RSS

Tag Archives: Design

Brainstorming: With Anonymity and without

I was reflecting for a moment on the picture here, where Design Thinking was in action, and was thinking about how we often ask students, teachers, parents, administrators, workers, and so on to add their ideas to a wall through a brainstorm method.  But I was also thinking about accountability.  I wonder if it would be better to create a system like this where everyone needs to have their name attached to their idea.  My theory is that it would help in two ways.

The first is that the overall architect(s) would be able to return to the brainstorm and see who’s name is attached to the idea.  This way, if there is a problem, they can quickly follow-up with that person to get a clearer idea of what they were writing about.

The second idea stems from the fact that I assume people will put more effort into an idea if they know their name is attached to it.  With anonymity could come sloppiness, laziness, or downright silliness.

Where I think it might squash some of the better ideas because people may not want to put them forth since their name is attached, to counteract this, people could be asked to come back to the wall or another wall for another turn at it.  This time, they could put any idea that came to their head, but could do it anonymously.

I would argue that using both methods would be most useful because most ideas would be well thought out and articulated from those who had their names attached, but the second method would enable out-of-the-box thinking and the bizarre ideas to flourish.

What do you think?  Has this approach been done before?

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 28, 2015 in Design, Education

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Has the IBO always gone overboard with criteria?

At the Nanjing International School, we use both the IBO curriculum and we are trying to adopt NoTosh’s ideas about Design Thinking.

I might argue that since we are trying to follow both the IB Design Curriculum AND Design Thinking we ask students to choose from at least one strand in each criterion.  In my teaching career with MYP, I have noticed most times every item from the IBO’s level 7-8 criteria does not make sense for students to complete.  They are not realistic and rather than student being informed by the process, they are bored out of their mind.

A case example:
If students would like to make a website, they might only choose:

Criterion A: Inquiring and analysing
The student:
i. explains and justifies the need for a solution to a problem for a client/ target audience
ii. constructs a detailed research plan, which identifies and prioritizes the primary and secondary research needed to develop a solution to the problem independently
iii. analyses a range of existing products that inspire a solution to the problem in detail 
iv. develops a detailed design brief, which summarizes the analysis of relevant research.

Criterion B: Developing ideas
The student:
i. develops detailed design specifications, which explain the success criteria for the design of a solution based on the analysis of the research (in this case, a website layout)
ii. develops a range of feasible design ideas, using an appropriate medium(s) and detailed annotation, which can be correctly interpreted by others
iii. presents the chosen design and justifies fully and critically its selection with detailed reference to the design specification
iv. develops accurate and detailed planning drawings/diagrams and outlines requirements for the creation of the chosen solution.

Criterion C: Creating the solution
The student:
i. constructs a detailed and logical plan, which describes the efficient use of time and resources, sufficient for peers to be able to follow to create the solution
ii. demonstrates excellent technical skills when making the solution. 
iii. follows the plan to create the solution, which functions as intended and is presented appropriately
iv. fully justifies changes made to the chosen design and plan when making the solution.

Criterion D: Evaluating
The student:
i. designs detailed and relevant testing methods, which generate data, to measure the success of the solution
ii. critically evaluates the success of the solution against the design specification based on authentic product testing
iii. explains how the solution could be improved 
iv. explains the impact of the product on the client/target audience. (IBO, 2014)

Following this idea, teachers would still have something to mark for every criterion, but it would be more succinct and we could enable the FUN back into the learning.  I would emphasize that we would want the students to choose and (verbally) justify why they have chosen those criteria.  Along the lines of Design Thinking, we want the kids to: “be immersed, synthesize, ideate, prototype, and then display” (NoTosh, 2015).

I think it is important that we follow the rules, but as educators we need to realize when the rules should be broken if we are ensuring that our students are not enjoying the subject matter.

Thoughts?

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Image

14,000 hits

14,000 hits

Woohoo!!  I remember when I was going on 1000 hits.  It was an exciting time.  Now, I have been blogging, tweeting, Scoop.iting, Scribding, Youtubing, Linkedining, and connecting for a few years now.  I just looked down and noticed my hit count.  Pretty cool.  I (we: Pla and I) are about to hit 14,000 hits for the site.  This is an exciting time.

I am nearly half way through my PhD, which definitely slows down the blogging process, but my next goal will probably be to write a few books.  Keep coming back.  I try to add content that is interesting and useful to any educator.

Cheers and thanks for popping by.
Tom Johnson and Pla Sankhum

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Theories, assumptions, and philosophical traditions as benefits to the instructional designer

If instructional designers have a lens with which to view or to reflect on a design process it can help support their practice altogether.   This lens can be the knowledge of foundational theories, assumptions, and philosophical traditions of instructional design.  Christensen (2008) writes it “helps later [to have this knowledge] when it comes to designing the instruction, but also serves as a guide for deciding how to analyze the learning tasks or content and how to assess learning.”

Smith and Ragan (2005) explain these three reasons to reflect upon philosophy and theory as an instructional designer:

  1. Theories are the sources of principles from which many of the prescriptions for design arise, and understanding of the base helps both the learning from the text and ability to engage in application in the field.
  2. Writers in this field need to acknowledge their bases of conclusions and recommendations.
  3. Theories allow designers to explain why they make the decisions they do.

These justifications are all well and good, but instructional designers would be wise to take heed to the advice of Rod Sims (2006) who states you should “assess the relevance of theories and frameworks informing the design and implementation of those environments.”

Examination of the examination is a pertinent component for instructional designers who focus on the lessons and courses, but who want to think about the big picture in doing so.

References

Christensen, T. K. (2008). The role of theory in instructional design: Some views of an ID practitioner. Performance Improvement , 47 (4), 25-32.

Sims, R. (2006). Beyond instructional design: Making learning design a reality. Journal of Learning Design , 1 (2), 1-7.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional Design, Third Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Site Objectives

With an endless assortment of knowledge and junk out there, it’s hard to slow down to digest what we encounter.

I am setting a couple aims and goals for this site:
A. Updated regularly
B. Cutting edge – This may be more easily done through Joomla
C. Useful
D. Aesthetic
E. Easy to Use – A Search would be useful

Your comments and ideas are more than welcome.

 

Tags: , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: