Interviews with children.
FALL 2017 DESIGN CHALLENGEThe recent New York Magazine article, "The Uninhabitable Earth," was the most-read article in the magazine's history. The article presents the scientifically projected fate of our planet due to climate change, organized by its impact: on water, on air, on the weather, on the economy, on war, and on other facets of life on Earth. Your challenge is to iteratively design, prototype, and test a device for college students. This device:
(1) makes college students aware of climate's impact on one or more aspects of life on our planet; and/or (2) helps remedy these impacts.
Surveys with older adults.
A COURSE IN 3 PARTS...
PART-1 | IDEATION STRATEGIES
3. Sketching (Automatic Sketching)
4. Co-Design (aka Participant Des.)
5. Mood boards
7. Analogy and Metaphor
8. Morphological Chart
PART-2 | DATA GATHERING &
1. Personas, Scenarios, GIFs
4. Surveys (aka Questionnaires)
5. Cultural Probes
6. Cognitive Walkthroughs
Usability Studies (Heuristic Eval.)
8. Delphi Methods
9. Analytics and Crowd Sourcing
PART-3 | WORKSHOP
Co-design with young child.
Efficacy study with child.
Fabricating a prototype in shop.
Heuristic evaluation task.
Survey with tweens.
Co-design at the hospital.
D E A S T A T E M E N T
DEA is dedicated to fostering a respectful and accepting learning community in which individuals from various backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives can embrace and respect diversity. Everyone in this community is empowered to participate in meaningful learning and discussion, regardless of an individual’s self-identified gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, religion, or political ideology. We encourage students to share their uniqueness; be open to the views of others; honor and learn from their colleagues; communicate in a respectful manner; and create an inclusive environment.
C O N S E N T
To prepare the required paper and video for this course, enrolled students may conduct peer-to-peer participant studies using their peers as participants. Methods may include interviews, observations, surveys, co-design activity, heuristic evaluations, and cognitive walkthroughs. As part of this design research activity, students conducting these studies may take written notes, photographs, and/or video as a means of documentation. This documentation may appear in papers, videos, and conferences for academic audiences. Student will not be identified by name, and no aspect of these studies should cause discomfort or risk to participants. Should any student in the class choose not to participate in any aspect of the study, or have questions about her/his participation, please make this known to the instructor. Additionally, for any work of the course submitted for publication, student authors will be identified as first authors of the submission, and the instructor and TA will follow in the list of authors of such work in recognition of their efforts in cultivating this work. If these term are not acceptable to you, please indicate so to the instructor. Non-participation will not impact your grade for this course in any way.
Human-Centered Design Methods
Keith Evan Green, RA, PhD
11:40 - 12:55 in MVR 157
C O U R S E D E S C R I P T I O N | D E A 2 7 3 0
Focused on methods for designing for and with people in an increasingly cyber-physical world, with its many challenges and opportunities. Course topics include: design ideation, personas, scenarios, “WoZ,” rapid prototyping, collaborative design, observations, interviews, surveys, heuristic evaluation, usability engineering, and “RtD.” While the methods considered apply to design broadly, Interaction Design, User Experience Design, and HCI are emphasized.
S Y L L A B U S | S E E A L S O M Y D E A 4 2 1 0
B A C K G R O U N D A N D D E F I N I T I O N S
(Listen to "The Power of Design" and "Are the Best Designers Rebels?" on the TED RADIO HOUR)
In the act of designing artifacts (e.g. objects, buildings, book covers, …), a designer or design team typically anticipates how people will engage (use, interpret) them. In designing interactive artifacts (those that may be virtual, smart, intelligent, cyber-physical), there is a fundamental difference: designers are developing responsive systems that actively engage and interact with inhabitants, local conditions, and/or digital information in real time. Unlike a typical, designed object that exhibits a limited range of responses to dynamic, changing conditions, an interactive artifact is intimately bound together with its users and local conditions in a designed performance.
“Interaction designers” are designers who design not only things but also the interaction of things and the people who use them. Consequently, interaction designers must go beyond simplistic, form-making and composition; interaction designers must explore ways for improving life, enhancing existing places, and supporting the interaction of human beings with their physical (and digital) surroundings.
