Assignments

Module I: The Designed Object
Duration: Two weeks

Description: Develop a “designed object” whose form and function operates as a technological critique. Use a design scenario and low-fidelity prototype to communicate your ideas.

Goal:

  • To interrogate the nature of technologically mediated artifacts through critical design
  • To develop your own position on the ideas and methods touched upon by the reading and discussion, expressing them through creative practice.
  • To successfully communicate ideas using design scenarios and low-fidelity prototypes

The limitations and constraints of the project are self-defined, but you should consider how your work relates to the ideas forwarded in the supplementary reading. The reading represents a variety of perspectives on the designed object may be and are offered as complimentary viewpoints. Your work should be seen as a response to these viewpoints and should represent a position that you take in regards to designed artifacts as well as tangible interfaces.

When developing the project you must identify a problem space, keeping in mind that a problem is not always solved with easy solutions, and does not necessarily need to be functional or practical in nature. (There are aesthetic and expressive “problems” to solve as well.) This can also be called establishing an area of practice, or context for your work.

  • You must have a concept, driven by a question.
  • You must support your concept through research and observation
  • You must have related works, which further clarify your concept through their similarities and differences (conceptual, technical, and historical).
  • You must have an audience (keep in mind how you define “audience.”)
  • You must have a design scenario that communicates the experience of your user. (Again, be mindful of how a “user” is defined.)
  • You must have a prototype of your project. Your prototype can be low-fidelity, but you must be able to explain what aspect of your project your prototype seeks to clarify, and how it functions as an example of the vision you have of your project.
  • You must demonstrate critical reflection of your design with an awareness of what the strengths and weaknesses of the project might be.
  • You must put this all into a presentation lasting no more than 5 minutes.
  • Your presentation and associated documentation must be uploaded to your website no later than one day after the last student presents their work.

Supplementary Reading:

  • Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, “Why We Need Things” excerpt from History From Things: Essays on Material Culture by Steven Lubar, W. David Kingery (Eds.)
  • Dunne, Anthony (2005): Hertzian Tales, Electronic Products, Aesthetic Experiences, and Critical Thinking (Chapter 4 and 5) pages 69 – 100
  • Kirsh, D. Complementary strategies: Why we use our hands when we think. In Johanna D. Moore and Jill Fain Lehman (Eds.) Proceedings of the Seventheenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pp. 212-217. 1995.
  • Hiroshi Ishii and Brygg Ullmer. 1997. Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ’97), Steven Pemberton (Ed.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 234-241.

Module II: Environment: Place and Space
Duration: Two weeks

Description: Investigate the implications of digitally augmented hybrid environments though developing your own alteration or intervention in an existing space. Support your ideas through demonstrated observation and analysis. Use a design scenario and low-fidelity prototype to communicate your ideas.

Goals:

  • To interrogate the nature of digitally augmented hybrid spaces through design and prototyping.
  • To develop your own position on the ideas and methods touched upon by the reading and discussion, expressing them through creative practice.
  • To demonstrate the ability to translate observation and analysis into design concepts
  • To successfully communicate ideas using design scenarios and low-fidelity prototypes

Present a design scenario and low fidelity prototype for a digitally augmented environment. The limitations and constraints of the project are self-defined, but you should consider how your work relates to the ideas forwarded in the supplementary reading. You will need to support your concept with observation and analysis of the space you choose to work in. In fact, the observation and analysis must drive your design. Additionally your work should be seen as a response to the viewpoints forwarded in the supplementary reading and should represent a position that you take in regards to ubiquitous computing and the design of technologically mediated spaces.

When developing the project you must identify a problem space, keeping in mind that a problem is not always solved with easy solutions, and does not necessarily need to be functional or practical in nature. (There are aesthetic and expressive “problems” to solve as well.) This can also be called establishing an area of practice, or context for your work.

  • You must have a concept, driven by a question.
  • You must have documented observation and analysis to support your concept.
  • You must have related works, which further clarify your concept through their similarities and differences (conceptual, technical, and historical).
  • You must have an audience (keep in mind how you define “audience.”)
  • You must have a design scenario that communicates the experience of your user. (Again, be mindful of how a “user” is defined.)
  • You must have a prototype of your project. Your prototype can be low-fidelity and in any medium or form, but you must be able to explain what aspect of your project your prototype seeks to clarify, and how it functions as an example of the vision you have of your project.
  • You must demonstrate critical reflection of your design with an awareness of what the strengths and weaknesses of the project might be.
  • You must put this all into a presentation lasting no more than 5 minutes.
  • Your presentation and associated documentation must be uploaded to your website no later than one day after the last student presents their work.

Supplementary Reading:

  • Lanier, Jaron, excerpt from You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto
  • Eric Paulos and Tom Jenkins. 2005. Urban probes: encountering our emerging urban atmospheres. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ’05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 341-350.
  • Manovich, Lev, Augmented Space, from Space Time Play: Computer Games, Architecture and Urbanism: The Next Level
  • Weiser, Mark, “The Computer for the 21st Century” – Scientific American Special Issue on Communications, Computers, and Networks, September, 1991

Module III: Play: Transporting the Core Mechanic
Duration: Two weeks

Description: Take an existing game, analyze it, and identify its core mechanic. Then, extract that mechanic and design a new game around it.

“A Game’s core mechanic contains the experiential building blocks of player interactivity. It represents the essential moment-to-moment activity of players, something that is repeated over and over throughout a game. During a game, core mechanics create patterns of behavior, which manifest as experience for players. The core mechanic is the essential nugget of game activity, the mechanism through which players make meaningful choices and arrive at a meaningful play experience. It is therefore very important to be able to identify the core mechanic at the beginning of the design process, even if it changes as the game develops. Pinpointing the core mechanic of the game allows designers to generate a summary profile the game’s interactivity. Very often, when a game simply isn’t fun to play, it is the core mechanic that is to blame.”

– From Rules of Play by Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman.

Goals:
• To understand the central role of mechanics and their impact on interactive systems.
• To develop your own position on the ideas and methods touched upon by the reading and discussion, expressing them through creative practice.

Present a game designed from a core mechanic extracted from another existing game. Your presentation should contain an analysis of the existing game and a clear illustration of how the core mechanic identified has been transported to your new game. You should present a design scenario and low fidelity prototype. The limitations and constraints of the project are self-defined, but you should consider how your work relates to the ideas forwarded in the supplementary reading.

• You must have a concept, driven by a question.
• You must have related works, which further clarify your concept through their simi-larities and differences (conceptual, technical, and historical).
• You must have an audience (keep in mind how you define “audience.”)
• You must have a design scenario that communicates the experience of your user. (Again, be mindful of how a “user” is defined.)
• You must have a playable low-fidelity prototype of your project.
• You must demonstrate critical reflection of your design with an awareness of what the strengths and weaknesses of the project might be.
• You must put this all into a presentation lasting no more than 5 minutes.
• Your presentation and associated documentation must be uploaded to your website no later than one day after the last student presents their work.

Supplementary Reading:
• Defining Game Mechanics by Miguel Sicart: http://gamestudies.org/0802/articles/sicart
• Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman, Meaningful Play and Designing Play, excerpts from “Rules of Play”
• Katie Salen, Pokewalkers, Mafia Dons, and Football Fans: Mobile Play With Me
• Greg Costikyan, I Have No Words & I Must Design: Toward a Critical Vocabulary for Games
• Johan Huizinga, Nature and Significance of Play as a Cultural Phenomenon

Leave a Reply