Set Your Design Thinking Process up for Success

On Tuesday I co-facilitated a design thinking education event with Google in Melbourne. We worked alongside 50 teachers from Catholic schools.

It got me wondering about what it takes to get the most from a design thinking (DT) process. Although my lense is for teachers and education teams, these ideas apply to anyone using the DT process.

For each idea, I have shared some links to further articles and readings to allow you to dig deeper.

Context

Design Thinking (DT) has to be meaningful for us to make the most from it. Connecting to a clear context is a vital commitment. We might do this by thinking clearly about the people at the heart of the problem. Unless we have a meaningful purpose we might easily check out.

Collaboration

Forming a team to work with is a basic tenet of quality design thinking. Every phase of DT benefits from sharing and critique from others. In fact when we say “How Might We” we are signalling our intent to share and create a solution with others.

Concept

Our willingness to explore ideas that are barely formed is a critical disposition. In fact, we might say this is a prototyping disposition. Ideas and solutions from DT are often first explored in conceptual ways. We need to know when to bridge from this to enacted or built forms.

Challenge

There has to be enough of this component to instil an urgent, edge of your seat, discomfort to do good. Our message to the teachers was to take the ideas and make them happen. Build-in milestones and opportunities for really early (painfully early) feedback with the people we are trying to help. Increasing the level of challenge often materialises from connecting our DT process to a real context or stakeholder group. Invite them in to see your results – keep the whole effort grounded in who we are trying to help.

Conditions

The teachers working with us were outside of their normal physical space. The renowned function and aesthetic of a Google workplace formed a provocative backdrop for our group. This was not just the living moss wall Google sign in the Melbourne office or perfectly formed booths, it is what these spaces represent. If we want more creative thinking in our schools, we need to consider how the physical environment can mediate that.

Another key reflection from one of the participants about the conditions was time. I know that allowing ourselves dedicated time to immerse in a topic or challenge is very powerful. It often feels like a luxury, but we will likely be more creative and productive if we can be present and focused.

Critique

One of the ways I describe the prototyping phase of DT is that it is about communicating your idea so that other people can share feedback. A prototype is not an end of itself. It is created to provoke critique from others so that we can refine our idea and make another version.

But the impact of critique cuts through the whole process. Early feedback helps us understand we are on track. Critique about our reframed problem always provides a new perspective or language we can use.

Culture

The big question for us all is how we shift the culture in our schools. The design thinking process challenges our capacities and dispositions – perhaps stretching them in new ways.

But really it is the persistent, ongoing, intentional use of the DT protocols and practices that reap the greatest reward. Not just once every term but an effort over many months and years.

When we utilise DT day in day out. When we normalise the language and the critical thinking expectations, that come with DT, it elevates the impact beyond just a process to a better collaborative culture.


An interesting mix of ideas there for you to ponder on. Certainly not an exhaustive list of the considerations, but a strong set of provocations nonetheless.

In order for us to make the most of the Design Thinking process we need the tools and activities, but perhaps, more importantly, we need to intentionally build the best possible conditions for the deeply creative and critical thinking that occurs.


Google for Education, Forward events are an opportunity for Educators, IT leaders, Googlers and Design Thinkers to tackle some of the big educational challenges we face. This is a chance to bring your creativity, collaboration skills and critical thinking to an authentic challenge.

Drop me a note if you are interested in learning more about these events.

tom@dialogiclearning.com

The states of knowing and not knowing and the really interesting bits in between

Read, Read, Read

Last year I was attending a conference in Boston, US and was lucky enough to listen to Alec Couros, a Professor of Educational Technology and Media at the Faculty of Ed., University of Regina.

He described a time in a supermarket when his 5 year old son asked whether bananas on a tree grew with their tips facing up or facing down. I will let Alec describe what happened next and how he reacted to his son’s question:

“I didn’t actually know off-hand. But, being the connected father I am, I pulled out my iPhone, Googled it, and in less than 30 seconds, we were looking at photos of banana plants and we no longer had to wonder.

*We no longer had to wonder.*

I did that entirely wrong. At the very least, I could have asked my boy, “Well, which do you think son?” perhaps followed by “So, why do you think that?” But I didn’t. And because I didn’t, I messed up a great learning opportunity.”

During his talk Alec outlined how the states of “knowing” and “not knowing” are drawn together by the pervasive nature of technology.

