jamin.org

Just want to share the results of the eReader and gestural interaction project I had my Basic Interaction class (undergraduate HCI double majors) do for their final project. This was a six-week project with the following focus:

• Synthesize needs and opportunities from both potential product users and other sources.
• Discover the intersection between the needs observed by researchers and the needs people perceive in themselves in otder to find rich areas for product development.
• Design product interactions that support the emotional connections between the person the reader
• Explore the personal and social roles that ebook readers facilitate
• Communicate the value of the ebook reader through the visual, auditory, and narrative channels provided by a video sketch

Though the time line was short, I was pleased with the results. During the final, a user research specialist from Daedalus Excel showed up and was very impressed with the presentations and solutions.

I was really impressed with the quality of the video sketches. I had them read John Zimmerman’s Video Sketches: Exploring Pervasive Computing Interaction Designs and showed them several examples. We talked about the advantages and disadvantages of different styles. But we did not go over tools, video techniques, or audio, which is typically done. Also, I told them that there was no right way to do this and that they should design their video sketch according to what they thought would be most effective given their skills and the time they had. The quality of the results were really impressive.

In particular, I enjoyed one group that used simple sketches and a child narrator to tell the story for an eReader for moms.

The students got to select an audience focus from a list of six options. Some of the groups overlapped. The documentation links are below, which contain links to their videos and final presentations.

Commuters
Starburst Reader
EasyNews

Moms
Kava
Oracle Reader

Family
Flip ‘N Share

Today marked the beginning of the third project in the Basic Interaction course I am teaching this semester. The goal of the project is to design an ebook reader taking into account gestural interaction for particular audiences and contexts. I thought this would be a good project because it combines a product with much opportunity for improvement and invention and an examination of the language and appropriateness of gestural interaction.

To begin the conversation on interactive gestures, we looked at Recognizing gestures: Interface design beyond point-and-click, the Interactive Gestures Pattern Library, and the recently released draft of the first chapter of the upcoming Interactive Gestures. Between the three, the basics of gestural interaction are well covered. The first chapter of Interactive Gestures, in particular, offers a lot in the way of examples for exploring the history and current state of gestural interaction. It was very convenient to have been released just a few weeks before the project began.

The students will have the remainder of the semester to conduct user research, synthesize, produce and test concepts, and then demonstrate their solution in the form of a video sketch. I have no preconceptions for the result of combining the ebook and gestures, but that’s what makes this exciting. In the words of Frank Gehry, “If I knew how a project was going to turn out, I wouldn’t do it.”

The first assignment for the Basic Interaction course I’m teaching this semester was due today. With it being only a week into the semester, I did not know what to expect from the students. But their efforts provided fodder for some stimulating discussion and considerations for interaction design. The assignment was as follows, originally developed by Chris Pacione (now at BodyMedia).

A: Physical cube

Starting with a cube, design an interactive object that you think best communicates the following uses. The cube should look as though you can:

• rub it
• turn it
• squeeze it

The cube can be no bigger than six inches in any dimension. You may add or subtract from the cube, but it has to remain cube-like. Other shapes may be used as long as they play a secondary role. You may also use color, texture, material as well as a relative context. For example, the final solution might be a green fuzzy cube with little circular nibs placed on the floor.

With no mention of research of audience, the students were left to their own devices in their interpretation. There were a range of solutions, many made of some sort of foam or sponge to afford squeeze, a lot of fuzzy bits for rubbing, and various measures to suggest turning.

After some discussion, we started talking about the success of the requirements from a distance and then once you got the cube in your hands. I saw this as a macro/micro perspective similar to how you might talk about a poster. From across the room you might be attracted to a cube because it looks like you can interact with it in one way, and then upon close inspection you discover further ways to interact with it. I had not thought about affordances as being macro and micro before, so I thought this was an interesting point to emerge especially when thinking about keeping people engaged with a product by not revealing all its tricks up front, but allowing for some exploration and discovery.

