For the third phase of the Design Thinking process, our group explored collaborative brainstorming. To start off, I created a shared Google Doc of the checklist, a new Stormboard space for our Post-it's, and a Google Drawings file of 30 circles. Inspired by Tim Brown’s TEDtalk, I led my group through a brainstorming warm-up with the 30 circles drawing file. We took 2 minutes at the beginning of our Hangout meeting to do the exercise together, which we shared on our Google Doc. We jumped onto Stormboard and started brainstorming ideas off of the categories from our Interpretation Phase. Each person contributed several thoughts for each category. We ended the meeting with discussion of our next step to filter through the “100 Ideas."
I initiated the protocol to select ideas, where off Hangout and on our own time, we looked over all the Post-its on Stormboard to select what we thought were either: inspiring, rational, daring, long shot, and most likely to delight for our End Users, and converted them to labelled cue-cards. When we convened for another Hangout meeting, we went through the selected ideas and labelled them again as either: physical, digital, or experience prototypes. We then narrowed down our selections further by eliminating ideas that would be an end product of the other ideas. Then we ended up with three ideas that we thought were tangible and practical to what our group could offer in terms of our skills, knowledge, interests and capabilities. Together from there, we used tables to brainstorm the benefits, constraints, and support needed for each of the final ideas.
The major challenge this week, was trying to make contributions that didn’t have much restraint, and only general guidelines. When we did the brainstorming warm-up, since my group members hadn’t had a chance to watch the Tim Brown’s TEDtalk yet, they had a lot of questions on the task to fill the circles. Each person ended up giving themselves some extra “rules,” to either use text or to draw; to use whatever thought that popped up, or to let the drawing tool guide the image, etc. The same struggle occurred with brainstorming “100 Ideas.” Do we ask questions or make statements? Do we use keywords or complete sentences? Do we keep the end product in mind? Do we focus only on our End Users or do we include our own needs? In this aspect, I’m glad I had a team to work with, since it took myself a bit of time to think of anything at all for some of the categories.
From this experience, I would share with my students and colleagues the importance of allowing everyone to have a chance to share and contribute without any pressure. Speaking up in a group meeting could be nerve-racking, and for some, could be difficult to say anything when someone else likes to take the reigns. An equal amount of time for everyone to write down their thoughts and ideas and to collect them all gives rise to more possibilities. Furthermore, allowing time to reflect and review each of the ideas on their own accord, again, relieves any pressure from making hasty selections or votes.
TIM BROWN: “TALES OF CREATIVITY AND PLAY”
The Tim Brown’s TED talk, “Tales of Creativity and Play,” connects to multiple aspects of the Design Thinking (DT) process. Brown explains that in order for us to be creative, we must have opportunities of play; and to play, we must still have agreed upon rules. DT includes a step by step guide in order to visualize and resolve problems or concerns with full clarity and understanding. To brainstorm successfully, creative thought processes must occur, and according to Brown, creativity could be hindered by one’s own fear to share ideas. The concern of what our peers think make us conservative, embarrassed, insecure, sensitive, and uncomfortable. The Ideation Phase of DT is all about brainstorming. There are no restrictions, no wrong answers, no limitations; in fact the more ideas expressed, the better, even if there are similarities amongst them. Essentially, it’s the engagement to openness that allow creative outcomes to occur naturally; this is what’s needed in order for us to Design.
In considering whether or not “Bring Your Own Device” (BYOD) would be well received in my school, or any school for that matter, really depends on the school community and its demographics. Personally from my experience, since our school doesn’t have the resources to provide 1:1, I encourage students to use their devices for some of the class assignments to avoid forfeiting the use of technology altogether. Those who don’t have a device to use are partnered up with someone who does. Similar to the recommendation made by professor Jennifer Imazeki, (2014), the devices are mainly used with “low-stakes assessment.” In other words, the devices are used to enhance student learning experience for engagement and participation.
Since technology is embedded in the lives of nearly every student, using their personal devices for learning sets an example towards what students could continue to access outside their classrooms. I’ve struggled with trying to ban electronics in my class before. One way or another, students still found a way to access them in hopes that they don’t get caught, which they always do. From there I learnt, that it was more effective to have time periods in class to use them, knowing that they will probably use that time to also do their own personal browsing or connect with social media, which helps avoid battling students to put away their phones during the periods that require their focus.
Another benefit with BYOD, especially with the older students, is the relationship established between teacher and pupil. Entrusted with more responsibility, students feel respected when treated like adults, they pay attention more, and are better informed. Feedback for how lessons are taught and learned are reflective by student real-time responses (or lack of response). Furthermore, according to Imazeki, BYOD is convenient for students, is easy to ask open-ended questions, is relatively low commitment, and is potentially low cost. Although, these pros are compared to “clickers,” it’s true to my school that doesn’t use “clickers.” Without funding for technology, devices and software turning over quickly, and minimal use in many subject areas, it’s better to ask students to use their cell phones that they always have on them anyway. “As with any technology, it is best if you go in with a flexible attitude” (Imazeki, 2014); a good teacher understands his/her students, relates to them, and utilizes the available resources to the benefit of a personalized learning experience.
Reference:
Imazeki, J. (2014). Bring-Your-Own-Device: Turning Cell Phones into Forces for Good (PDF). Taylor & Francis Group: The Journal of Economic Education.