INTERACTION DESIGN: DESIGN METHODOLOGY SEMINAR
Spring 2023
Instructors:
Dr Joëlle Bitton
joelle.bitton@zhdk.ch
Mona Neubauer
mona.neubauer@zhdk.ch
OVERVIEW AND OBJECTIVES
The Interaction Design Methods course is proposed as an ongoing 'workshop', where theory is practiced and where we share knowledge and learn from each other. This course proposes to investigate the methods of interaction design and the challenges they pose, with an outlook on human-centred, non-human centred & planet-centred design. With notions of cultural contexts, historical overviews, and case studies, we’ll discuss the foundations of interaction design methods and their evolution.
Each student is responsible to advance the collective knowledge of the class, by becoming an investigator and by discovering sources, case studies, and possible new methods as well. Students mentor each other in a peer-to-peer format.
During the overlap with the Interaction Design process course, some of the methods reviewed will be put into practice.
The course is a work-in-progress inviting experiments in pedagogy and in modulating theory and practice together. The field of Interaction Design is dynamic and thus calls for mixing foundation literature with new proposals, while keeping a critical perspective and staying open to shifts. As we progress in uncovering the topics of method class, we also put a strong emphasis on developing essential skills: reading, writing and reflecting, researching, including diverse sources, evaluating data, identifying assumptions and biases, presenting arguments, mediating discussions, sharing knowledge and owning your voice.
*The syllabus for this year's class was elaborated following a workshop in January 2023 where 5 alumni were invited to reflect on the past learnings and on renewed possibilities: Claudia Buck, Edna Hirsbrunner, Fabian Frey, Marcial Koch and Carlo Natter.
COURSE OUTLINE
Class sessions are designed as a workshop each Monday from 10.30-12.30. Starting in week 3 of the course and continuing for the rest of the semester, two students are responsible for one workshop session around a topic, where they present literature, case studies, mediate discussion and activity. See topics below.
EXPECTATIONS AND GRADING
In a peer-to-peer format, students will give each other a grade and feedback
Peers for the class 2023
| Irina | Tara |
| Andreas | David |
| Stepan | Luca B |
| Tanya | Elias |
| Cyril | Elia |
| Laberi | Basil |
| Luca Z | Dario |
| Anja | Jin |
| Ege | Jeanne |
Following criteria:
Workshop Facilitation and contribution to the «Interaction Design Database» 30%
Final essay 30%
Participation in discussions 20%
Journal/Blog 20%
The grade is shared with the instructors by the end of the semester with a short written summary and reasoning included. Teachers may modulate the grade with their own evaluations.
Regular attendance is required (80%). Absences have to be excused (medical notes, etc). Arriving late on more than one occasion will also affect the grade.
Any assignment that remains unfulfilled receives a failing grade.
Note that sessions may take place either on-site or online - hybrid sessions (both online and on-site at the same time) are not possible, unless they were specifically designed for that format.
ONE-TIME DELIVERABLES:
Each class can take place in different places. It can be at school, in a public space, in a museum, in a park, in an office space, on Zoom/online platform, etc.
In order to organise our schedules, you are welcome to pick your location by week 3.
*Please be mindful of commuting time according to your classmates' and your teachers' schedule. We may also have to change location plans due to various circumstances.
Every week two students are in charge to design a collaborative workshop of 2 hours (1h40 with 20mn-break in middle or at the end). You will act as workshop facilitator, use existing methods or generate your own ones – and present at least 4 literature references: 2 from a given pool – and 2 additional sources that you research yourselves, plus case studies. These additional sources should include academic and non-academic references, from various genders, and from various countries / cultures.
The structure of the workshop should include:
The presentations include entries in the Interaction Design Method database, sent to the instructor by email the prior Wednesday 14.00, to get enough time for feedback and to include possible changes.
The entries in the Interaction Design Method Database should include:
The essay is a final 1500-words essay with a diversity of sources and bibliography (classified by genre: book, book chapter, journal article, conference article, academic thesis, newspaper article, web article, etc).
Pick a case study to use as your starting point for your essay. Propose your topic by Week 9 by email in the form of a short paragraph (50 words) explaining the case study, the topic and the questions at stake. We will inform the student if this is accepted in that week. The final essay has to be submitted by 30.05.22 (No extension possible) on the IAD server.
If possible, the paper should be written in English.
DELIVERABLES PER SESSION:
For everyone, there are 2 mandatory readings every week and response notes are expected for each paper from each student and have to be uploaded on the blog by the prior Sunday evening. Additional readings are provided for reference and it's expected that you at least browse through the papers and read abstract and intro.
Students are expected to discuss and comment in class based on the readings they have done prior to the class (they can be randomly called to share their perspectives).
