Week 4: Design Thinking Experimentation Phase Reflection (Phase 4)
This week my team and I collaborated and communicated in order to refine our focus, our DT question and even our end user. With help and guidance from our instructors we were able to modify our DT question from “How might we provide all students access to online homework?” to “How might we provide devices to students?” Refining our DT question also meant that now we needed to modify our end user because as a result of modifying our question, our product ended up being something that is meant to appeal to school district leaders, not students, even though students are the ones who will end up benefitting from this product in the long run.
As a team we focused on designing a prototype that would be meant to provide all students, within a given school district, access to a device and to the internet via a 1:1 program. Implementing a 1:1 program is a huge and expensive endeavor, so whatever school district chooses to follow that path, must make sure they are prepared to take on such an immense challenge. With that said, we decided that designing a digital guide, The Guide: Implementing 1:1 Internet Capable Devices, would be a helpful prototype to create in order to help school districts avoid potential pitfalls.
My team immediately got to work via Google Docs. We put the checklist for phase 4 on a Google Doc and collaborated via a Google Hangout session. We all made sure we were on the same page and then proceeded to divide up the work amongst our team members. Everyone received a task, such as researching and interviewing key people who would shed light on our research, and then everyone proceeded to contact their key people, schedule interviews and prepare questions to help our guide be the best it could be so that it could have the potential of being used by other school districts.
My individual contribution to this week’s work included reaching out to Dr. Laura Spencer, Director of Technology for the Lakeside Union School District. I was very fortunate that she was able to fit me in to her busy schedule and I interviewed her in order to gather helpful information that would strengthen our digital handbook regarding successful implementation of 1:1 internet capable devices. After gathering my information, I went back to our Google slides, and used QuickTime Player to do a screencast of the slides that included the topic I had chosen to do research on during this phase. Once my screencast was completed, I added it to our Blendspace project titled: The Guide: Putting Devices in All Students' Hands.
A challenge we faced this week was really being pressed for time. It was difficult to gather all the information we needed within the time given because it meant relying not just on each other, but on others as well. It’s tough enough to have to work with each other’s different schedules, but on top of that, we had to reach out to experts who also have very demanding schedules and some weren’t able to meet till later in the week, closer to when the project was due. On top of that, each one of us has the pressure of not letting the rest of the team down. I really wish I would have had the time to meet up with a wider variety of experts in order to have a more complete picture of my research. What I would do different next time to better the process is to contact my key person earlier in the week so that I don’t end up crunched for time. I wish this phase would be three weeks long so that we can have enough time to strategically schedule interviews with different experts and that way we can have a more well-rounded perspective on the topic.
If implemented with actual end users, I think this process would differ in so many ways. Having actual end users would allow me to inform a few different school districts that we are creating this product to help them successfully implement 1:1 internet capable devices and that we would like their input through an online survey, such as Survey Monkey. I would also open up a padlet for them to post their questions so that we could include a FAQ section within our guide. Since we would have direct contact with our end users, it would bring them more to life creating even more empathy for them so that we can really seek out to meet their needs, as they would be involved with EVERY aspect of the process and we would be receiving continuous feedback during every stage, making the final product that much stronger.
The revolutionized idea of collaboration in the 21st century can add to the DT process in such effective and innovative ways that are probably unimaginable to some people. Google Hangouts, cell phones, texting features, Google Docs, Popplet, Padlet, Blendspace, Facebook, Twitter, G+ communities, e-mail and other wonderful uses of technology have made our group collaboration possible without us having to drive anywhere to actually physically meet up with each other during this whole process! Although we have different schedules, all this communication via a variety of mediums through technology has made it not only possible to collaborate, communicate, create and problem-solve but it also has the added feature of convenience. Everyone adds their piece of the puzzle when it fits their schedule. One big feature is also trust. You have to trust your group members that they will get around to it on a timely manner. Everyone always comes through and we may not always be able to all participate during the Google Hangouts, but everyone makes sure to address each component they are responsible for and that is also a big part of the revolutionized idea of collaboration in the 21st century.
