The
fifth theme of the course was about “Design Research” and this time we had to
prepare by reading “Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space”
by Fernaeus & Tholander, “Differentiated Driving Range” by Lundström and
“Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration”
by Réhman, Sun, J., Liu and Li. Especially the latter text was very interesting
to me as my current employer is also active in the field of mobile solutions
for live sports and hence it presented me a better understanding how conceptual
processes work in detail.
As
the seminar group was replaced by a second lecture the structure of the theme
was very classic. This lead that it was easier to soak up a lot of things in
the field of this conceptual topic. In my opinion it was really good to have
two lectures as it was quite difficult to discuss in last weeks’ seminar groups
about topics which have little room for interpretation.
The
lecture by Haibo Li was due to its humoristic touch very easy to follow and to
understand. Haibo Li discussed with us the question “How to solve a problem”.
According to him there are two parts of problem solving. First, defining a
problem and second, solving the existing problem. Haibo Li’s theory is that 90%
of the time shall be used for defining a problem and 10% only for solving a
problem. This was quite new to me as 10% sound a little less to actually solve
a problem, however it makes sense that a good preparation shall take the
biggest amount of time as it avoids to spend your time for ideas, which are no
breakthrough ideas.
The second lecture by Anders Lundström was very interesting and had a dialogue structure, which I found very suitable for the topic as it turned out that most of us had a different understanding of what a prototype actually is. According to Ylva Ferneaus a prototype is a tool that is used for researching the research question hence one can add various functions to a prototype in order to research a field which is of interest. According to what I have understood the focus is to see what happens when the prototype collides with reality. For me, it was of highest interest that a research method like an interview or prototype is not enough to be considered as research as research only starts when the acquired empirical data will be analysed.
I
found this theme very interesting as the conceptual nature of design research
is in my understanding very important to the media world in order to enable a better communcation.
Thanks a lot for sharing your thoughts! I agree with you that Haibo Li's lecture was a bit humorisitc. I especially enjoyed the case of the hungry bear. bear which I think is a good reminder or example of this step along the design research. As far as I understood the second lecture a prototype is mostly to gain knowledge. Since we did not have a seminar this week, you could not really discuss my findings or approaches from the “pre” blog post in my opinion. With the lectures I was able to check my approaches and find some differences/mistakes, but I missed the verbal interaction with class mates in the seminar. The interactions always helped to get a different perspective on the papers and exchange opinions. Well done.
AntwortenLöschenHi.
AntwortenLöschenI like your reflections about this theme. However it is quite interesting that you prefer to have two lectures than one lecture and one seminar. I agree with you that last week was hard to fire up an interesting conversation in the seminar, but it is always nice to discuss with your classmates and share opinions and questions. I really believe that the seminar every time help me gain more knowledge and form a clearer opinion about each theme. This week's theme it could be a lot more interesting if it has been discussed in seminar.
Hi!
AntwortenLöschenThanks for the pleasant and well-worded blog post about theme 5. I agree with you that the lecture by Haibo Li was interesting and well executed and that one of the major key concepts this week, which we will take with us from his lecture, is the importance of problem solving.
/Paul
Dieser Kommentar wurde vom Autor entfernt.
AntwortenLöschenI am glad that you brought up the 90-10 ratio Haibo talked about. I think it was new to me but something I do not entirely agree with. I believe, as you mentioned, that 10% in solving a problem is not that helpful in actually solving it. However, one can not deny the importance of taking the time to defining what problems we need to solve, so we don’t end up solving the wrong problem. I was, as you said, his theory and it could be proved wrong. I am glad that you found the second lecture useful.
AntwortenLöschenNice reflection! keep up the good work!