A reading guideline is provided to support the reading process: identify author(s), research location/institution, country, background, date, writing style, publication, context, sources, possible biases; identify words and concepts that are not familiar to you; identify questions that are emerging. See additional tips for reading academic papers by researcher Mike Ananny.
Texts vary in length every week, this is considered part of the learning process in this class to go through a reading and gather essential ideas in a limited time.
In addition, we suggest that you read the entries in the database made by your classmates prior to class.
A separate 'reflective journal' is developed by each student to share learnings from the seminar. It should be in the form of an online blog/vlog/podcast (ie. WordPress, Notion, Medium, TikTok, Insta or other) to share with the public your discoveries, findings, reflections, etc.
COURSE MATERIALS
Readings are made available in the shared IAD server.
CALENDAR
Week 1 - 20.02.23 Deconstructing Interaction Design or Why Are You Here? (mn, jb)
The focus of this introductory lesson is a discussion on the term "Interaction Design".
From your short experience as design students in the first semester and your various experience as customers and users, we’ll uncover the variety of meanings of interaction design.
We’ll also look at the syllabus and go through the lectures to prepare.
Reading:
Löwgren, J. & Stolterman, E. (2007). "Thoughtful Interaction Design". The Process (15-41).
Readings to browse:
Kolko, J. (2007). "Thoughts on Interaction Design". Brown Bear LLC. (Chapter 3)
Week 2 - 27.02.23 Design/Undesign: Perspectives and biases (jb)
Historical outline and introduction of design method theories, highlighting the notion of design, technology and human experience, as well as understanding who designs design.
Lecture : “Perspectives of Interaction Design”
Readings:
Carroll, J. M. (2000). "Making Use: Scenario-Based Design of HumanComputer Interactions". The MIT Press. “the Process”
Sanders, E. (2013). "Perspectives on Participation in Design". Transcript Verlag.
Readings to browse:
Dubberly, H. (2004). "How do you design?" Dubberly Design Office.
Mareis, C. (2013). "Wer gestaltet die Gestaltung? Zur ambivalenten Verfassung von partizipatorischem Design". Transcript Verlag.
Dreyfuss, H. S. "The designer’s role (sketch)".
Kolko, J. (2011). "Exposing the Magic of Design: A Practitioner’s Guide to the Methods and Theory of Synthesis". (Oxford Series in HumanTechnology Interaction) (1 ed.). Oxford University Press, USA.
Week 3 - 06.03.23 For who and what do we design? Do we design for anyone? (mn)
Design takes place everyday, it is inspired by popular culture and in turn inspires stories and the collective imagination. What power does design have? What kind of responsibility do designers have? What futures do we want to create?
Readings:
Samochowiec, J. (2020). "Future Skills: Four scenarios for the world of tomorrow". GDI Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute. [chapter "Scenarios" + "Conclusion"]
Bell, Genevieve, Blythe, M. & Sengers, P. (2005). “Making by Making Strange: Defamiliarization and the Design of Domestic Technologies”. In ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 12. 149-173.
Readings to browse:
De Laet, M.,Mol, A. (2000). "The Zimbabwe Bush Pump: Mechanics of a Fluid Technology", In Social Studies of Science. 30/2. 225–63.
Norman, D. (1988). "The Design of Everyday Things". 54-80.
Rosner, D.,Bean, J. (2009). “Learning from IKEA Hacking: “Iʼm Not One to Decoupage a Tabletop and Call It a Day”. Proceedings of CHI’ 09.
Links to browse:
https://thanks-in-advance.com/
Week 4 - 20.03.23 Human-Computer Interaction and methods (mn)
Interaction Design and the field of HCI research are intertwined. Desk-based research, cultural probes, participatory design, ethnographic video, etc… terms that are at the heart of methodologies.
Readings:
Gaver, B., Dunne, T., Pacenti, E. (1999). “Design: Cultural probes”. In Interactions, 6(1), 21-29.
Oulasvirta, A., Kurvinen, E., & Kankainen, T. (2003). “Understanding contexts by being there: case studies in bodystorming". In Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 7(2), 125-134.
Readings to browse:
Buur, J., Fraser, E., Oinonen, S., & Rolfstam, M. (2010). “Ethnographic video as design specs”. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Australia’ 10.
Danzico, L. (2010). “From Davis to David: Lessons from Improvisation”. In Interactions.
Fogg, B.J. (2003). “Conceptual Designs”. In Laurel, Brenda (ed.). Design Research. Methods and Perspectives.
Sanders, E., Stappers, P. J. (2008). “Cocreation and the new landscapes of design”. In CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18.
Verplank, B. (2008). Interaction Design Sketchbook.