Interaction Designers combine design, technology, and an attentiveness to human needs and desires to make cyber-physical ecosystems supporting human activity. Specifically, “Human Centered Design Methods” focuses on the iterative, human centered, design-research process of developing meticulously designed, computationally-embedded, artifacts that support and enhance the interactions across people and their surroundings to create places of social and psychological significance. The gradual embedding of computation in designed artifacts will have a broad impact on society as these technologies support and, in some cases, augment everyday work, school, entertainment, and leisure. In brief, Interaction Design is more than an aesthetic search, a stylistic possibility, a utopian dream, or a technological quest; it is, instead, a way of designing a “commodious home” for established and new patterns of living. In the words of philosopher Andrew Feenberg, “technology,” in this context, “is not simply a means but has become an environment, a way of life.”
O B J E C T I V E S A N D L E A R N I N G O U T C O M E S
“Human Centered Design Methods” aims to cultivate new vocabularies of design and new, complex realms of understanding towards realizing artifacts and systems responsive to human needs and desires. By the completion of this course, student will:
• cultivate an understanding of how human-centric design methodologies can be applied in the iterative process of designing artifacts supporting and augmenting human users.
• demonstrate an ability to develop and test conceptual design prototypes responsive to the challenges and opportunities of an increasingly digital society.
• communicate a design process in a rigorous written paper, poster, design diary, and video, adhering to the requirements for submission to the benchmark conference for human-centered, interaction design research: CHI, “Late Breaking Work” submission, https://chi2018.acm.org/authors/late-breaking-work/ and the “Video Showcase” submission, https://chi2018.acm.org/authors/video-showcase/.
R E Q U I R E D R E A D I N G S
• Interaction Design and Delft Design Guide
> before class skim-read the assigned chapter(s) and linked docs.
> in class listen/take notes to learn what is emphasized.
> after class re-read chapter(s) and linked docs for detail, knowing the emphasis.
• Green, Keith Evan. Architectural Robotics (optional book for this class)
• Dow, S. Wizard of Oz Interfaces [WOz]
• Frayling, C. Research in Art and Design [RtD]
• Ishii, H. Tangilbe Bits
• Ishii, H. Radical Atoms: Beyond Tangible Bits...
• Mau, Bruce. An Incomplete Manifesto for Growth
• Mitchell, W., J. "Software" and "Computers for Living in" in e-topia
• Perec, G. Observational "Experiments" in Species of Spaces and Other Pieces
• Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J. and Evenson, J. Research through Design [RtD]
> a useful online resource: designresearchtechniques.com
P R O T O T Y P I N G M A T E R I A L S
You will need to purchase materials required to construct your prototypes. Some materials and most manual and digital fabrication tools are available in our Digital Design Fabrication Studio on LL2 in HEB adjoining MVR.
To create functioning, interactive prototypes, you are strongly encouraged to embed into your prototype littleBits, electronic "bits" that snap together magnetically. Watch a TED Talk about about littleBits, and review a guide on how to use them. Also watch a short video on how Havas uses littleBits professionally. Finally, you might find project inspiration and ideas from Make (link) which also offers the guidebook, Getting Started with littleBits (a used copy from Amazon costs about $6 including shipping).
Your working prototypes with embedded littleBits will require:
• at least one Input bit (a sensor, such as a motion sesnor or a light sensor)
at least one Output bit (an actuator, such as an LED or a servo motor)
• one battery bit and one 9V battery
The total cost of your littleBits components does not have to be much more than $50. You can purchase your bits on the littleBits webpage. You might consider using a wireless bit (e.g. the Bluetooth Low Energy bit or the CloudBit); however, unless you have a computer coding background, I would discourage you from purchasing the Arduino bit or any bits requiring it (e.g. LED Matrix). (If you are interested in designing more complex interactive systems than simple Input-Output ones for this course, take my DEA 4210 Interaction Design studio.)
M A K I N G C O L L A G E S
One way to make Collages by Melissa from my previous studio-lab course
Examples - Archigram collages 1, 2
M A K I N G A N I M A T E D G I F S
PBS video on Animated GIFs
One way to make stop-motion videos (This one, using Photoshop)
Example from Dassault Systemes: "The Meeting"
Examples from my students: Lyndsey, Michael + Melissa, Jim + Lyndsey
Example from my lab: a quick study for an interactive patient room
V I D E O E X A M P L E S & G U I D E
Marble Answering Machine (Bishop, 1995) (WOz example)
musicBottles (Hiroshi Isshi, Tangible Media Lab, MIT.
