This theme was quite different than the others. We only had lectures and no seminar. I felt that the lack of having a seminar will make this post different than my previous posts after the theme. I felt that after this theme, comparing to the previous themes, I only have my own reflection to base my knowledge and perception on. I think this have disadvantages since we did not get the chance to discuss our opinions with others therefore I’ll write this reflection mostly based on the lectures and some own thoughts. I do not feel that I have gained as much since this themes pre posting as I have on the first themes. I have also noticed them being less and less philosophical than the first themes.
Haibo Lee discussed the process from having an idea to developing a finished product. From his lecture the main point as I perceived was that the most important thing is to define a problem, after having done that finding a solution is the easy part. In fact he said you should put 90% effort into finding and defining the problem and the last 10% on coming up with a solution. He later on continued by talking about how you should reason when choosing, validating,evaluating and marketing your idea. I felt his guidelines were pretty straight forward and it wasn’t hard to grasp at all, mostly since it is not completely new information to me. Good lecture with good points and knowledge directly towards our engineering field.
In the other lecture with Anders Lundström he discussed the difference between two types of prototyping; industrial research prototyping and design research prototyping. I hard trouble grasping everything from Anders lecture, since it felt a bit unstructured. But what I did understand that I didn’t know earlier is that prototype itself does not have to be made in order to solve anything but they are also there to help gain knowledge. This is primarily applied to when using a design research.
I felt that a seminar for this theme would have been well needed. It would have been fun knowing how others perceived the lectures to be and the pre assignment, since I feel feelings could have differed which makes the discussion more interesting. Overall I felt this theme to be very interesting since it can be related to our engineering field, and could very much be something that I might use in a work situation.
Hello Isabella! Great reflection, I agree with most things that you write in your reflection and recognise some of the thoughts that you present as thoughts that I have had myself during this theme. Even though a seminar would have been interesting I´m not sure how much it would have gained since I think the last couple of seminars haven´t been that fruitful because everybody had pretty much the same view and ideas and I think a seminar for this theme could have been the same way. I actually appreciated having a second lecture instead of a seminar but I can agree that it would have been interesting to discuss the theme with course mates as well.
SvaraRaderaHi Isabella,
SvaraRaderaI have to agree with you that this theme was quite different from the other themes that has been discussed. I also had some troubles understanding everything from Anders lecture. But I supposes that the main thing that you should bring with you from his lecture is that what you mention about prototypes, they are also part of the research and one can learn a lot just from the prototype. Another thing that stuck in my head was that the research process also plays a big part in this kind of research - how did they acquire knowledge and what factors come to play when landing in a final design?
Hej,
SvaraRaderaInteresting reflection on this theme. After having read many other blog posts now, it seems that everybody would have liked a seminar for this theme to reflect together on the learnings and compare different perspectives with fellow-students. I feel the same, but I actually had the feeling that the second lecture was a lot more interactive than our previous ones anyways.
What I find particularly interesting in your reflection is that you also highlighted marketing the research idea (and eventually the solution). I hadn't thought about this before the lecture but now I actually read a paper on that for the topic of week 6, so the learnings still get intertwined over the weeks.
Hi,
SvaraRaderaI really liked your reflection, as it summed up all important key points of this weeks lectures. I had the same problem with the second lecture. I don't think that I totally understood everything Anders was talking about- this may be due to the bad audio quality (I didn't hear what he said sometimes) or because of the lack of slides and structure. Still, I understood that design helps shaping prototypes that help to gain knowledge. So basically everything is connected to each other and cannot function without one another.
I also think it will bring some disadvantages if we do not have a seminar during the week. Haibo Li said " 90% effort into finding and defining the problem and the last 10% on coming up with a solution." I think idea is of great importance because it can help us save the time ,money and effort. Thanks for mention "difference between two types of prototyping; industrial research prototyping and design research prototyping."In fact I missed this point during the lecture.
SvaraRaderaHello there Isabella!
SvaraRaderaGreat reflection, you manage to cover some important points even though the second lecture was a bit unstructured. I agree with you that seminar is a good way to discuss the theme but lately I have thought that the seminars are not that good. If the theme don´t have the philosophical element and are more fact based theme I feel that i can be hard to find anything to discuss. I think what you wrote about prototypes and how they can be used was interesting, it was something I had a hard time to understand during his lecture.
But i think you have done a great reflection and keep it up!
Hi Isabella,
SvaraRaderaI agree with you that it would have been nice to have a seminar for this weeks theme aswell. Although this was a theme that we already had some knowledge about, just like quantitative and qualitative research so I would say that it was better to skip the seminar for this theme than say, theme 1 or theme 2.
Even though it might seem obvious now, the fact that the prototype itself does not have to be made in order to solve anything but rather just to gain knowledge was quite an eye-opener for me. I think I have previously thought of prototypes more in the industrial way than how you can use them in design research. Was it the same for you? Has you view on prototyping changed during this weeks theme?
Great reflection, cheers!
Hi!
SvaraRaderaJust like other before me have said the lack of seminar this week is shown in the fact, that at least I, haven't gotten an equally deep knowledge of the theme as I have from the others. I would also like to know what you thought of prototyping and how you felt about i after this weeks theme? What did you think of this themes papers?
Good job!
/Maria
Hi!
SvaraRaderaJust like other before me have said the lack of seminar this week is shown in the fact, that at least I, haven't gotten an equally deep knowledge of the theme as I have from the others. I would also like to know what you thought of prototyping and how you felt about i after this weeks theme? What did you think of this themes papers?
Good job!
/Maria
I'll agree with pretty much everyone else that most of the second lecture went over my head, and the lack of seminar (for both the first and the second) didn't help in the slightest. That was too bad, because I felt the prototype one could've been very interesting if it'd been a lot more structured. I did think the reassessment of the use of a prototype was a somewhat interesting take on the subject, but again, it should've gone in to it way further.
SvaraRaderaHello.
SvaraRaderaI also think that the lack of a seminar was not good. Though, I must say that I enjoyed the second lecture, and it almost functioned like a seminar because of the open discussions we had during it. So I do not think it is that bad. I think that the thing Haibo Li said about 90% defining problem and 10% solving is interesting. But are we not solving the problem when we are defining the problem? A really well defined problem are easier to find an answer to.