Week 5 - 27.03.23 Experience and the "user-experience" (jb)
At the heart of the design is the human experience: how to keep track of it?
Readings
Bitton, J., S. Agamanolis, and M. Karau, “RAW: Conveying minimally-mediated impressions of everyday life with an audio-photographic tool”. In Proceedings of CHI 2004.
boyd, danah. 2007. “Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life.” In MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Readings to browse:
Buchenau, M. & Fulton Suri, J. 2000. “Experience Prototyping”. In Proceeding of DIS ’00.
Merholz, P., Wilkens, T., Schauer, B., & Verba, D. (2008). Subject To Change:
Creating Great Products & Services for an Uncertain World: Adaptive Path on Design. O’Reilly Media, Inc. (Chapter 1 + 5)
Horst, Heather. 2011. Free, Social, and Inclusive: Appropriation and Resistance of New Media Technologies in Brazil. In International Journal of Communication. 5. 437–462.
Kaye, Joseph, Levitt, M. K., Nevins, J., Golden, J. & Schmidt, V. “Communicating Intimacy One Bit at a Time”. In Proceedings of CHI ‘05.
Week 6 - 03.04.23 Prototyping concepts, prototyping everything (jb)
The prototype is the actuation of an idea, its evaluation, its dissemination, its validation all at once? Where does the prototype stop?
Readings
Montgomery, Will. 2013. “Machines for Living”. In Wire. 243. 28-35.
Houde, S., and Hill, C. 1997. "What Do Prototypes Prototype?", in Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (2nd Ed.), M. Helander, T. Landauer, and P. Prabhu (eds.): Elsevier Science B. V: Amsterdam.
Readings to browse:
O’Sullivan, D. & Igoe, T. 2003. Physical Computing: Sensing and Controlling the Physical World with Computers. Premier Press..
YounKyung, L., Erik, S., & Josh, T. 2008. The anatomy of prototypes: Prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. In ACM Trans. Comput.Hum.Interact. 15(2). 1–27.
Ehn, P., & Kyng, M. 1991. Cardboard computers: Mocking-it-up or hands-on the future. In Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. 169–195.
Bolchini, D., Pulido, D., & Faiola, A. 2009. “ “Paper in screen” prototyping: an agile technique to anticipate the mobile experience”. In Interactions. 16(4). 29–33.
Week 7 - 17.04.23 Prototyping with storytelling - what is evaluated? (jb)
Why do we document, why do we practice pitching, selling ideas? How do we share and disseminate a design? What are the critical challenging points of using storytelling as a form of evaluating a concept?
Readings
Auger, James. 2012. “Demo or die: Overcoming oddness through aesthetic experience”. In Why Robot? Speculative Design, the domestication of technology and the considered future. PhD Thesis. RCA, London.
Kim, J., Lund, A. & Dombrowski. 2010. “Mobilizing Attention: Storytelling for Innovation”. In Interactions.
Readings to browse:
Brown, D. M. (2010). “Competitive Reviews” In Communicating Design: Developing Web Site Documentation for Design and Planning. 254-263. Berkeley: New Riders.
Quesenberry, W. & Brooks, K. 2010. “Why Stories?”. In Storytelling for User experience. Rosenfeld Media.
Loch, Christopher. 2003. Moving Your Idea Through Your Organisation. In Laurel, Brenda (ed.). Design Research. Methods and Perspectives.
**Case study: Almost twenty years apart, read how researcher Hiroshi Ishii & his colleagues present their visions of the future:
Ishii, Hiroshi & Ullmer B. 1997. “Tangible Bits: Towards Seamless Interfaces between People, Bits and Atoms”. In Proceedings of CHI ‘97.
Ishii, Hiroshi, Lakatos, D., Bonanni, L. & Labrune, J. “Radical Atoms: Beyond Tangible Bits,Toward Transformable Materials”. In Interactions. 19:1. January/ February 2012. 38-51.
Week 8 - 24.04.23 What is innovative? (jb)
The history and practice of design is following that of technology, how do they correlate in notions of innovation and creativity?
Readings:
Kelley, T. (2001). "The Art Of Innovation: Lessons In Creativity From IDEO, America’s Leading Design Firm". Crown Business. 23-52.
Rhys, J., Haufe, P., Sells, E., Iravani, P., Olliver, V., Palmer, C. and Bowyer, A. (2011). “RepRap - The Replicating Rapid Prototyper.” In Robotica, 29.
Readings to browse:
Ou, J., Dublon, G., Cheng, C., Heibeck, F., Willis, K.D.D. & Ishii, H. (2016). “Cilllia - 3D Printed Micro-Pillar Structures for Surface Texture, Actuation and Sensing”. In Proceedings of CHI ‘16.