Example from my students: haptic desk interface for autism
Examples from my lab: Helping Hand; ART: AWE; CyberPLAYce; home+;
G U I D E S : I R B A N D C O N S E N T F O R M S
IRB application from my lab
IRB approved protocol from my lab
Parental Permission (Consent) Form example from my lab
M Y L A B ' S P A P E R S E M P L O Y I N G H C D M E T H O D S
Survey (for children) with Smileyometers
Survey (for adults) with two different kinds of Likert scales
Using suveys, task analysis, design guidelines: AWE from IE
Using co-design with kids: CyberPLAYce from IDC and LIT KIT from DIS
Design research, full arc: AWE from the Journal of Personal & Ubiquitous Computing
Design research, full arc: ART from CHI
C H I L B W P A P E R E X A M P L E & G U I D E
ReWear from University of Maryland College Park (Best One!)
Smart Kitchen from National U. of Taiwan
Measuring Product Happiness from TU Delft
Energy Monsters from Northwestern U.
A C M P O S T E R E X A M P L E S & G U I D E
Xtinguish from a previous DEA 2730
LIT KIT from my own lab
Qora Smart Glove from Emily Carr U.
Personal Inventories from HCI+D at Indiana U.
Augmenting Bag-of-Words from Georgia Tech
S C H E D U L E
08.22 | 01 Course Organization and Definitions
> READ: (in class, if time allows) Mau, B. "An Incomplete Manifesto for Growth"
> IN CLASS: form teams of three
08.24 | 02 Intro to IxD Research / Data Gathering for User Requirements
> READ: Ch.s 9&10 to p.370; NY Mag; A D. Cyc; B Prob Def.; D Requir.s; G Mind Map
> IN CLASS: define the problem (incl.needs & requirements); generate a Mind Map
08.29 | 03 Interfaces – Defined, Types, Cases / littleBits / Literature Review
> READ: Ch. 6; C Lit Review;; Mitchell ; Iishi-1; Iishi-2; explore the different littleBits
> IN CLASS: prepare a lit review; iterate you Mind Map; think "littleBits"
08.31 | 04 Ideation and Prototyping (part 1)
> READ: Ch. 11; E Collage (and see above); Mood boards, U Ix Prototyping; WoZ
> IN CLASS: ideate with the strategies above and littleBits
09.05 | 05 Ideation and Prototyping (part 2)
> READ: F Analogy & Metaphor; H Morphological Chart (more)
> IN CLASS: ideate with the strategies above and littleBits
09.07 | 06 Ideation and Prototyping (part 3)
> READ: I Scamper; J Storyboard (more)
> IN CLASS: ideate with the strategy above, reflect, and prepare a Storyboard
09.12 | 07 Personas, Scenarios, Task Analysis [Nine Ideation Strategies: 10 pts]
> READ: Ch. 10, pp.370-384; K Scenario (more); L Role Playing
> IN CLASS: reflect, write a scenario, and play the roles
09.14 | 08 Interaction Design in Practice (including IRB and Agile UX)
> READ: Ch. 12; review U Ix Prototyping; Dow, S. WoZ; review Animated GIFs above
> IN CLASS: analyze, reflect, and iterate your prototype; develop an animated GIF
09.19 | 09 Data Gathering: Overview, Observation, Ethnography, Triangulation
> READ: Ch. 7; N Observations; Perec, G. Observational "Exp.s"
> IN CLASS: observe, analyze, reflect, and iterate your prototype
09.21 | 10 Data Gathering: Interviews
> READ: O Interviews; Q Focus Groups
> IN CLASS: interview; present your Nine Ideation Strategies, one per slide
09.26 | 11 Data Gathering: Surveys
> READ: P Surveys; Online survey (example); Review survey examples above.
