it was encouraging to seethe team’s sensitivity to the opinion of the others and implementing them in the design.In summary the events unfolded as follows: What and How of my plan • To get the team to engage ‘outsiders’ in design dialogue about the design context What actually happened • The students interviewed school visitors, as a groups and individual to elicit their opinions Challenges faced • The students were unsure about what they could pose to outsiders to get constructive feedback, so they decided to use the current school map (2D). Insights • Group interviews are more efficient at gaining constructive feedback. The team said that there was less pressure on those interviewed and a shared opinion was a consistent opinion that could lead to relevant useful design.
31 3.8 Workshop 4‐ Empathising using Social Media (Facebook) as a platform. Conducted on: March 14th 2011 (1 hour touring school and 1 hour discussing about findings) I had explained to the students about cultural probes. To show their effectiveness in collectinginformation for design, I told the students to record their experiences of making their way aroundthe school in their notebooks. When we met for the 2nd workshop, none had started on thenotebook nor maintained consistent records of their movements around school. I was worried thatthe students were not creating any design materials of their own to frame the design context forthemselves.The first two workshops had set the stage for them to relate to designing for a range of possibleusers (students, teachers and parents) but they had not built an experience around the actualneeds of these users that were to be addressed with their design. This is where I returned to myearlier field studies to help me look for possible avenues to create an experience for them toground their imagination on. Grounding imagination is a method of bridging the gap between dualaspects of practise and imagination (Büscher et al, 2004). By creating shared experiences amongteam members, it creates a common platform for dialogue and ideas to be discussed related tothe design context which encourages conceptualisation of a foreseeable future.Based on my earlier charactering profiling I noticed the team was comfortable with social mediablogging and thought that would be a good platform leverage on to record their experience of theschool building in a dynamic way as they walked around. I prepared a worksheet(http://www.box.net/shared/6f8bcip4xn) (found in the appendix) which instructed them to set up afacebook account for the persona “Nigel”, a student new to the school who was using hisphone(with camera to record his experiences in school). They lived the experience of “Nigel” asthey walked around school, taking photos of what interested them about the school building,noticing areas which were confusing to navigate. The method also triggered ideas about possiblesolutions to the design context. Unrelated observations of the environment when looking forphotos to take also emerged that proved to be relevant to the brainstorming process later such ashow instead of photos on the 3D map, paintings of school landmarks could be used instead suchas the student painting of the school clock tower. What emerged subconsciously from thisexperience was their reliving of their own student experience and prioritising important locationsthat would be most frequently visited by them as students. In relation to the original 2D map, itunderwent another iteration using these photos for easier identification.
32 3D map (using CAD) 3D map with photos (1st iteration) (2nd iteration) Facebook blog of persona ‘Nigel’: The students recorded their experience of living their first day at school and what were the important and frequently visited locations for the students. In summary the events unfolded as follows: What and How of my plan • For the team to emphatise for the design context by using personas and experience experience prototyping the “first day at school” What actually happened • The students went around school taking photos blogging their experience on Facebook with their handphones Challenges faced • The students sometimes let design thinking interfere with the task of recording their experience.Insights • The method of empathy building should ideally not be interfered by design decision- making. Instead, the empathy uilding should create a record which allows a post activity evaluation that leads to design thinking. This is a demonstration of reflection-on-action where the designers re-examine their experience to discuss the motions to make the design decision for the next step.
33 3.9 Workshop 5‐ Bodystorming using Navigation Devices Conducted on: June 3rd 2011 (1 hour discussions and activities) For this workshop, the team members were told to each bring a navigation device. Ian is a scout,so he brought a compass; Jonathan brought his handphone; and Abner a torchlight. Theyexplained their choices for those items were because the items are synonymous with locatingspace and objects to reach a destination point or moving though space in darkness respectively. The team with their navigation devices Jonathan bodystorming with his handphone and the map I prepared a worksheet (refer to appendix 5- Prototyping Exercise Worksheet) for them to reflecton different types of navigation devices that people use to start triggering their ideas. I highlightedthe example of the Inuits using a carved out stick as a tactile map of their coastline to find their wayaround when kayaking in the dark. This was to inspire them to be imaginative with their ideas. Theteam was given a task of using their navigation devices to locate a room in a 4 way junction. Thetask was analogous to having to find their way around school looking for a classroom. They initiallystarted explaining their ideas with the device itself. I noticed this was keeping their ideas very ‘safe’to the original functions of the devices. Ian suggested using his compass arrow as pointing to thedestination point. Abner‘s idea was the torch would be something that when shone on the floor willreveal arrows point to them the way to go. They were challenged with the notion of how aside fromthe inbuilt GPS in mobile devices, they could use their handphone as a navigation device.Jonathan hit a brainwave when he thought about how the camera function of the handphone couldbe used together with the school map as a navigation system. He remembered reading aboutbarcodes and QR scanners and did research to find out how this technology could be used for theproject. To help the students understand the technology better, I provided links to online resourcesfor them to read about this technology to become familiar with how they could apply to the contextof this design problem.
34 What and How of my plan • For the team to explore bodystorming as a technique to think of new ways of using physical artefacts to navigate through space. What actually happened • The students bodystormed using the items that they had brought along with them but they tended to explain their ideas verbally. Challenges faced • The students let the form factor of the item they brought condition their bodystorming techniques with predictable ways of using the items for navigation such as the arrow in the compass and the light shining from the torchlight. Insights • On hindsight, to inspire the students to think more creatively with their props, I should have explored a wider range of items and encouraged the students to not restrict to the theme of navigation. Using the handphone as a navigation device seemed like the only plausible implementable solution which the team followed through. It would have stretched their imagination more to use miming as a medium of exploring the artefacts to let each other guess how they were using it to perform the task. This could surface more interesting interpretations that the team could have explored in their prototypes.
