Critical reflection

on our design METHODOLOGy

 

Magnus

Traditional approach

• They were subjects of study
• We were the designers

 

• Social and cultural context have been a focus of our process, yet it has been hard to assess the context due to e.g. physical distance.

 

• If lack data;
  the user we talk about is often a stereotype (Nielsen, 2013)

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN

• Did we give the stakeholders a voice in the design of the application? (Robertson & Simonsen, 2013)

 

• Genuine participation
• Mutual learning

 

• Stakeholders in the solution
  • Stakeholder's interest
  • Ownership
• RLabs: Empowering individuals using digital media. (Marlon Parker)

Retrospectively

• “Pressure in a project to be ‘constructive’ may obliterate the desire and obligation of a researcher to be critical.” (Pedersen, 2007)

 

• How do you facilitate participatory design over long distances?

  • E.g. Probe kits (Jesper Simonsen and Toni Robertsen)

    • Photos, video and maps

    • Postcards with questions etc

Reflections on brainstorming

Mikkel

Brainstorm Problems

• 3-6-5 brainwriting
  • used too early?
• Neglected use after finding the focus
• What could we have done differently?
  • Utilised personas

Personas

• Variety of personas
• What could we have learned
• Limitation for inspiration
• More interviews?

Further Development

Thomas

Course calendar

• Courses
• My schedule
• Suggestions

 

• Schmidt, Barkhuus and Dey

Youth café screen

• Feed of deeds and news
• To create more awareness

Check-in feature

• Active context-awareness perhaps a problem?
• Redesign to ensure user-control