Based on my experience designing a system to empower the Baldwin Rivera Boggs SJ hub, I will revise my design process in a few ways going forward in the final assignment. During the first segment of the assignment, research, I will begin doing “deeper” research earlier, in order to account for how long my research took in the BRBSJH project. By deeper, I mean doing thorough scholarly research (in conjunction with seminar) as well as speaking to more people to unravel my biases. I also want to be more proactive, earlier, in terms of reaching out to precedents and collaborating with people studying the same faulty system as me (drug education.)
The second segment, execution of design prototype, will be very different for my final project than it was for the BRBSJH project. Thus, it is more difficult to relate the two, and to predict my experience prototyping my drug education system. That being said, I think there are some global lessons I learned from my BRBSJH prototype that I can apply to my process going forward. I was disappointed in the level of clarity and professionalism in my BRBSJH prototype, and I definitely want to apply the concept, aforementioned in regards to research, of reaching deeper, sooner, to my final project prototype design. For example, if I choose to make a website or app for the final assignment, I would either need to learn how to do that stuff–because code is really not my field of expertise–or I need to think of an alternative way to communicate the same idea, in a different medium I have more comfort in. And I can’t leave that decision, or the development of that decision, until Wednesday night before it is due. Or at least I really shouldn’t.
Selection of audience and sample size. I do not feel to sure about the direction I will take in this segment in my drug education project. That is because, I have not decided the shape my prototype will take. Once I know that, it will become a lot more clear who the audience of the prototype will be. For example, if my prototype is an app, I would choose a group of freshmen and sophomores in high school to use it, and tell me if the app 1) taught them something they didn’t already know 2) made them want to do drugs 3) made them want to abstain from drugs 4) would be a tool they would refer to in a drug related crisis. However, if my prototype is not the actual system, but is only an explanation of the hypothetical system, my audience might be a few adults currently running drug education programs in the United States. I’d have them review my planned system, and ask them if my system is 1) an empowering tool for drug education 2) a system that is not redundant 3) a system that might empower students to make more informed decisions with drugs.
Again, my documentation is contingent on the form my prototype takes. Although, to relate back to my BRBHJH project, I doubt it will be recordings of interviews. I can improve on the quality of my documentation by coming up with a type of documentation that communicates the importance of my system.
I definitely think that I can improve the LP post, by formatting the post in a clear linear way that walks the audience through my design process from beginning to end. In the final post for my BRBSJH project, I summarized different parts of the process in different posts, making it difficult to read as one, continuous process. This time around, I want to unite all the different parts in my final post, just to clarify with myself and my audience my exact thought process that informed the final project.