35 3.10 Workshop 6‐ Prototyping‐“How to impart Technical Skills for Young Interaction Designers”. Conducted intermittently during months of June to July 2011 as the team refined their prototypes. I have entitled this section as such as I feel a major challenge to teaching the interaction designprocess is how to infuse the necessary technical skills so that beginning designers can prototypetheir design ideas with appropriate fidelity to gain contructive feedback from users. Moussettecomments that prototyping interactivity “requires substantial time and effort by individuals withhighly specialised skills and tools” which “limits their ability to approach and successfully work onsuch projects” (Mousette, 2007). Having learnt some Arduino during my 1st year of my Masterscourse and watching some of the frustration of classmates, I did not want the technology to kill theinterest of my students in this project. As a teacher, I feel the technology should not overwhelmthese students yet make the prototyping possible for a design that is realistic, achievable and canbe posed to users to get constructive feedback for the team to make design decisions on theappropriate modifications to make. Reflecting on workshop 1& 2 when Ian came to me with hisnavigation electronic circuit, he was already applying the recent knowledge mastered from anelectronics project he was learning from D&T. This approach is a utilitarian approach where a formis crafted to serve a function without much thought given to the interaction features. In his case, anexisting circuit was moulded to serve the function as a navigation device. What became apparentfrom such an approach was the frustrations a designer faces in manipulating a high fidelity form tosatisfy the function. Instead the designer should relook at the problem to ask if it could beapproached from a user-centred approach as prescribed by interaction design methodologies. Theinteraction is conceptualised first (what is the function and how would a person use such a serviceor product) and then subsequently, the technological issues of the form factor about mediatingsuch an interaction are considered. The challenge for teacher is to ensure that the student does notlet technology (form) control the desired function the student(s) may have conceived at the start.Realistically what transpires is the student will reach a compromise point where the technology isused to mimic the desired interaction as closely as possible and form may have to meet functionhalfway.For prototyping the interactive features of the map, The team first conceived the idea of placing theQR code on the placemarker. When scanned, the QR code will download for the user a sequenceof still images as a visual guide for getting to the destination. For prototyping the experience, theteam used a simple diagrammatic layout to communicate the idea to users to get some feedback.However even before getting feedback from others, within the team, they felt this was not anelegant design and could still as easily be reproduced by having a sequence of still images pasteddirectly on the placemarkers making the QR codes redundant.
36 Löwgren speaks of the pliability, rhythm and fluency as qualities of aesthetics in interaction whichcan be scrutinised for aesthetic appropriateness depending on what the user expects from theinteraction experience (Löwgren, 2009). In this design context, these qualities were perceptuallygauged and critiqued by the team leading to refinement in the type of imaging used for the mapdesign.The best way to impart prototyping skills is to get the team to try out the experience themselves todecide whether it meets their own expectations and if not, what should be done to enhance it to alevel that does. Along the way, the team would challenge their own standards to aim for a betteruser experience and find the appropriate tools to realise their vision. The initial interaction conceptualized by the team (using still images to show route)What and How of my plan.• To encourage my students to test out their ideas by doing their own field work to get a first hand perspective of the user experience.What actually happened.• The students went around taking still photos to sequence the route they should navigate to get to the destination point. They realised that the still sequence could actually confuse the users as they were experiencing the feelings themselves. They decided to switch to panoramic views as a more immersive way to help the user have a better spatial sense of the surroundings.Challenges faced.• The students had to learn how to take the photos accurately to allow the stitching to be seamless to give an immersive 3D panoramic view of the location on the map.
37 Insights.• Prototyping starts by working with the basic tools (in this case still images). Testing out initial hunches can bring out the qualities that the team should focus on. This can be enhanced by researching for other prototyping tools to achieve the desired simulation or interaction.• While collection information for the prototyping phase, design decisions were made. The students were demonstrating reflection-in-action where they made conscious decisions to simplify the navigation route with just the essential few images to locate the destination point. When they were not satisfied with the experience they decided to explore panoramic views as an alternative. To put it simply, the students had to do the act in order to think about it. By experiencing the interaction first hand, it led them to make design decisions and do the research to challenge themselves with creating a more authentic experience for the user relevant to the design context.3.11 Workshop 7- Experience Prototyping and User Testing Conducted on 7th August -10th August For the design process to come full circle, it was imperative that the team carried out user testing tofind out the effectiveness of their design ideas. When I met the team to discuss how they plannedto do the user testing, they appeared confident and assured me that they could do the user testingtogether using the questions they outlined as a team. Interview Questions Crafted by the team
38 Prototypes tested"By their very nature, prototypes involve compromises. It allows stakeholders to interact with anenvisioned product to gain some experience of using it in a realistic setting and to explore imagineduses” (Preece et al, 2001). Low fidelity sketches can be discarded easily as not as much time andeffort would have been invested to become emotionally attached to them (Kolko, 2011).For the user testing, the team initially created 2 types of prototypes with QR codes. One as aninteractive paper based handheld map, another as QR codes placed directly on the placemarkers.Initially, the teams plan was to use a sequence of still images to show how to arrive at a location,but they realised this would confuse the user more. With online research, they came across aimage hosting website for panoramic views (http://www.photosynth.com) which they decided wouldbe a good visual system that could allow the users to recognise the surroundings at a destinationpoint to find their way there.I helped the students generate the QR codes, linking them to the photosynths uploaded byJonathan. As the first set of codes were not recognised by the phone camera due to the high levelof pixelisation, I used http://bitly.com/ to shorten the link to reduce the pixelisation so that the QRcode could be scaled down to fit into the map and still be recognisable.For design conversation to ensue, it was crucial for the team to have something concrete todiscuss with and this was made possible with the first draft of the class plan layout drawn by Ian.Using that, the team could decide on the appropriate placement of the QR codes on the map andhow to categorise information distinguishing the classrooms and departments according to thedifferent levels. It was decided that since the brochure would be printed in black and white to savecosts, color coding the information would be pointless. Draft Map of Classroom Layout Paper Based Map Users testedPaper based prototyping is a technique normally applied to software design. With this technique,the students were exploring using the paper images directly as a method of interaction. It raiseddoubts whether this simulation was a true depiction of the ease of the use for a mobile device tofocus on a QR code from a distance, and how rain would affect the responsiveness of the code.