We also talked about the range between explicit and implicit affordances. For example, an explicit means of communicating that the cube should be turned might be by an arrow. In the middle of the spectrum might be a quote or line of text that starts on one side of the cube and continues across multiple sides, provoking the user to turn it to read the whole sentence by not explicitly telling them. On the implicit side might be a cube that is a puzzle that can be pulled apart and put back together. This act requires the user to turn the cube to examine all the sides to figure out the puzzle.

Finally, it was interesting that no one challenged the requirements by creating affordances that did not deliver. For example, no one purposely designed a cube that looked like you could turn it but actually did not turn. This brings up a point about intention (and perhaps manipulation) in design. When would you want to suggest an action that could not actually be performed? Unfortunately, we did not have time to discuss this. Perhaps for the next assignment.

As for this assignment, I think it’s a great introduction to interaction design because it gets people thinking about interaction design outside of the context of digital interfaces, it’s easy to talk about because you have tangible artifact to interact with, it’s quick, and it’s fun.

Last week, the course evaluation results were made available for Introduction to Design Computing, the course I taught last fall. Unfortunately, the feedback I got was not very positive. In fact, it was outright deplorable. Out of 5, the average score for the course was 2.09, and for me as an instructor, 1.91.

I must say the results were a hard blow. The comments were even harder to take, especially since most of the class are also my peers. The main issues were that it was difficult to know what the course was about, that there should have been a greater emphasis on the tools, and some people felt I wasn’t knowledgeable enough about the material (though others complained that they felt they could have learned more from me).

While not the feedback anyone wants to hear, I understand their frustration. The course is not clearly defined, which was my main concern when planning it. There was a big question about whether the course was about the tools or prototyping design ideas. I questioned why a Flash tools course was required for graduate interaction design students, since many of them already have the skills. Through discussion with other faculty, it was decided the course needed to change from strictly a Flash course, which meant I needed to develop the syllabus from scratch. The school did not help me prepare for this. Other than the meetings I initiated about what I should teach, I was on my own.

This is the norm for graduates students who teach, which is not good for the teachers or the students. And as I stated at the beginning of the course, I did feel unprepared. While I attempted to stick to talking about design concepts within the context of digital prototypes, I was constantly pulled toward more detailed teaching about the tools due to some of the needs of the students. This created a question in my mind about what the course should really be about, which probably didn’t help things.

This is all not to say that I could not have done things better. Definitely, I could have. My idea of keeping the syllabus flexible to respond to the student needs seemed to have worked against me. And I should have learned more about the differences between ActionScript 2.o and 3.0, as it took me a couple weeks to figure it out.

On the positive side, I had an open conversation about the course during the final, and several of the students said they learned a lot and enjoyed certain projects (while others thought certain projects were useless). As for the evaluations, a few students gave me an above average score. And some comments were positive. So not all bad.

I shared the verbal feedback I got with other faculty and hope it will affect the future of the course. For one, I stressed the difficulty of having a graduate student teach his peers, and the odd role dynamic that it creates. I also highlighted the need for the content to be more defined and questioned whether it should be a required course for interaction design graduate students.

The feedback really made me think hard about preparing for the Basic Interaction class I’m teaching this semester. Again, I was on my own. But fortunately this time I had four previous syllabi to pull from, I have taken the class, and it’s my degree, so it was a lot easier to plan. I’m a lot more confident and prepared this time around.

Overall, I still believe my teaching experience last semester was valuable, and I’m happy I was able to help some of the students learn new skills. I’m disappointed that this wasn’t the case for everyone, and I wish it would have gone more smoothly. But I think the experience and the feedback will help me both this semester and in the future.

Happy new year +3!

What follows is my experience in 2007 as a graduate student and the opportunities it afforded me, as well as what I will be doing in 2008. Finally, I mention the blizzard that is about to hit Mammoth Lakes, California, where I currently am.

Design School and 2007

Two thousand and seven was a great year for me. I have no regrets about taking two years out of my work life to indulge in the grad school experience. People say that you don’t need to go to grad school and that you can get the same experience in the working world. While that may depend on the program, in my case, I wholeheartedly disagree.