This week my team and I collaborated and communicated in order to refine our focus, our DT question and even our end user. With help and guidance from our instructors we were able to modify our DT question from “How might we provide all students access to online homework?” to “How might we provide devices to students?” Refining our DT question also meant that now we needed to modify our end user because as a result of modifying our question, our product ended up being something that is meant to appeal to school district leaders, not students, even though students are the ones who will end up benefitting from this product in the long run.
As a team we focused on designing a prototype that would be meant to provide all students, within a given school district, access to a device and to the internet via a 1:1 program. Implementing a 1:1 program is a huge and expensive endeavor, so whatever school district chooses to follow that path, must make sure they are prepared to take on such an immense challenge. With that said, we decided that designing a digital guide, The Guide: Implementing 1:1 Internet Capable Devices, would be a helpful prototype to create in order to help school districts avoid potential pitfalls.
My team immediately got to work via Google Docs. We put the checklist for phase 4 on a Google Doc and collaborated via a Google Hangout session. We all made sure we were on the same page and then proceeded to divide up the work amongst our team members. Everyone received a task, such as researching and interviewing key people who would shed light on our research, and then everyone proceeded to contact their key people, schedule interviews and prepare questions to help our guide be the best it could be so that it could have the potential of being used by other school districts.
My individual contribution to this week’s work included reaching out to Dr. Laura Spencer, Director of Technology for the Lakeside Union School District. I was very fortunate that she was able to fit me in to her busy schedule and I interviewed her in order to gather helpful information that would strengthen our digital handbook regarding successful implementation of 1:1 internet capable devices. After gathering my information, I went back to our Google slides, and used QuickTime Player to do a screencast of the slides that included the topic I had chosen to do research on during this phase. Once my screencast was completed, I added it to our Blendspace project titled: The Guide: Putting Devices in All Students' Hands.
A challenge we faced this week was really being pressed for time. It was difficult to gather all the information we needed within the time given because it meant relying not just on each other, but on others as well. It’s tough enough to have to work with each other’s different schedules, but on top of that, we had to reach out to experts who also have very demanding schedules and some weren’t able to meet till later in the week, closer to when the project was due. On top of that, each one of us has the pressure of not letting the rest of the team down. I really wish I would have had the time to meet up with a wider variety of experts in order to have a more complete picture of my research. What I would do different next time to better the process is to contact my key person earlier in the week so that I don’t end up crunched for time. I wish this phase would be three weeks long so that we can have enough time to strategically schedule interviews with different experts and that way we can have a more well-rounded perspective on the topic.
If implemented with actual end users, I think this process would differ in so many ways. Having actual end users would allow me to inform a few different school districts that we are creating this product to help them successfully implement 1:1 internet capable devices and that we would like their input through an online survey, such as Survey Monkey. I would also open up a padlet for them to post their questions so that we could include a FAQ section within our guide. Since we would have direct contact with our end users, it would bring them more to life creating even more empathy for them so that we can really seek out to meet their needs, as they would be involved with EVERY aspect of the process and we would be receiving continuous feedback during every stage, making the final product that much stronger.
The revolutionized idea of collaboration in the 21st century can add to the DT process in such effective and innovative ways that are probably unimaginable to some people. Google Hangouts, cell phones, texting features, Google Docs, Popplet, Padlet, Blendspace, Facebook, Twitter, G+ communities, e-mail and other wonderful uses of technology have made our group collaboration possible without us having to drive anywhere to actually physically meet up with each other during this whole process! Although we have different schedules, all this communication via a variety of mediums through technology has made it not only possible to collaborate, communicate, create and problem-solve but it also has the added feature of convenience. Everyone adds their piece of the puzzle when it fits their schedule. One big feature is also trust. You have to trust your group members that they will get around to it on a timely manner. Everyone always comes through and we may not always be able to all participate during the Google Hangouts, but everyone makes sure to address each component they are responsible for and that is also a big part of the revolutionized idea of collaboration in the 21st century.