39 The team then decided to take the experience out to the field for testing from research to the fieldto the gallery. QR codes on Image of Placemarkers QR codes on actual Placemarkers Finding UsersThe users to test were chosen based on the aim of creating this map, which was to address theneeds of new comers to the school, students, teachers, parents and visitors. Nielsen recommendsusability testing to be done with at least five users as an efficient gauge to provide insights into theproblems with a system (Nielsen, 1994, p165). However with this project, the challenge was gettingthe team to actually do the usability testing. The team members could not seem to coordinate theirafter school time to come together to test their prototypes with some users. As a teacher, I couldsense that there was almost a sense of their hesitation in confirming whether their ideas were moreeffective than the current systems at helping people find their way around school.Interview ResultsA week after the interview questions were decided and they still hadn’t reported anything, I decidedto divide the task up by expecting that each of them test out their map prototypes with at least oneuser and report their findings independently on Facebook with photographic evidence of their user-testing. Abner and Jonathan were able to get back with some observations but these wereinconclusive to assist them in taking the next step with their design. They staged the test by usingthe handphone with the map. The user’s opinions focused on that of QR interactivity citing that itgave them a more ‘spatial’ feel of what to expect from that location on the map without having to bephysically there. As one student user cited, “its like this map is some kind of portal to anotherdimension”. Users (teacher and student) testing out the map with their handphones
40 Several use qualities of the map were cited by the user such as the portability of the map, how itcould be easily reproduced and updated with additional panoramic views linked by QR codes.Teachers liked the classroom layout as it was difficult to find classrooms without the floor directoryto guide and the map could easily be carried around. They could also mark the locations on themap to plan their route between classes. To gather more opinions, I posted an on-line survey to thestaff to get feedback about the map, which garnered more constructive responses like including aroute to avoid rain and handicap zones for those on wheelchairs to allow them to move to theirdestinations unobstructed and quickly. These findings were shared with the team to make themthink about what other improvements they could make to the map.The QRs on the placemarkers intrigued the users. Three of them cited it to be giving them a senseof teleportation moving from the placemarker to the panoramic view on their handphone with asimple scan. They liked that they could store the panoramic view on their phone for retrieval later.Some found it difficult to keep a steady hand to capture the QR with their phone. The QR code wastested under wet weather conditions and sunlight and found to be just as responsive as rainwaterand sunlight did not create any error with the plastic laminate shielding the code from the elements.Overall, the response for both the paper based map was favourable and all of the six usersinterviewed preferred the QR 3D map over the original 2D map. As for the QR codes on theplacemarkers, they felt the it would be more effective at providing ‘visual teleportation’ to sightsaround the campus that were more hidden from view and give a more immersive experienceonline.What and How of my plan • To help students craft questions for the interviews to get constructive feedback from the users • To encourage them to do user testing independently as a team.What actually happened • The team had to do the user testing individually as they could not coordinate their after school schedules. I conducted an online qualitative survey with my colleagues to get feedback about the map.Insights • Sometimes the best laid plans go wrong so perhaps its better to just try out the “quick and dirty” prototypes to start getting some feedback in their still unfinished states. In the unfinished form, the prototypes lends itself to more user input and saves the designers time from committing to a design prematurely. • For user testing, doing some tests individually could yield results, but its better to have responses from a wider pool of stakeholders to yeld more insightful opinions which may have been overlooked. This was evident from the results of the survey which raised issues such as addressing universal design needs and wet weather routes.
41 3.12 Problems and Hurdles Faced during Workshops I had started this project idealistically with the team of students thinking of a top down approach ofdirect teaching where I would be teaching the content for the students to apply as a team to thedesign context on their own. From my observation during the first two workshops, I could see theywere enthusiastic in wanting to learn different techniques for design as I introduced to them aboutdesigning for a context using the W5H approach. In the subsequent workshops, it was apparentthey wanted to learn and apply new technologies that can lead to innovative designs. They wereeager to show their ideas to me such as in the case of Ian with his electronic circuit. As a teamhowever, it was difficult for them to collaborate and work on the design space together. Individuallythey had many things to say and ideas to share at the workshops but fusing the different thoughtstogether and expecting the team to make design decisions independently and conclusively withoutmy presence was not easy. This could be attributed to them being young boys still developing theiridentity and hence wanting to assert their dominance in the control of ideas. It was obvious fromthe workshops that they had a range of ideas and they each believed their idea(s) were the bestsolution to address the confusing navigation issues in their school.In my role as teacher-facilitator, in order for the project to progress in realising the design solutionsthey had conceptualised, I could not get them to work collaboratively as much as I had originallyplanned. It was more effective for me to get each of them to take on a particular aspect of theproject they were interested in doing and sharing with the team thereafter what they had achievedand then for the team to decide which direction to take the project to next. For example, afterfeedback from the student visitors to the school, Ian decided to explore using CAD software inmaking a 3D representation of the map. After Jonathan had bodystormed with his handphone, hedecided to carry on with exploring the online imagining aspect of the map with the QR codes.Abner who was mainly responsible for crafting the interview usability testing questions was the onewho carried out most of the user testing. The recurring pattern from these observations was that asa team, the design responsibilities were mostly taken on by those who had conceived the ideainitially. There was a sense of ownership and motivation to see it thorough since they hadsuggested it and the rest of the team were agreeable to it.In terms of the design outcome, this style was reflected by the mish mash of visual features in themap where there is an elegance lacking in the final product because it was a evolutionary form ofprototyping where the design features were added incrementally as each workshop surfaced somedesign ideas that motivated the members to implement their idea into the map.To encourage collaborative design I tested out several approaches of externalising their ideas withtangible aids so it could be shared within the group. Here I discuss some of the techniques I usedfor them to share a common reality to bridge the gaps in their communication.
