Week 9: Refining + Formative assessment

During the class in which there were round table discussions (sort of formative assesments) while we waited for our turn, we talked more about our design ideas, trying to make them a little better, add more of a design touch to them and working out the data collection properly (which can be seen in Ann-Maree's design:)

We tried to make the data collection side strong with increasing the quality of data able to be colected and the system in which it happened. We kind of started to forget about the behaviour and interactive side of things. It was the newest part of the concept of interaction design that we'd been trying to grasp so we have to make sure that we really hammer that home over the course of developing our product home.

As we had been dwelling on such a different difection for so long we were pretty behind. Slow to get moving on ideas bt when we did, we would run forward with them quickly. We kpet heading in so many directions then having to abandon that we were at a primative stage when we presented. But this was good because when we talked to them, our idea chaged alot so we had to go backwards again anyway and start from base camp.

We presented to the tutors and through a round table discussion and ideas session started to move the interaction away from a wall so much, away from external and really bring it in to something personal to the child. Something they own- a toy that senses when theyre in the classroom perhaps. Something that they feed information to and it records data within it then trasfers to the teacher or the office, but still gets returned to live on a wall station or something as to not get lost at home. Things like that.

As Will and I had been the only oens able to stay till the end of the class (the other two had important meetings for other subjects to run to), we didn't work out completely where we were heading as we still had to discuss it with the others. But over the couple of dayd following when we had time to sit down and discuss with them, we manged to articulate it to them and they loved it. We went away and started thinking aobut more ideas with this in mind.

Week 8: Team identity and design brief

As our concepts started becoming a little more solid and real, we started to build up our team identity.
We chaged our name to Wafer Designs after some playing around with acronyms and our names and initials etc:

As we were establishing primary and secondary users, contexts, clients and company identity we started to write up our official design brief.

Week 8: Narrowing Ideas... possibly a concrete scenario?

We talked and talked and talked and threw down countless ideas. None of them ticked every box. Either they didn't collect data, or they didn't fit The Fun Theory.

We started to narrow our ideas a little- struggling with a full public setting. With advice from the tutors we realised we could do a slightly refined public setting such as a school, a retirement home, a museum, a shop- something along those lines.

We still wanted to concentrate at least on keeping the fun spirit of interaction design, just abandon The Fun Theory. It wasn't our original theory anyway.

We thought a good way to inject joy into a design is to design for chlidren. We talked about one of Will's previous designs (from NPD I think) that involved basically an eloquent, subtle tagging system for children in schools so the school knew that they were safe in the particular event of things like emergency evacuations, as the current method is not fool proof and it relies on the small children knowing how to behave and react in a scary emergency situation- something that is a little hard to control no matter how many drills you run.

So this got the ball rolling- Here was a problem. Now we, the problem solvers were going to come in and save the day.

We tried to investigate a possible every day situation like this which helped the teacher by gathering data on the children.

We started talking about role taking and making sure the child is back in the classroom/arrived at school.

We were thinking about an electrical role call system that sped up the events at the beginning of the day, making the rolecall into a quick game for the kids.

We wanted to try and make it not obvious that we were collecting information on the children by making it a game

This would also connect up with the admin/office and notify them immediately when a child had not turned up at school. This ensured that the office could follow up quickly, calling the parent to see what had happened- if the child was having a sick day, it would be an easy way for the parent to let the school know and if the child just hadn't made it to school, it would notify the parent of this straight away incase soemthing had happened to the child that they might need to be worried about.


We then talked aobut the fact that for highschool kids this would NOT work. If they didn't want to come to school, hell, they were going to wag and noone could be a damn thing about it. That's the attitude of some teenagers and with their whole 'F*ck the authorities' thing you could never force them into participation in the game even if they turned up to every single form room class at the beginning of every day. (For example- I never wagged a class. EVER. I was a nerd child and was scared of getting  into trouble- however, during year 11 and 12 it would be a rare day you would see me in form. I would rather take the 20 minute sleep in and sign in at he office than waste time doing nothing in form. So this system would not work for me as I was never present for rolecall, but I was always present at school.)

So we narrowed down to the only age group who would willingly participate, the official beginning segment of schooing- Kindergarten to year 3.

After some brainstorming on what the designs could be we came up with a few ideas:

We didn't really think about metaphors to help the children relate to it... the animal or 'cute' side to it was really aobut the design and trying to make it appeal. It wasn't from a behavioural side or anything similar. We really wanted to talk to the tutors about the idea first and try to figure out what we were doing. We presented our idea and concepts to the tutors at the end of class.

Week 8: Ideas

We sat down this week and just stopped and went over everything. We looked at the topic, o/b/s, the brief and the things we had learn already. Also the things we were able to do with the Arduino.

 

We tried to come back to the Fun Theory. We looked at activities people do in the public environment and we tried to identify problems with them. Will mentioned a urinal game that stops guys peeing on the floor when they're out at pubs and blubs etc (when they're drunk and can't aim properly)- being the only guy in the group he was the only one who knew how awful this was.

We were thinking about integrating very simple games into a urinal were the action was aiming your urine to maybe hit a taget or something. The idea was ok... but we did shy away from it a bit as it was kind of gross, also it wasn't an idea that we all sat up and went WOW at. We were waiting for that breakthrough moment where we founda design we all loved and got behind.