> IN CLASS: survey, analyze, reflect, and iterate your prototype
09.28 | 12 Data Gathering: Cultural Probes [QUIZ-1: 10 pts]
> READ: Ch. 10 p. 361-362; R Cultural Probes; Cultural Probes
> IN CLASS: develop a cultural probe; generate your money shot (ex.s 1, 2, 3 and 4)
10.03 | 13 [No lecture: Presentations-half of class] [Early Concept: 10 pts]
10.05 | 14 [No lecture: Presentations-half of class] [Early Concept: 10 pts]
10.10 | [F A L L B R E A K]
10.12 | 15 Design and Cognition; Design for Emotion
> READ: Ch. 3 & 5; S Design for Emotion; T Emotion Measurement
> IN CLASS: measure emotion, analyze, reflect, and iterate
10.17 | 16 Research through Design
> READ: RtD; Frayling Research; Zimmerman/Forlizzi RtD; V Videos; Paper Template
> IN CLASS: review poster/paper/video examples above, assign team members
10.19 | 17 Evaluations: Heuristic Evaluations, including Cognitive Walkthroughs
> READ: Ch.s 13,14 & 15 p. 512-514
> IN CLASS: perform Cognitive Walkthroughs, analyze, reflect, and iterate
10.24 | 18 Workshop to Advance Your Paper, Poster and Video
10.26 | 19 Evaluations: Usability Studies
> READ: Ch.s 15 to p. 511, M Heuristic Eval., (Nielsen's Heuristics), SUS/PSSUQ
> IN CLASS: perform a Usability Study, analyze, reflect, and iterate
10.31 | 20 Workshop to Advance Your Paper, Poster and Video
11.02 | 21 Evaluations: Delphi Method and Quasi-Experiment Studies
> READ: The Delphi Method
> IN CLASS: perform a Delphi Method study, analyze, reflect, and iterate
11.07 | 22 Workshop to Advance Your Paper, Poster and Video
11.09 | 23 Evaluations: Analytics, Crowd Sourcing, Using Models
> READ: Ch.s 15 p. 514-521; review Qualtrics, Survey Monkey and Mechanical Turk
> IN CLASS: perform a web survey with Qualtrics (free via Cornell; more at this link)
11.14 | 24 Workshop to Advance Your Paper, Poster and Video [PAPER DRAFT]
11.16 | 25 Presenting Design: Public Speaking [QUIZ-2: 10 pts]
> READ: View S. Jobs; Sheryl Sandberg
> IN CLASS: prepare your 2-minute madness presentation
11.21 | 26 Workshop to Advance Your Paper, Poster and Video [IRB DUE]
11.23 | [T H A N K S G I V I N G]
11.28 | 27 Presentations: "2-Minute Madness," Poster and Paper Exhibit, Demos
> Submit a single slide created with Google Slides to the class Box folder before class.
> Pin-up your printed poster and each, individual page of your paper and design diary.
11.30 | 28 Presentations: Videos [FINAL WORK DUE: 40 pts]
> Submit all final assignment deliverable to the class Box folder before class.
> Present your videos (we supply the popcorn); Complete a course evaluation online.
G R A D I N G
Throughout this course—an intimate and intensive “conversation” across students, professor, and TA— students will have ample opportunity to receive feedback on their work. In addition, students within teams will grade each other, student teams will grade other student teams, and student grading will be considered in assigning grades for this course. Students will receive a grade in response to work, weighted as follows:
• (10 points) Attendance and participation. This is based on: (1) occasional, unannounced attendance calls taken in the first ten minutes of class, and (2) by the quality of your input when your name is blindly selected from my “magic box,” a box holding the names of all enrolled students in this course. Failure to attend a class without an approved excuse that was submitted prior to that class will lower your grade 2 points out of 100 points total.
• (10 points) Completion of Cornell IRB’s CITI training for new human participant researchers. Email Cornell’s completion certificate to the TA before Thanksgiving break. Failure to completethis task or late submission results in 0% grade for this component of the course. No excuse.
• (10 points) Nine Ideation Strategies. For each team, uploaded to our class Box folder and presented in class: one manifestation of each of the 9 ideation strategies (a list of these is found on this page, upper-left column), a persona, a scenario, a "money shot" (best image) of your prototype, and a "demo" of your design captured by video. Four students will work together as a team and receive the same grade. A student peer-review evaluation form [link] will be used, and peer reviews will be considered in assigning the grade.
• (10 points) Early Concept. For each team, uploaded to our class Box folder and presented in class: a persona, a scenario, a "money shot" (best image) of your prototype, and a "demo" of your design captured by video. Teams of 3 or 4 students will work together and receive the same grade. A student peer-review evaluation form [link] will be used, and peer reviews will be considered in assigning the grade.
• (20 points) 2 quizzes (True/False and multiple choice). Each quiz is worth 10 points of the total grade, testing basic content of assigned readings. (Download publisher’s powerpoint slides if you wish; I do not provide my slides).