42 Transparent image holders Overlay for Maps which were written on top of with markers By using images behind transparent backing boards, these props allowed the students to communicate their shared reality via a common platform. The tools were crafted to encourage writing and drawing by functioning as a record to reflect on as compared to verbal discussions which is easily forgotten. In the images above, you can see colored outlines of markers that were used by Abner and Ian to draw over to create sectors by color coding the layout view to distinguish between the classroom block and school facilities to delineate between the two areas in the school for the new map. Bubble stickers WHAT IS HE EMOTION WHAT IS HE SAYING? THINKING ? I wonder whats the fastest way for me to get I wish I didn’t have to carry such a LOST, SCARED heavy bag to class ? Photos of Persona with Bubble comments made by team members The bubbles were inspired from those in comic books used for dialogue. I crafted the thoughtbubbles as cardboard stickers for the students to write comments on what is going through themind of person in the image. This was used for crafting the persona of Nigel, as an ice breakeractivity, before I got the team to do fieldwork by ‘being’ Nigel and taking photos for Nigel’sFacebook account as an account of his experiences walking around school on the first day. When Ifirst tried this idea, I designed it as 2 types, the ‘thought’ bubble and the ‘say’ bubble. Physically,
43 the stickers were actually plastic overlays pasted over cardboard backing. The plastic overlayallowed the students to change their comments. The students were each given a set and the teamwas shown the 2 photos above to comment on using the bubble stickers. During the course of theicebreaker activity, I noticed the students were having diverse range of comments but not able todescribe the emotional level of the persona as discussion point for his needs to be addressed, so Iincluded another bubble which I called the ‘emotion’ bubble. This bubble was to help the studentssurface the emotions the persona was feeling.The bubble stickers came in 3 forms to show different levels empathizing with the persona, a‘think’ bubble, a ‘say’ bubble and a ‘emotion’ bubble. The ‘think’ bubble was for the team memberto write what was going through the mind of Nigel, the ‘say’ bubble was to write something Nigelmight say in such an image and the ‘emotion’ bubble was to write how Nigel might be feeling. Thebubbles were useful in eliciting a range of responses from the team-members and opening upfurther dialogue which created a multi dimensional persona in Nigel to explore when roleplayingNigel while taking the photos for Facebook. Conflicting schedules Initially, the workshop sessions were as long as 1 hour each with full attendance, by the 4rdsession, I had shorten the time spent with the team to shorter time frames (sometimes without fullattendance.) Benjamin came to me to give me a letter he had written to say he was unable tocontinue as the workshops were taking him away from his duties in the school concert band. Thestudents had other commitments in many after school activities that were important to theirperformance assessment. To be fair to the students as they had volunteered for this program, Ididn’t want this project to drain them and lose the fun factor it had for them to learn somethingaside from their school curriculum. There was no assessment to this project, but was planned moreas an enrichment after school activity. To keep updated about the their progress with theirindividual efforts, the team members still came to see me to seek advise. Making decisions as ateam however was difficult, as they seemed to be rooted to their own areas of influence in the finaloutcome of the design such as Ian with his 3D CAD model and Jonathan with his panoramic viewsof the different school locations.
44 Chapter 4 Reflections from workshops In this chapter I reflect on the overall design process and insights I have gained from the workshops i conducted. For this thesis, Interaction design could be said to be working from two levels, at a microview of the actual conceptual methodologies that I am teaching my students and macroview of creating engaging interactive design material for the young designers to work with so they could think like interaction designers working as a team. I base my insights from the workshops on the two modes of reflective practice as conceptualized by Donald Schön of reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action. As the teacher-facilitator I found myself moving between these two modes in crafting the content for the workshops and discussions following for the appropriate course of action to take for my students to learn and apply that learning to the design problem. As an added mode, when my student’s progress had come to a standstill as they were not applying any of the conceptual methods I was teaching, I had to practice forethought in reflection for action to guide them with exploring the design context with other options. Reflection‐in‐action (knowledge for acting/doing) performance DESIGN CONTEXT self‐ forethought reflection Reflection‐for‐action Reflection‐on‐action (knowledge for planning actions and imagination) (self derived knowledge from doing) Different Reflective modes of teacherfacilitator and student within design Context
45 4.1 Teaching style When formulating the design context for this project, the interests of the team and its group members and my role as teacher-facilitator may not have necessarily been the same. While we both were interested in designing a better navigation system for the school, my more immediate concern was my role at a teacher-facilitator and how do I stage the design process without interfering the decision making processes of the team so they are able to think like interaction designers. I consciously tried not to sway their design decisions as a team, but took a more probing stance by asking them pertinent issues to think about in relation to their design space such as explained in using the W5H approach of considering the design context. Initially the intention was to teach in a direct teaching style of content placed separate from the design context the team was handling. As the workshops progressed, it became evidently clear the content had to be created in relation to the design context (reflection-for-action). This was necessary for the students to grasp the techniques taught in interaction design for them to reapply knowledgeably in another similar situation. The students may not necessarily have any prototypes of their own to show but they would be get some feedback which would be useful in taking their next design step (reflection-on-action).For example, after they had shown the first school map to the French students, they decided to make a 3D map using CAD software. They would also know how to stage a a more authentic participatory design session using their own prototypes with the other stake holders (reflection-for-action). However this was postphoned by the group till very late into their project when their prototype has already reached a high level of fidelity. This learning by doing style could only come about from a practise that allowed them to reflect-on-action to improve in subsequent sessions by reflecting-for-action. In my role as a teacher-facilitator, I had to always consider the worst case scenario when the team was not either not creating their own design materials or not getting any constructive feedback to take the next design step. For that I had to reflect for action. For example, when I created the online user survey for the map to share the responses with the team so they knew what other stakeholders in the school felt about their idea as their own user testing did not produce any feedback they could use. 4.2 Challenges The biggest challenge in teaching interaction design is the effective coaching of a design team, especially if they are beginning designers. By effective here, it means that students are able to make informed decisions from the information collated and a teacher is able to guide the student in making those decisions independently and the student is able to justify their choices.
46 There is a fine balanced tension where the teacher crafts the project requirements well structured enough for the students to understand yet abstract enough for them to structure the problem independently to frame their own understanding and define the problem meaningfully on their own terms. In that aspect, I think I achieved my aim with the resources I created and the design decisions I took to explore different ways of getting them to create their own design materials to work with then they were not creating any from just learning concepts. Chapter 5 Conclusions This thesis project has been an exploration of the possibilities of teaching interaction design skillsto young beginning designers who have no previous background in interaction design. Itinvestigated how these students respond to the techniques of interaction design and moreimportantly how the techniques were crafted into ways to help stretch their imagination and alsocoalesce their thinking so they can fuse their ideas moving from individuals in a group to acollaborative team. It is found that while there are ways to bridge communication between teammembers by using tangible aids, it needs to be grounded in a real design context by creating ashared emphatic experience for the team members. This encourages dialogue amongstthemselves and the design materials that they create in response to the design situation. In thisparticular context, the students designed for a better navigation system for the school and testedout their ideas with stakeholders. To address communications gaps, some forms of tangible aidsare suggested that can motivate more meaningful discussions among the team members to allow aturn-taking or concurrent style of brainstorming. Sequential Flow of Team Dynamics capturing design process
47 To present a holistic perspective of the design process the team engaged in, I visualised thesequential flow of the team dynamics in relation to their group activities. The prototyping styleadopted by the group, which they were not really concious of, was evolutionary prototyping wherethe current school map was incrementally redesigned to the final form tested by users. This ismainly attributed to the team dynamics where the individual team members were more comfortableby working on their own domains of expertise which was their individual ideas they mooted duringgroup meetings. This is also due to the team not being able to meet on a regular basis to argue outtheir ideas and craft their prototypes from an early stage to refine their ideas with users from thestart. As a result the prototyping stage was delayed till very late into the project and also it was ahigh fidelity form which did not allow much scope for any significant redesigns after user testing.The team’s strength lay in looking at current systems within the school to identify what was lackingfor users and attempt to address the shortcomings in those designs with their own version in a 3Dinteractive map using mobile technology. CURRENT SYSTEMS AS EXAMPLES TO CRITIQUE DESIGN OUTCOME (3D MAP OF SCHOOL AND 2D FLOORPLAN WITH QR CODES FOR ONLINE PANORAMIC VIEWS) As interaction design is a user-centred approach to design, in the absence of immediatelyengaging users with their prototypes after conceptualising their design, the team used themselvesas a gauge for testing the effectiveness their design by debating about the user experience as theydesigned for the context. By placing themselves in the user’s point of view, they were able toemphatise better and feel more compelled to design a better system that would satisfy their own
48 needs. This was because for this situation, they were familiar with their own needs when they werenew students in the school adapting to the environment as well.5.1 Revisting the problem formulationI revisit the problem formulations outlined at the start if this thesis (section 1.3) to discuss how myresearch and experiments have explored possible approaches to the questions below.Research Question 1 (Stage 1): How can interaction design skills be effectively staged for young students to understand? Based on my observations in my teacher-facilitator role, interaction design skills cannot simply bemediated through workshops where conceptual methods are taught in a top-down approach fromteacher to students. While relevant points of discussions in context to the design space may beraised by students as in the W5H method, the imparting of interaction design skills should satisfytwo other requirements • adapting appropriate design methods to allow the students to sympathise and emphatise with the user(s) they are designing for. • testing prototypes/mock-ups of student ideas with potential users to get feedback.When designing for a context, “design has no special subject matter of its own apart from what adesigner conceives it to be”. In the process of application, “the designer must discover or invent aparticular subject out of the problems and issues of specific circumstances” (Buchanan, 1992). AsI discovered, the young designers in the team are not able to immediately apply the designmethods taught as they don’t see the value in such an open-ended style of information gatheringusing techniques such cultural probes, ethnography or user interviews. Students also may behesitant to contribute their starting point for discussions in building the design space as a team.The onus then falls on the teacher to look for opportunities to mediate learning such skills throughthe use of basic tools that can allow the young designers to craft as engaging interaction designaids. The aids should not be simply be conceptual such as personas and scenarios andexplained as such, but hands-on and exhibits the following qualities of spatiality; • Adjustability (can be easily moved around to compare ideas) • Recordable and Eraseable (for writing/erasing and collection, sorting and manipulation)To reaffirm this, Kolko encourages the externalization of data in a form that can be freelymanipulated and seen concurrently, allowing a progressive escape from the mess of gathereddata (Kolko, 2011, p65). In synthesising for design, progression is made from data to information
49 to knowledge and then wisdom (Kollko, 2011, p59). This can only happen when tools have aquality of adaptability that allows designers to customise it to their design context. Interactiondesign is designing for spatiality and temporality. As such qualities depicting time and spaceshould also be characteristics inherent in the tools used to explore the design context. Forexample with the tools I created, the bubble stickers can be erasable and updated with newconcerns in response to a reframing of the design context. The hexagons can be slotted in withchanging content such as images or text and reshuffled to provoke fresh approaches to thedesign context using the information gathered.Such qualities leads me on to respond to the next problem formulation of encouraging dialoguebetween team members.Research Question 2 (Stage 2): How can group communication in an interaction design team be facilitated? To provide my answer to this question, it is necessary to understand the concept of designsynthesis. Design synthesis refers to the “abductive sensemaking process of manipulating,organizing, pruning and framing data to produce information and knowledge” (Kolko, 2011, p172).As Kolko describes it, “while other aspects of the design process are visible to non-designers(such as drawing, which can be observed and generally grasped even by a naive and detachedaudience), synthesis is often a more insular activity, one that is less obviously understood, oreven completely hidden from view.” (Kolko, 2011). When designers are engaged in reflection-in-action, there is a need to bring out the synthesis that happens in their head to a consistent formatthat can engage other members into a dialogue.For group communication to be facilitated, tools should be tangible and offer a degree ofpersonalization which can be traced back to the team member. For example, when the bubblestickers were used, some of the team members began writing on it their names to make it their‘own voice’ as an opinion that matters in the design space. When the bubble stickers with theirwritten thoughts were pasted on the backing boards over the images the idea could be tracedback to the team member to get more insight from their opinion in the design space. Questionsuch as, ”why did you write that..”, “what made you feel that way ….” , “how did you arrive atconclusion?” are types of Socratic line of questioning which opens up the discussion in the designspace for dialogue to develop and fuel brainstorming for ideas to emerge within the team. As anice-breaker, it also brings members unfamiliar to each other in a team to find that they may havesimilar concerns in the design space which could be a good foundation to work from in designingcollaboratively.A common platform to share comments on and write and rewrite such as a whiteboard or abacking board with a transparent overlay can encourage collaborative work. For example whenthe students were writing on the map, Abner and Ian used the plastic overlay to write and erase
50 their thoughts about how the map was organized and could be made better. The Facebook groupallowed comments to be easily shared and images uploaded as a forum for open discussionsserving as a design conversation.As for the qualities in tangible tools that can encourage an open discussion and dialogue to bemediated between interaction design team members, I suggest two categories of tools that canelicit conversations at different phases in collaborative design work: sym-tools and emp-tools.These tools can be applied once the data gathering phase for a design context has started (withat least collecting images related to the design context). The data gathered function as content fordesign dialogue to be developed around it.Sym-tools are used in the forming phase to unite team members by giving each member a voiceor opinion that can be shared with their teammates as an ‘outsider’s point of view’ to the designcontext. The intention is for the designer to sympathise with the persona or user to give a framingof the problem where a viewpoint or perspective can be shared with other members in the team.Emp-tools are using in the storming phase for the designers to brainstorm in a more emphaticway by situating themselves within the design context with an experience that gives an ‘insider’spoint of view’. I have summarized the qualities of these tools in the table below.Traditional tools such as personas are created as a proxy for actual comprehensive emotiveimmersion but such tools lack real feelings (Kolko, 2011, p159). Kouprie proposes a frameworkfor empathy in design practice which is divided into the four stages of discovery, immersion,connection and detachment where a designer steps into the a user’s life to get a feel of it beforestepping out of it to reflect on the significance of the experience (Kouprie et al, 2009)Based on these, I suggest Sym-tools and Emp-tools to complement personas as a way of probingdeeper into the problem to relate to the emotional level of the persona. To distinguish betweenthe two states of feelings, sympathy is a way of relating to the feeling of the other whereasempathy is a way of knowing and understanding the feeling of another (Wispé,1986). Thedistinction lies in the level of immersion called for in an experience to evoke an empathic feelingas compared to a sympathetic one. Designers often try to solve a design problem while concurrently trying to understand it. Thesetools give the designers a better grasp of the issues at hand within the design space by dividingthe experience of the design team into a two-stage process. Firstly the designers relate to theiruser by sharing concerns (such as with the use of bubble stickers). Secondly, they understandthe experience of their user by ‘living’ through their user viscerally, and record the experience in away that allows the team to reflect on the experience in making design decisions. The features ofthe two types of tools are tabulated here.