With the gross factor with the urinal game, I DO think it's a shame that people are scared to venture there. The gross things in life that people don't design towards as often are probably some of the things that could use the more innovation and thought. Especially anything to do with toilets (which is why it was nice to see one of the groups in our class do that for new product development). Another area that could genuinely be interesting particularly for interaction design is to investigate sex toys. We talked about it as a joke in class but I would actually like to make a serious point here. I investigated it a bit personally and like how people design interaction designs with warm glowing pendants and stuff as a little token of affection from their loved one when they are apart for extended periods, the same could be done for sex toys. As maslow's heirachy indicates- sex is one of the most primal and important needs to fill, and it's on the same level as the need to eat, sleep and be safe- it's biologically wired into us. If you are apart from your loved one for a very long time (if they're off at war or something) having some sort of interaction design that has that connection but on a sexual level could keep relationships solidly strong and either party wouldnt get sexually frustrated and restless. I know personally, i had an experience where i went overseas for a period of time and my boyfriend at the time cheated on me. So in my situation something like this would have benefitted us.
It could even be something to help stop the spread of AIDS and HIV. There is of course a huge sex industry no matter where you go- people seek out one night stands, brothels, internet apps to allow people to meet just for the purpose of anonymous sex and some people just get drunk, have that lonely night and get carried away. Some people are just single for a long time and crave a bit of human connection on that level. If done correctly- this could be an alternative (of course not for everybody). It could connect the physical (on some level) with a form of human and emotional contact and begin to sway people from possibly paying for a prostitute and simple having some sort of phone sex-esque interaction with the help of the design. It would be cheaper too. Also if successful this could begin to remove the sex industry which is an ethically strange thing to do- on one hand it stops all the numerous horible aspects of prostitution etc, but it puts people out of a job who have gotten so desperate they have indeed turned to that which is not a good thing.
Anyways, I think it's a legitimate thing and I know I may be mocked, and I know it's not all sunshine and daisies and innovative stunning design but I really do think it's a genuine need and if viewed professonally and from the point of view that sex is natural and nothing to be ashamed of, this could be a potential project.


Anyways, we kind of weren't thrilled with the urinal idea so we decided to keep thinking and looking. Knowing we had an informal presentation of a concept the followign week we were working hard on trying to find an appropriate Fun Theory design.

Week 7: Lifetec

This week we went to Lifetec.
This place is AMAZING. I've been here once for personal research and again for a class trip. This was the third time and every time I go I just keep getting mroe and more out of it. What this place does show you, is the abysmal amount of designs out there for people with disbilities.
Industrial design, in my eyes, is about helping people. Really when it comes down to it I think that's the whole point. And when I see what there is out there for disabled people, and how little there is it makes me to upset. I think for my thesis I will look into this... but i digress.
 

The thought that goes into these products is great- people have designed specifically for other people's needs and it's great to see the solutions they have come up with. On the other hand, it's crazy to see how little thought has gone into some things. Half an hour analysing one of these products and some people in our class had come up with the most incredible re-designs. For some products, you get the feeling that they said "yes, they cannot use fine motor skills so I did this to fix that" but they never went and put themselves in their shoes, didn't research their environment, didn't try these actions out themselves, didn't talk to people or test their ideas out properly.
This is worrying to see.

At Lifetec we looked at Assistive Technology.
We looked at the fact that changes in technology lead to changes in behaviour, but that as behaviours change then the accessibility in technology becomes more important.

We looked at universal design, a concept we were taught about in first year in ergonomics and product usability. Designing for the limiting user is something we are knowledgable about, however, it's something that I think we forget. If you are going to design, why not make it for everyone. There is a big psychological and emotional wellbeing side to this too, I think.
When people with disabilities cannot do something simple that everyone else does every day, it limits their lives and makes them feel like they are different and reinforces the fact that they are differently abled. They shouldn't ever feel this way.
Simple things like ability to use a TV remote can change their lives tenfold. Like an example from the lecture about kerbsides having that dip down bit for wheelchairs. It allows people in wheelchairs so actually usea footpath. Now think about not being able to physically go down the street. horrible thought isn't it? But the thing is with the kerbside dip, is that it's also an indication that this is where a person is to cross the road, that this is where the footpath continues. It also is helpful for fully able people. We see it as a normal thing and it doesn't scream "I EXIST FOR DISABLED PEOPLE NOW LET'S ALL STARE AT WHOEVER USES THIS".

Brisbane public transport (we discovered while studying out public transport systems last year) has designed their buses with disability/wheelchair ramps. However- only the "BUZ" routes have them. This means that if you don't live on the main major routes in Brisbane then you're stuck and you have to catch a cab. First of all- people with disabilities can't often afford to live in the most populated, dense areas that the buses travel to, and secondly- due to the fact that most of them live on disability pensions, they can't even afford a cab.

Also, I think the ramp is poorly designed. To use this ramp the bus has to stop, the driver has to get out of his seat, ppull out the ramp, wait for the wheelchair to make it up and in the ramp, then the bus driver has to pack the ramp away, strap back into his seat and THEN set off on the route again. Then when the person in the wheelchair wants to get back off the bus then this sequence of use must happen again.
NOTHING could draw more attention to the fact that you are disabled than holding up an entire bus of people like that- and especially in peak hour this is very stressful as people tend to lose their shit over the most minor delay as they are rushed to get to work.


This is where Inclusive Design comes in. We need to make designs that are:
Functional
Usable
Desirable
and Viable

Once we have this figured out, there will be successful products.

Everyone matters, Design for everybody.