The interaction design program at the CMU School of Design has changed the way I think about what my purpose is in the world and how I think about life. I’ve had a chance to learn under some great people—Shelley Evenson, Richard Buchanan, Dan Boyarski, John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, Ben Fry, Golan Levin, and Kristin Hughes. And I have had the pleasure of being in the company of my peers, a range of interesting folks from various backgrounds with perspectives I truly appreciate. I learn a tremendous amount from them. My coursework has also provided me with real-world experience working for clients like Motorola and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

This past fall semester I taught Design Computing (digital prototyping with Flash) to a mix of graduate and undergraduate design students. It was my first time teaching, and was both challenging and rewarding.

I also had the opportunity to direct the school’s second annual Emergence conference, which was a great honor and privilege, though a lot of freaking work. But becoming acquainted with folks from Adaptive Path, Apple, Cooper, Core77, Electronic Ink, Engine, GM, Google, IBM, IDEO, live|work, Method, and Swisscom Mobile, eased the pain a bit.

Most of the companies listed above also recruit from the school. This past summer I worked at Adaptive Path in San Francisco, which I would not have had access to without going through the IxD program. There I worked on the Charmr project, a diabetes management device with a focus on the diabetic experience. It was very rewarding and a lot of fun.

Finally, my grad school experience has also truly turned me into a designer. So to answer any question as to whether grad school is worth the $70,000 I will owe upon graduation, for me, the answer is yes.

2008

Enough about last year. The year ahead will bring a slew of new adventures. For one, I will be graduating in May. After that, I will likely move away from Pittsburgh, where I have been living since 2003, to wherever it is that I find work. To prepare for this, during the winter break, I have been building a new portfolio and redesigning this site, which I hope complete before the semester begins on January 14.

This semester I am taking courses with Richard Buchanan, Kristin Hughes, and Shelley Evenson. In addition, I am teaching Basic Interaction Design to design, computer science, and HCI undergraduates. Given my enthusiasm for interaction design and the design process, I am very exciting about this.

In February I am heading to Savannah for Interaction08 to the first ever interaction design conference. I would also like to attend SXSW Interactive, but it may not be in the budget.

Speaking of conferences, I am also currently working on a Work-in-Process submission for CHI 2008 in Florence, Italy, due January 8. My paper is on my thesis project work regarding opportunities for interaction design to support identity change. Submission to CHI is a requirement of my thesis advisor.

Mammoth Blizzard

I am writing this post from Mammoth Lakes, California, where my brother, Matt, and his wife live. I have been here (Flickr photos) since December 20. It has been quite relaxing and a good break from my near constant design thinking. That said, I started off 2008 on somewhat of a design note when I met up with Dan Saffer (Designing for Interaction author, Adaptive Path Experience Design Director, and Interaction08 co-chair, MDes IxD CMU) who just happened to be in Mammoth at the same time as me. Dan will be guest lecturing at CMU on January 16 in Jodi Forlizzi’s Seminar 2 class for the first-year interaction design grads. Good beer and good conversation with Dan in an unlikely meeting place provided a fitting start to the new year.

Dan left Mammoth the next day, due to the upcoming storm. Conversely, I extended my stay.

The National Weather Service has issued a Blizzard Warning for Mammoth Lakes warning of significant snow accumulations and strong winds that have the potential to create dangerous winter driving conditions Friday through Sunday. Four day snowfall totals of 5 - 8 feet are possible through Sunday in the Sierra.

To leave Mammoth, I need to fly out of Reno, Nevada, which is already a harrowing experience given the winds the whip over the surrounding mountains. The impending storm will only increase those winds. So I changed my flight from this Friday to Tuesday, January 8, so I could both avoid potential delays or cancellations and also see such a massive amount of snow. Friday’s prediction is three inches per hour.

The fear of storm produced the longest grocery store lines that I have ever seen, stretching from check-out all the way down the aisles to the back of the store. The shelves were being emptied. Got to love people. (We were only there for a few ingredients needed for last night’s meal.)

So day three of 2008 finds me well, looking forward to the storm, the semester, and whatever lies beyond. I hope it finds you well, too.