Seago, A., Dunne, A. (1999). "New Methodologies in Art and Design Research: The Object as Discourse". In Design Issues. 15:2. Summer 1999.
Franzini, L., Herzog, R., Rutz, S., Ryser, F., Ziltener, K., Zwicky, P. (2021). “Postwachstum? Aktuelle Auseinandersetzungen um einen grundlegenden gesellschaftlichen Wandel". edition 8.
chapter ["Die Postwachtumsökonomie als plünderungsfreier Zukunftsentwurf, Paech, N., page 73-82]
chapter ["Von der imperialen zur konvivialen Technik", Vetter, A., page 159-167]
Week 9 - 08.05.23 Re:Evaluation or How to fail (mn)
What does it mean to evaluate an interaction design work, what are the tools, how is a project fitting its intentions? Is evaluation even necessary in the context of design?
Readings
Bardzell, J., Bolter, J., & Löwgren, J. 2010. “Interaction criticism: three readings of an interaction design, and what they get us”. In Interactions. 17:2. 32–37.
Greenberg, S., & Buxton, B. 2008. “Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time)”. In Proceedings of CHI ’08.
Readings to browse:
Nørgaard, M., & Hornbæk, K. 2006. “What do usability evaluators do in practice?: an explorative study of think aloud testing”. In Proceedings of DIS ‘06.
Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. 2002. “Introducing Evaluation”. In Interaction Design. Wiley.
Sengers, P., & Gaver, B. 2006. “Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation”. In Proceedings of DIS ‘06.
***Assignment for all: propose the topic of your essay***
Week 10 - 15.05.23 Data and visual abstractions (mn)
Diagrams, sketching, mind mapping, working with data, visualising information: this is the work of explaining to your audience, from clients, to customers, to collaborators, the essence of an argument.
Readings
Buxton, B. (2007). "Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design". Morgan Kaufmann. 76-81.
Eggers, W. D., Hamill R., Ali A. (2013). “Data as the new currency. Government’s role in facilitating the exchange”. In Deloitte Review. 13. 18-31.
Readings to browse:
Fisher, D., DeLine, R., Czerwinski, M., Drucker, S. (2012). "Interactions with big data analytics". In Interactions. 19(3). 50-59.
Mackinlay, J.D., Winslow, K. "Designing Great Visualizations". Study for Tableau Software. (undated, retrieved November 2013).
Pavliscak, P. (2015). "Data-Informed Product Design". O’Reilly.
Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Preece, J. (2002). “Identifying Needs and establishing Requirements”. In Interaction Design: Beyond Human Computer Interaction. John Wiley & Sons. 201-211.
Week 11 - 22.05.23 Design Fiction, Speculative Design, Artistic research (mn)
Where design and art collide: what is your design standing for? How do we reboot the design field?
Readings
Auger, James. 2012. “Speculative design: The products that technology could become”. In Why Robot? Speculative Design, the domestication of technology and the considered future. PhD Thesis. RCA, London.
Wakkary, Ron & Odom, William & Hauser, Sabrina & Hertz, Garnet & Lin, Henry. 2016. A short guide to material speculation: Actual artifacts for critical inquiry. interactions. 23. 44-48.
Readings to browse:
Dunne, Anthony and Raby, F. 2001. Design Noir: The Secret Life of Electronic Objects. August / Birkhäuser.
Tsaknaki, Vasiliki & Fernaeus, Y. 2016. “Expanding on Wabi-Sabi as a Design Resource in HCI”. In Proceedings of CHI ‘16.
Edmond, Ernest A. 2014. “Human Computer Interaction, Art and Experience”. In Candy, Linda & Ferguson, S. (eds.). Interactive Experience in the Digital Age. Evaluating New Art Practice. Springer.
Shedroff, N. 2012. Make it So. Rosenfeld Media.
Kakalios, James. 2005. The Physics of Superheroes. The Gotham Books Publishing Group.
30.05.22
***Assignment: Submit your Final paper***
Week 12 - 05.06.23 Teach or Why Were You Here? (jb, mn)
For our final class, we go back to the basics of design: its pedagogy. Interaction Design is though here as a mediation for everyday life: how can you as students use your knowledge to develop your craft and to share your lessons learned.
Readings:
Ackermann, E.K. (2016). “Learning to Code: What is it? What’s In It For The Kids?— A Tribute to Seymour Papert". Trans. version from publication in Tecnologie didattiche (TD 27-2002).
Moriwaki, K., Brucker-Cohen, J. (2006). “Lessons from the scrapyard: creative uses of found materials within a workshop setting”. In AI & Society. 20:4. 506-525.
JOURNALS/BLOGS LINKS