51 Characteristics of Sym and Emp tools for aiding interaction design for young designers. Example in the context of Tool Function within team design Remarks designing for a better navigation system In the forming phase to unite teams in Reflection-in- action. Sym-tool framing a problem with their individual Bubble stickers A group activity which can be run (outsider’s point of view) opinions in parallel or by turn taking. Reflection-on-action In the storming phase for the team to Using social media to blog Emp-tool To follow through for the team to engage in unraveling the design context experience of persona by (insider’s point of view) discuss what design directions to at a deeper emphatic level. living through the persona take. Relationship of different categories of tools in interaction designIn the design conversations that transpire between designers and their materials, there is a needto externalize the ideas in a tangible way. As Lawson puts it, “the really interesting things thathappen in the design process are hidden in the designers’ heads rather than being visible”(Lawson, 2004, p4). This is to both communicate to others the designers’ intentions, therelationships and patterns they have observed and also to keep in the designers’ minds a frameof reference serving as a ‘snapshot’ of the current design space. This snapshot allows thedesigners to remap it with new data that is collected or even by reframing the design question(s)to look at the information from a different perspective.
52 5.2 Discussion about Teacher’s role in scaffolding interaction designAs I see it, the role of the teacher in facilitating interaction design practice to young designersfocuses on three very important areas which together creates sympathy and empathy in thedesigners to better understand the user and the design space.1. Familiarity of the problem domain. The teacher needs to get a firm understanding of the context in which the problem specification is being formulated so that they know appropriate gaps to leave for the students to collect appropriate information. However it is important to not misconstrue design to be like a static jigsaw puzzle where pieces of gathered information fit precisely in relation to one another to reproduce the same image each time. Instead design mimics more of the dynamic marionette where the designers control the dynamics of the movement of the different constraints which are inter-related such that they move in tandem in sometimes unexpected ways.2. Crafting resources (as content). The teacher should collect and create appropriate media in relation to the problem and mould them to fit the context of the design. Media could be in the form of images, photos, video footage which could inspire the students to think innovatively and also to adapt in ways that will allow more insightful design decisions to be made.3. Recrafting the tools. When the current resources are not yielding sufficient headway in the progress of the project, the teacher needs to intervene and recraft the tools and technique to more engaging formats. This is where emp-tools could be applied. A case in point would using communication platforms and digital devices such as social networking websites and camera handphones to be adapted to the problem domain to create more insight and empathy that could create content to develop design dialogue around. Tools needs not be strictly confined to the digital realm and can also be simple enough to elicit opinion and play such as with games and roleplay.Is the approach taken by myself the best approach to teaching interaction design?In my view, there is no best approach to speak of, except for appropriate approaches depending onthe problem domain. As interaction design is a user-centred design approach, the focus should beto involve users as early as possible in the design process. However with this team, this was
53 delayed until their high fidelity prototype was made. The team was more keen in having a ‘wow’factor to surprise their users which also seems to imply they may have committed to their designidea prematurely. The users tested may have found their redesigned map a fresh experience, butwhether it fitted users needs is questionable judging by other design issues raised in the surveyssuch as designing for handicapped routes and wet weather.Ideally the team should have started with some open ended interviews and ethnographic studiesbut this proved to be difficult for the team to initiate as they did not see the worth of those methodsto get data and were more intent on designing something based on their judgement and notinvolving the opinions of others. One approach could have been for them to interview and conductethnography on each other to create content for design conversations to follow through. However,based on my observation of their friendship dynamics, I refrained from that as the project wouldhave lacked objectivity and relationships could be strained with their personal opinions of eachother.The design process of engaging them in an emphatic experience with their shared persona ‘Nigel’was the trigger point to get to open up and share their concerns. Posing examples of the currentschool navigation systems to outsiders also provided a non-biased view constructive to the designdecisions they took. This approach shows what can be done to overcome hurdles in scenarioswhen the team design for themselves instead of a user. Content related to the design context toencourage design conversations should be made to ‘break the ice’ between team members inreaching a comfort zone of designing without any inhibitions or need to protect individual ideas. Apersona can serve as a user and a shared emphatic experience built around this user as an anchorpoint for the team to reflect on in their design process.
54 6 Future work In my opinion, the future of facilitating interaction design as a studio practice among youngbeginning designers rests on mediating a fine balance between the methods of exploringempathy and putting into action achievable ideas with easy to learn technology. While mostinteraction design methodologies such as ethnography, cultural probes, user interviews helpdesigners understand the design context, what remains a challenge is how to emphatise with theusers to satisfy their unmet needs. A bolder attempt would be to create a want with the interactionwhere previously there was none. I feel empathy can only best be explored by stagingexperiences relatable to the design context. A case in point is living the experience of the personaof Nigel where the team starting blogging their experience and taking photos which allowed themto reflect-in-action what were the really important locations students needed to find in school. Thisto me is how best to engage young designers, using the very same platforms they are using asmediums of communication to create and live viscerally the experiences of the users they arecreating their designs for. Such approaches will help stretch their imagination as they createstories around their personas and look for design opportunities for them.Alongside empathy is the issue of technology. Ideally, technology should not be a bottleneck tothe imagination of young designers. While some physical prototyping software may have steeplearning curves, require computing resources and infrastructure beyond the means of somestudents and educational establishments, sometimes all it takes is something as simple as a QRcode and a mobile scanner application to open up possibilities in terms of what can be exploredand crafted into new interactions that are easily implementable. For this navigation project, it wasby sheer coincidence that Jonathan had brought his handphone along to bodystorm with.Although it seemed like the obvious device to go with (compared with a compass and atorchlight), what stood out to me as a facilitator was how the team were engaged in dialogueabout the user experience when deciding between the still images or the panoramic views. Evenin the absence of user testing until the final prototype, the process of refinement that the teamgave to the intermediate ideas showed a high-level of thinking becoming of young interactiondesigners.For future work, I intend to carry on with this navigation problem with the current team to see howwe include some of the suggestions from the online survey made by the staff. Service designskills are another topic within interaction design I would like to explore with the team as we seehow we can implement their map for visitors and new students in the school to use. To encourageparticipation by other students, the team is thinking about how to encourage other students toupload photosynths of the school to share so that a more immersive map can be created to bringthe visual experience of the campus from both outside and inside the facilities online. As one ofthe users interviewed mentioned, scanning the code and having the panoramic view open up on
55 the handphone felt like a virtual teleportation to another location. That could be a visual metaphoradopted for the layout of the map to give more consistency in its visual layout.
