This week in tutorials we explored the concept of the design process. What we discovered was that the design process is rarely linear, it does not follow a neat flow of beginning, middle, end.
While we were completing the task of designing the paper bridge, we noticed that we went through a lot of trial and error.
First we identified all the mini problems inside the big problem. For example, the size of the paper did not reach. There was nothing tether the paper bridge to each table, and nothing to weigh the ends down.
Due to time constraints, we started implementing our first idea, without brainstorming other possible solutions. When the first idea did not completely worked, we looks at the merits of that design and thought about how we could improve it to over come the downfalls. Once we explored all possibilities with this first design, and none of them worked, we had to go back to the drawing board and rethink a completely new idea. We did this a few times before we came to a solution that almost worked, but then unfortunately time was up and we did not succeed in the design task.
The paper bridge design problem helped to reshape our thinking when it came to the homework question.
My answer had been that it was a design problem. The questions I asked were:
– What are the different kinds and what are the typical traits of people with dimensia?
– Should you take a “one-size-fits-all” approach to the design, or a multi-faceted one, that could exist in different forms to cater to people experiencing different cognitive difficulties?
– Could it utilise non-traditional wayfinding methods and include interactivity?