• (40 points) Final course deliverables. For each team, uploaded to our class Box folder and presented in class: a paper, a poster, a design diary, and a video. Four students will work together as a team; however, each member of the team will be chielfy responsible for one of the four key deliverables, and will be graded for this component. The student working on the design diary will also be chiefly responsible (and graded) for the section of the paper reporting on the iterative development of the prototype. Team members will make her or his assignment clear to the instructor for the purpose of grading by uploading her/his work with file name in this format: Team1_Poster_CharlesEames. Posters, papers, and design diaries are printed on one-sided paper and each sheet is pinned-up for exhibition. See the course's grading rubric [link]. A student peer-review evaluation form [link] will be used, and peer reviews will be considered in assigning the grade.
More about the four deliverables for this course:
(1) A written, printed paper [my guide] communicating the iterative, human-centered design process for an interactive artifact developed in-groups of three. You are not reporting on all ideation strategies, data gathering techniques, and evaluation methods; only those that make the most cohesive, compelling reporting of your design process.
(2) A printed poster [30" wide x 40" high; my guide] communicating the basic content of the same paper.
(3) A printed design diary [example from previous class] containing [a] weekly photographs of your team's developing porotype, with a written description of what was learned from the research study (or studies) performed that week that informed its development (this is a one page document); [b] the final prototype carefully photographed (including a “the money shot” and a photo of the prototype in which all components of the prototype are labeled.
(4) A video [my guide] communicating the full, cohesive story of the designed artifact your team produced, answering why, for whom, and how it was developed, including an overview of the methods used to design and evaluate it. The animated GIF assigned early in the term is part of this video deliverable.
This paper, poster, and video will follow, precisely, the directions (https://chi2017.acm.org/lbw.html) and paper template for a “Late Breaking Work” to CHI, the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Grading is on a 40-point scale that follows the course's gradiing rubric. You are encouraged to learn from prior LBW papers (previously known as WiP or Works in Progress) - those linked to this course webpage (see above) and thosefound (in the thousands) in the ACM DL.
These notes will be helpful to you in preparing the final deliverables:
my guide for developing papers and posters
my guide for making videos.
• a great design diary from a previous class
To further guide the development of your paper, you are required to come to class having entered, into the “Extended Abstracts” paper format, your discussion and results (including any associated figures and tables) for that content/studies you accomplished in the previous week. At (often unannounced) class sessions, name(s) of one of more students will be blindly selected from the magic box to present this segment of the paper for class critique. These presentations will contribute to the selected students’ participation grade, and will help all members of the class to construct a better paper. As indicated in the weekly class schedule, all posters will be presented as drafts in class for critique.
At the FINAL CLASS SESSION, you will submit: (1) the printed paper, poster, and design diary; and (2) your digital files, uploaded to our class Box file, of the paper, poster, design diary, and video.
P O L I C I E S
Attendance, timely arrival to class, and participation are mandatory and count for 10% of the grade. Attendance at the start of class will be taken for some class sessions without advanced notice. For each absence or late arrival, email the professor and TA with an explanation, attaching supporting documentation (e.g. doctor’s note); we will consider these as a valid excuse (hardship, medical appointment) without penalty, or not. It is your education, so you should take responsibility for yourself in attending all class sessions on time.
Late submissions will NOT be accepted, except with a doctor’s certificate or other proof of personal crisis or hardship. Failure to submit the printed documents and digital files will reduce your mid-term or final assignment grade 10 points.
Grading for this course is carefully determined by the professor and TA with thoughtful consideration of student grading of their peers. If you believe the grade for any component of this class including the final grade is incorrect, you may submit a written argument along with the component-in-question for reassessment. The written argument must reference a specific issue with the graded component of the course and must be thoroughly substantiated. The professor and TA will together consider the request, potentially with the assistance of other faculty with expertise in the area. The reassessment will result in any of the following outcomes: no change of grade, a change of grade for the better, or a change of grade for the worse. Be warned: reassessment cases are too frequently cases in which a component (e.g. the paper, poster, or design diary) falls well short of the high expectations for the course such that the grade is changed for the worse! You understand that the grade for work submitted for reassessment may result in a grade lower than originally assigned.
J O I N S I G C H I A N D D R N
Students are encouraged to join (at no charge) email postings for ACM SIGCHI ANNOUNCEMENTS and DESIGN RESEARCH NEWS (for design opportunities) and ACM SIGCHI JOBS (in design). Directions for joining all these.