56 References LAWSON, B. 2006, HOW DESIGNERS THINK. OXFORD: ELSEVIER. 4TH EDITION PAPANEK, V.J. 1972, DESIGN FOR THE REAL WORLD, THAMES AND HUDSON. SIMON , H. A. 1996, THE SCIE NCES OF THE ARTIFICIAL (3RD ED.), CAMBRIDGE, MA: MIT PRESS WONG; RENWICK; TAN & YAN .2004, STARTING TO TEACH D ESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY, PEARSON PRENTICE HALL BUCHANAN, R. 1992, ‘WICKED PROBLEMS I N DESIGN THINKING’, DESIGN ISSUES, 8(2), 5‐21. Löwgren, J .2007 ,‘INTERACTION DESIGN, RESEARCH PRACTICES AND DESIGN RESEARCH ON THE DIGITAL MATERIALS’, UNDER YTAN: O M DESIGNFORSKNING , ED . SARA ILSTEDT HJELM, RASTER FÖRLAG, STOCKHOLM, (http://webzone.k3.mah.se/k3jolo/) Hallnäs, L; Redström, J .2008, ‘INTERACTION DESIGN FOUNDATIONS,EXPERIMENTS’. UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF BORÅS. (http://bada.hb.se/handle/2320/1554?mode=full) KOLKO, JON (2010). “ABDUCTIVE THINKING AND SENSEMAKING: THE DRIVERS OF DESIGN SYNTHESIS". IN MITS DESIGN ISSUES: VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1 W INTER 2010. BUXTON , B. 2007, SKETCHING USER EXPERIENCES: GETTING THE DESIGN RIGHT AND THE RIGHT DESIGN, ELSEVIER/MORGAN KAUFMANN. LANTZ, A; ARTMAN, H; RAMBERG; R. 2005, ‘INTERACTION DESIGN AS EXPERIENCED BY PRACTITIONERS’, PROCEEDINGS OF THE N ORDIC D ESIGN R ESEARCH CONFERENCE 2005 (http://www.tii.se/reform/inthemaking/files/p21.pdf) Kotzé,P; Purgathofer, P. 2009, ‘DESIGNING DESIGN EXERCISES – FROM T HEORY TO CREATIVITY AND REAL‐ WORLD USE’ , IFIP INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR INFORMATION P ROCESSING , VOLUME 289/2009, 42‐59 (http://www.springerlink.com/content/c505505202233040/ ) SAS, C. 2006, ‘LEARNING APPROACHES FOR TEACHING INTERACTION DESIGN ’, IN: HCI E DUCATORS WORKSHOP, 23‐24 MARCH 2006, LIMERICK,IRELAND. ( http://www.idc.ul.ie/hcieducators06/Procs/sas.pdf) AGGER ERIKSEN,M.2009,‘ENGAGING DESIGN MATERIALS , FORMATS AND FRAMINGS IN SPECIFIC, SITUATED CO‐DESIGNING:A MICRO ‐ MATERIAL PERSPECTIVE’, NORDIC DESIGN RESEARCH CONFERENCE; ENGAGING ARTIFACTS, NORWAY, OSLO (http://www.read.dk/dkds/files/102945/EngagingDesignMaterials_MAE_NORDES09.pdf) FALLMAN , D. 2008, ‘THE INTERACTION DESIGN RESEARCH TRIANGLE OF DESIGN PRACTICE, DESIGN EXPLORATION, AND DESIGN STUDIES ’, DESIGN ISSUES , 24.3, P . 4‐18, MIT PRESS . (http://daniel.fallman.org/resources/papers/dfallman‐di20082434.pdf)
57 KOSKINEN, ILPO; BINDER, T; Redström, J , 2008. ‘LAB, FIELD, GALLERY AND BEYOND’ IN ARTIFACT VOL 2, ISSUE 1, 2008 SCHÖN, D. 1983, THE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONER: HOW PROFESSIONALS THINK IN ACTION. NEW YORK: BASIC BOOKS . SANDERS, E.B.N. 2000, ’GENERATIVE TOOLS FOR CO DESIGNING’, PROCEEDINGS OF CODESIGNING 2000, 3‐12. ( http://www.maketools.com/articlespapers/GenerativeToolsforCoDesiging_Sanders_00.pdf) SANDERS, E.B.N; BRANDT, E; BINDER, T. 2010, ‘A FRAMEWORK FOR ORGANIZING THE TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES OF PARTICIPATORY DESIGN’, PROCEEDINGS OF THE 11TH BIENNIAL P ARTICIPATORY D ESIGN C ONFERENCE 2010, 195‐198 (http://www.maketools.com/articles‐papers/PDC2010ExploratoryFrameworkFinal.pdf) SCHULER, D. & NAMIOKA, A. ( EDS).1993, P ARTICIPATORY DESIGN:PRINCIPLES & PRACTICES . LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASS. OULASVIRTA, A., KURVINEN, E., & KANKAINEN, T. 2003, ‘UNDERSTANDING CONTEXTS BY BEING THERE: CASE STUDIES IN B ODYSTORMING’. IN PERSONAL U BIQUITOUS COMPUTING ., 7(2), 125‐134 (http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/oulasvir/scipubs/bodystorming_AO_EK_TK.pdf) BUCHENAU,M; SURI, J.F. 2000, ‘EXPERIENCE PROTOTYPING’, IN PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD CONFERENCE ON DESIGNING INTERACTIVE SYSTEMS: PROCESSES, PRACTICES, M ETHODS AND TECHNIQUES. Büscher, M ET AL .2004, ’WAYS OF GROUNDING IMAGINATION ‘, IN PDC 04 PROCEEDINGS OF THE EIGHTH CONFERENCE ON PARTICIPATORY DESIGN : A RTFUL INTEGRATION : INTERWEAVING MEDIA, MATERIALS AND PRACTICES ‐ V OLUME 1 MOUSETTE, C. 2007, ’TANGIBLE INTERACTION TOOLKITS FOR DESIGNERS’, PRESENTED AT INTERACTION DESIGN RESEARCH CONFERENCE 2007 (DOWNLOADABLE AT http://www.camilleensuede.com/fichiers/camille_moussette_toolkits.pdf) LÖWGREN, J. 2009, ’TOWARDS AN ARTICULATION OF INTERACTION AESTHETICS’. NEW REVIEW OF HYPERMEDIA AND MULTIMEDIA 15(2). (http://bit.ly/interaction‐aesthetics) ROGERS, Y; S HARP, H; PREECE , J. 2002, INTERACTION DESIGN: BEYOND HUMANCOMPUTER INTERACTION, (1ST EDITION), WILEY NIELSEN, J. 1994, USABILITY ENGINEERING, ACADEMIC PRESS INC KOLKO, J .2011, EXPOSING THE MAGIC OF DESIGN, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS . Kouprie, M ; VISSER, F.S .2009, ‘A FRAMEWORK FOR EMPATHY IN DESIGN: STEPPING INTO AND OUT OF THE USER’S LIFE‘, IN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING DESIGN, VOL 20, NO 5, OCTOBER 2009, 437‐448 WISPÉ, L. 1986, “THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SYMPATHY AND EMPATHY: TO CALL FORTH A CONCEPT, A WORD IS NEEDED.” JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND S OCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 50 (2), 314–321. LÖWGREN, J & STOLTERMAN, E. 2004, THOUGHTFUL INTERACTION DESIGN, CAMBRIDGE, MASS.: MIT PRESS . LAWSON, B.2004, WHAT DESIGNERS KNOW, ARCHITECTURAL PRESS.
58 APPENDIX Appendix 1: Initial Teaching plan for Interaction Design Programme for students
