Week 3: Design Thinking Ideation Phase Reflection (Phase 3)
During the interpretation phase, my group collaborated to generate 100 possible solutions to address our social justice problem of students having equal access to online homework. We decided to use a google doc in order to easily share the link between all four members of the team and add our ideas to the list. After completing part one, we moved on to part two and decided on what protocol to use for selecting ideas. We all agreed to have an open mind, defer judgment and encourage unrealistic ideas as much as realistic ones, build on the ideas of others based on IDEO’s rules of brainstorming. We created four different categories: longshot, inspiring, rational, and most likely to delight the end user. Then we proceeded to classify our 100 ideas into these four categories. Some of the ideas ended up overlapping as we noticed that they could possibly fall under more than one category. Therefore, we went ahead and linked those ideas to more than one category. This concluded part two of the ideation phase.
Part three of the ideation phase required that we select our most promising ideas from the 100 ideas that we had classified. Each one of us selected an idea that we felt was most promising from the 100 total that we had compiled. We each explained why the idea that we chose would most benefit the user and we addressed the possible constraints that each idea had so that we could then work out possible solutions to those constraints. In our popplet, you will be able to see how we classified our 100 ideas into four categories and then proceeded to select our most promising ideas. You will also see how we explained each of our most promising ideas and typed out each constraint and possible solution to address each constraint. The last step was to collaborate in order to come up with two final ideas and the experts needed for the experimentation/prototype phase.
My individual contribution to this week’s work included contributing 25 of the 100 ideas on our shared google doc, helping to classify the ideas on our popplet, picking out one of the four most promising ideas that we selected as a group and finally having conversations with my group members about which ideas would become final ideas. I also contributed in deciding who our experts would be for the experimentation/prototype phase.
Some challenges my group faced included having to clarify some components from phase two before we could even move on to phase 3. It was stressful to think that we had some missing components, but then we realized we were just not clear enough or we had not organized our information in such a way that the format would allow the reader to be able to see evidence of our work in a visually appealing way. Now we realize that we just need to be address one more component from part two and that is making sure our “inspiring story” is accessible to the reader.
I felt that phase three went pretty smoothly. What I would do differently next time is be more thorough with phase two so that it doesn’t leak onto the week that should be for phase three.
I would apply this process at my site with my students by having them engage in this exercise in teams of four. I would ask each team to decide on a challenge that they all have in common and then start generating 100 possible solutions. I would encourage them to have as much fun with their solution-generating ideas as possible. I know they will enjoy this activity! Giving them permission to be as creative as possible during the first part of phase 3 will be so empowering! I would definitely integrate the use of technology and encourage them to add their ideas through a shared google doc and then arrange them into categories either through popplet or padlet, or any other medium that they see fit. They would have the opportunity to go through the process the same way we just did. They will feel in control once they realize that they have the power to solve their own problems!
The ideation process has traditional (convergent thinking) as well as non-traditional (divergent thinking) characteristics of creativity. First we engage in divergent thinking. We do not place any constraints on our thinking. We just let our ideas flow and all ideas are valid at this point. After we categorize them we need to move onto traditional ways of thinking and be more realistic and think which ideas from our list are reasonable and promising. After we choosing about 4 promising ideas, we again, have to think about realistic constraints that could possibly get in the way of these ideas, however, at this point we get to again engage in divergent thinking because we may have these constraints, but we won’t let that stop us. These constraints won’t stop us because through our divergent thinking we can think of solutions to address each of those constraints so that we may proceed with our promising ideas in spite of those constraints.
During the interpretation phase, my group collaborated to generate 100 possible solutions to address our social justice problem of students having equal access to online homework. We decided to use a google doc in order to easily share the link between all four members of the team and add our ideas to the list. After completing part one, we moved on to part two and decided on what protocol to use for selecting ideas. We all agreed to have an open mind, defer judgment and encourage unrealistic ideas as much as realistic ones, build on the ideas of others based on IDEO’s rules of brainstorming. We created four different categories: longshot, inspiring, rational, and most likely to delight the end user. Then we proceeded to classify our 100 ideas into these four categories. Some of the ideas ended up overlapping as we noticed that they could possibly fall under more than one category. Therefore, we went ahead and linked those ideas to more than one category. This concluded part two of the ideation phase.
Part three of the ideation phase required that we select our most promising ideas from the 100 ideas that we had classified. Each one of us selected an idea that we felt was most promising from the 100 total that we had compiled. We each explained why the idea that we chose would most benefit the user and we addressed the possible constraints that each idea had so that we could then work out possible solutions to those constraints. In our popplet, you will be able to see how we classified our 100 ideas into four categories and then proceeded to select our most promising ideas. You will also see how we explained each of our most promising ideas and typed out each constraint and possible solution to address each constraint. The last step was to collaborate in order to come up with two final ideas and the experts needed for the experimentation/prototype phase.
My individual contribution to this week’s work included contributing 25 of the 100 ideas on our shared google doc, helping to classify the ideas on our popplet, picking out one of the four most promising ideas that we selected as a group and finally having conversations with my group members about which ideas would become final ideas. I also contributed in deciding who our experts would be for the experimentation/prototype phase.
Some challenges my group faced included having to clarify some components from phase two before we could even move on to phase 3. It was stressful to think that we had some missing components, but then we realized we were just not clear enough or we had not organized our information in such a way that the format would allow the reader to be able to see evidence of our work in a visually appealing way. Now we realize that we just need to be address one more component from part two and that is making sure our “inspiring story” is accessible to the reader.
I felt that phase three went pretty smoothly. What I would do differently next time is be more thorough with phase two so that it doesn’t leak onto the week that should be for phase three.
I would apply this process at my site with my students by having them engage in this exercise in teams of four. I would ask each team to decide on a challenge that they all have in common and then start generating 100 possible solutions. I would encourage them to have as much fun with their solution-generating ideas as possible. I know they will enjoy this activity! Giving them permission to be as creative as possible during the first part of phase 3 will be so empowering! I would definitely integrate the use of technology and encourage them to add their ideas through a shared google doc and then arrange them into categories either through popplet or padlet, or any other medium that they see fit. They would have the opportunity to go through the process the same way we just did. They will feel in control once they realize that they have the power to solve their own problems!
The ideation process has traditional (convergent thinking) as well as non-traditional (divergent thinking) characteristics of creativity. First we engage in divergent thinking. We do not place any constraints on our thinking. We just let our ideas flow and all ideas are valid at this point. After we categorize them we need to move onto traditional ways of thinking and be more realistic and think which ideas from our list are reasonable and promising. After we choosing about 4 promising ideas, we again, have to think about realistic constraints that could possibly get in the way of these ideas, however, at this point we get to again engage in divergent thinking because we may have these constraints, but we won’t let that stop us. These constraints won’t stop us because through our divergent thinking we can think of solutions to address each of those constraints so that we may proceed with our promising ideas in spite of those constraints.