In his blog post “Context and practicalities,” Christopher Stein offers his students (and us) a clearly structured, easy-to-read overview to approaches to product design, and especially software design. The post provides guidance that I found practical (as promised in the title), relevant and useful in understanding the software and digital platform design process, and thinking ahead to possible and certain future projects. Equally helpful is his historical (or at least narrative and sequential) description of the iterative developments of of the Waterfall Method, Instructional Systems Design, User-Centered Design, “agile,” all terms from the design world that I have heard often, but had not seen defined and explained so clearly. (I believe this post was written before the further development of Human Centered Design that arguably has evolved from User-Centered Design; for anyone interested here’s a quick explanation of the difference and relationship between the two).
Having never designed software, and imagining that the same is true of most of us, I thought it might be useful to relate Stein’s post to at least one areas that is more familiar to all of us, namely, research.
In this regard I was I interested to compare the guiding questions that Stein recommends in the “Five W’s and one H,” as well his description of the Waterfall and User-Centered Design processes, with the questions and steps we each may typically take in initiating and planning a research project. As a thought experiment, I considered how an educational research study might work – and possibly be enriched? – if it were carried out as if it were a software design project.
Several of the questions and steps Stein describes (“What are the goals of the project? What need or problem Will it satisfy?”; Analysis, Design, and Testing, respectively) seem more or less analogous to those built into a typical research process. The most significant difference in the two types of processes that jumped out at me was the emphasis on purpose and usability (or just usefulness) that is integral to the software design process, and not always given weight or even present in educational research. I find the idea of an educational research project and process that tests whether findings are purposeful, usable and useful (or even used) compelling – especially if that testing process were guided by the perspectives and experiences of people who are meant to benefit from that research. This line of thinking also brought to my mind Leigh Patel’s guidance for researchers to decolonize the research process by beginning with the questions, “Why this? Why me? Why now?” (Patel 2016) – and the hopeful possibility that some of these questions might be answered not only through our own reflection as researchers, but through practical assessment by the people whom we intend to serve through our research.
Could Stein’s “Five W’s and one H,” and/or the Waterfall or User-Centered Design processes be applied and/or adapted to a research project in your respective disciplines? How would those differ from or alter your typical research process? How might applying or adapting these questions or steps to your research process affect the relative validity and quality of the results and/or product of your research?
If the results of one of your studies were tested by an “end user” of your research – who would you want that end user to be, and how and for what would you want them to test the results and products of your study?
In the height of the dot.com bubble (2000 or so) I was taking a course with an early designer in interactive design. At that time there was a lot of fervor for “interaction” . The web was just starting to be capable of such things and investors had tons of money to throw at it. Everyone was trying to something “interactive”.
However, the “why” was often neglected. Sure, Heinz ketchup should probably have a web presence, but did people really want to play an online game shooting ketchup at fries? Would people expect to find this at Heinz.com? (Hypothetical example). Why! Why! Why!
I have to admit, it was really refreshing to read Stein at the beginning of this course. I remember that the first time I came into contact with the Five “W’s” was when I took a Journalism elective course in middle school. It always stuck in my mind those W’s, and it is good again to revisit them, but looking at them at the same time through a different lens: how can this approach be used when thinking about building research and technology for ourselves and for the public? And that allows me to make a connection with “37 Signs You’re Doing Too Much”: In order for us to design and build tools or web apps they have to be able to help us solve problems, to be simple to use, and to be useful for the public. Stein’s approach can be applied to our disciplines, at least in my case, in Anthropology when someone embarks on a research inquiry, a few things that comes to mind are: “What is the context?”, “What does the historical record say?”, “Who are the community members?”, “When does this particular cultural practice take place?” among other inquiries. The “5 W’s and 1 H” should be the compass to our research projects, and for every academic and non-academic inquiry that we embark.
Following one of Julliet’s questions, I would confess that I am not sure that User Centered Design process would fit my research needs. My goals is to create a data collection platform, so that I can learn how college students learn Twine to create interactive digital narratives. I think my research question itself puts student’s perspective in secondary position to the needs of researcher. Sure, I would love to test prototype with several students to make sure all features are working, but making the final tool meet all user’s expectations seems to contradict to my goal. I need them to struggle learning new tool just as much as those students who struggled with Twine in a study where data was collected manually (physically entering the room with subjects, pressing hotkeys to take screenshots, etc.).
Apart from that Stein’s post was quite useful into reminding me about “begging” part as well as hardware one. It did not occur to me that if my project would to see the light of day, I would perhaps need to purchase a server to convey my study and securely storing data.
I agree with Joseph’s comment – Stein’s post heavily reminded me of my days in a journalism program in undergrad. Sometimes it may seem a bit silly breaking down stories (in journalism) and technology projects (described in Stein’s post) in that manner, but it’s actually helpful as a reminder of all the different aspects of your story/project. In a way, the five W’s and one H should serve as a roadmap for your story/project. They can sometimes end up changing throughout the course of your story/project, but it would make the most sense for them to be determined before you even get started.
I was most struck by the “Where” portion of Stein’s piece because as someone who has a web-based job, I do tend to think about how a webpage, website, etc. looks on various screen sizes. However, especially with older websites, it seems like mobile and responsive design are frequently forgotten. I’m by no means an expert on this since I don’t exactly have the expertise at the level of a web developer, but I do believe we’ve gotten pretty far in responsive design since the publication of Stein’s piece. This walkthrough from Google Developers shows just as much: https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/design-and-ux/responsive
On Stein’s point about borrowing – I cannot express enough how grateful I am to all the individuals who make their materials, processes, code, questions, solutions, etc. available for others to peruse and borrow online. I spend a lot of time on forums like StackOverflow and have been saved numerous times by tweaking a code snippet that someone posted in a thread. From these experiences, I’ve learned the value of both not reinventing the wheel, but also the importance of being flexible in the way I ask questions. In a way, this seems like a form of agility as well – formulating a search, trying a solution, revising the search, trying a new solution, etc.
The Five W’s and one H brings back into focus the key elements that need to be kept in mind for any project and ensure that all essential needs and goals are met. I especially find it easy to get swept up in putting my programming skills to the test, and thinking about design and feature elements, that what I am trying to accomplish and the most useful way to do it can fall to the back of my mind. Asking these questions helps to focus on the justification and purpose of doing this or including that: what purpose will a feature serve? Is it easy to understand? Does it do more than look pretty or cool on the page? Having this sort of accountability checklist while keeping users in mind would go hand in hand with the principles discussed in “Getting Real” to ensure that a quality product is produced and time and energy are best directed to making such a product.
I think considering Stein’s “Five W’s and one H” could be useful for starting any project. Although they may not be utilized as in depth for everyone, these are important questions to ask yourself before working on anything. I should definitely consider these questions to bring more clarity to my research.
Like Juliet asked, I think it’s important to consider who the “end user” is early in the process. Our products are made for the user and not necessarily for ourselves. Sometimes I even question what large companies are doing when they advertise to us, but truthfully many aren’t considering what the consumer wants from a consumer’s perspective. These readings have definitely made me want to approach my research from different perspectives.