59 Teaching Aids for Interaction Design created by Teacher‐Facilitator Appendix 3: Persona Worksheet INTERACTION DESIGN Grounding Imagination with Personas. (A Persona is a character with feelings, motivations and experiences created by you. It is an imaginative process meant to help in understanding whoever you are designing for better.) FIRST DAY AT SCHOOL! Its Nigel’s first day at ACS Barker. He is so excited ….but….the school building is so huge and he is finding it challenging finding his way around. He hasn’t made many friends yet and he is shy in getting to know his classmates. He is an introvert who likes blogging about his experiences. He uses FACEBOOK to keep his friends from his former school updated about what is life is like in ACS Barker. Step into Nigel’s shoes and imagine you are him How do you think Nigel’s FACEBOOK account will look like? What kind of photos of the school building/activities will he update his page with? What sort of captions will he write for those photos taken? Which buildings/facilities are really important to him? How would be find his way around to his classrooms. What happens when he is lost in school?Set up a FACEBOOK Account and start living Nigel’s world in school for 3 days and updating the account with the experiences of Nigel(updating statuses, photos, links) with whatever information you feel represents Nigel’s feelings as a new student of the school.
60 Teaching Aids for Interaction Design created by Teacher‐Facilitator Appendix 4: Sym tools‐Bubble stickers for sympathising with user/persona There tools are sympathy evoking tools used together with images of personas or characters in a design context (as in the persona worksheet in Appendix 3).The bubbles encourage members in a team to express their own opinions in a playful manner to encourage conversations about shared concerns in the design space. Speech bubble to create a dialogue Thought bubble is to write what between personas or characters. you think a persona/character is thinking . Observation bubble is for story Exclamation bubble to convey an telling where events or other emotion for an urgent concern said or observations are related to image(s) thought by the persona/character. are written.
61 Teaching Aids for Interaction Design created by Teacher‐Facilitator Appendix 5: Prototyping Exercise Worksheet Understanding How People make Sense of Moving around in Space. Examples of Navigation Devices No Tool Image Remarks ( what can you say about it? +ve and ‐ve ) 1 Map and Analog Compass Skill level needed? Time taken to read? Convenience Level? 2 DIGITAL Device Dependance? Compass Skill Level? Time taken to Read? 3 GPS systems Skill Level? and How does a person understand how such a device works? Google Maps Is there a cause and effect relationship? (Does the screen change in response to some action?) 4 Inuit Coastline Tactile Maps used by the Inuits Maps What sort of senses does it rely on? What skill level is required? Prototype making (quick and dirty) What materials would you use to make a Prototype (working Model) of a Navigation Device for people to try out? What kind of Environment would you need to test out your ideas? Can a device be inbuilt within the environment itself? Consider how important DIRECTIONS, IMAGES and Other types of Media help a person in MOVING AROUND IN SPACE?
62 Prototypes Created by Students Appendix 6: Evolutionary prototypes of map design 1. Original Maps, PlaceMarkers, and floor plans located on campus This is the navigation systems in place within the campus. This was shown to the visitors and the feedback it received was that It helps people understand the layout and proximity of buildings but it doesn’t give detail for locations within the classrooms block or how to recognise the different buildings to know one has 2. 3D Map (created with Google Sketchup by the team) i d h‐based on user interviews with foreign exchange students. This is the image of the 3D model view of the layout of the important locations for students around the campus. The 3D model was decided as a good representation of the architecture of the campus easily identifiable. The locations were identified when the team recorded photos on Facebook living through the visceral experience of Nigel, the persona of a new student in the school. 3. Draft map of classroom floor plan layout‐based on tour of classroom block This draft plan layout was drawn up by Ian. He realised the individual floors had a common layout. He did a tour of the block to identify the individual classes and labelled them in order to help them be identified easily based on level. Visually this layout he was planning could be read more easily than the orginal layout of the plain text on the floor 4. 3D Map with QR codes and photosynth prototype for user testing‐based on body storming results This map was conceived after the body storming session and online research into QR codes. The team decided to go with this idea as it was something implementable and they could prototype it within their means. Users say it’s a more organised system to understand visually as compared to the 2D maps.
63 Appendix 7: Final version of map To use the 3D map with your mobile device, you will need to download the QR reader applications listed on page 1 of the map.