I believe that in a time when technology provides unprecedented access to knowledge we need to be exploring the really interesting bits in between. Spending longer between posing a question / a state of wonder and the clarification of new or affirming knowledge.

We need more learning designed to unflinchingly explore the unknown, enquiry state and for much longer.

The brevity of not knowing, which Alec describes, often short circuits our opportunities for enquiry, for exploring and revealing our existing knowledge and perhaps discovering new and better ways to find things out.

It is the discerning application of technology in these instances that we should be developing with our students. To know when to ponder, mull and cogitate, working out something with others, and when to simply close the gap, “Google it” and do something with that new knowledge.

Making this type of choice will be the key to constructing knowledge in the future, alongside retaining an enduring curiosity for the world and what it is like to not know.

Pic Read, read, read. by cuellar

The Design Principles Behind Google Glass and the Social Influence It Could Have

I have always found it interesting to peer behind the veil a little of nascent technology and learn how it is developed. On these Google Glass developer pages you can dig a little deeper into the design principles behind one of the four current Google X lab projects.

Aimed at developers building on the Glass platform, or as they coin it developing Glassware, they outline the simple design principles needed:

  • Design for Glass – Don’t try to replace a smartphone, tablet, or laptop by transferring features designed for these devices to Glass. Instead, focus on how Glass and your services complement each other, and deliver an experience that is unique.
  • Don’t get in the way – Glass is designed to be there when you need it and out of the way when you don’t. Your Glassware must function in the same way.
  • Keep it relevant – Deliver information at the right place and time for each of your users. The most relevant experiences are also the most magical and lead to increased engagement and satisfaction.
  • Avoid the unexpected – Unexpected functionality and bad experiences on Glass are much worse than on other devices, because Glass is so close to your users’ senses.
  • Build for people – Design interfaces that use imagery, colloquial voice interactions, and natural gestures. Focus on a fire-and-forget usage model where users can start actions quickly and continue with what they’re doing.

But what is most revealing and consequently most fascinating for me is the focus on language and how this is being tailored as an integral feature of this type of technology. It is being coined as “wearable tech” but in many ways the proximity to us, to our physical persons means that the device or platform has to work with our own language settings.

The “natural speak” commands will be the most potent way these devices will become closer to our everyday lives and influence them too. We can wear them, however until they work seamlessly with the idiosyncrasies of our spoken word, they will always fall short.

The developer pages offer some of the following examples for voice commands needed to develop on the Glass platform:

Guideline Good Example Bad Example
Is general enough to apply to multiple Glassware, but still has a clear purpose “ok glass, learn a song” “ok glass, learn something”, “ok glass, learn a song on guitar”
Is colloquial and can explain Glass features in a conversation “ok glass, take a picture” (“You can use Glass to take a picture”) “ok glass, take picture” (“You can use Glass to take picture”)
Is comfortable to say in public “ok glass, find a doctor” “ok glass, find a gynecologist”
Brings the user from intent to action as quickly as possible “ok glass, find a recipe for” (this allows users to speak “chicken kiev” and immediately see the recipe) “ok glass, show me a cookbook” (this forces users to look through a list for what they want)
Avoids brand words “ok glass, make a video call” “ok glass, start a hangout”
Is long enough to ensure high recognition quality (at least three syllables) “ok glass, make a video call” “ok glass, hangout”
Fits on a single line (less than 600px wide at 40px Roboto Thin) “ok glass, add a calendar event” “ok glass, create a new calendar event”

One of the most interesting directions these sorts of guidelines take us is the way that such a device or tool may influence our use of language and consequently the way we think. For example the focus on the commands being “colloquial”, “comfortable to say in public” and how they should strike a balance for technical purposes by being “long enough to ensure high recognition quality (at least three syllables)”. In a way this is describing how Glass users will have to talk to interact successfully.

Google Glass

With such high constraint the written form that is displayed needs careful thought on Glass and in many ways is some of the most influential aspects of the product design as, in some way, it makes real the experience and relationship you have with the wearable device. It becomes a response to your commands. Here are some of the guidelines for the written form:

Keep it brief. Be concise, simple and precise. Look for alternatives to long text such as reading the content aloud, showing images or video, or removing features.

Keep it simple. Pretend you’re speaking to someone who’s smart and competent, but doesn’t know technical jargon and may not speak English very well. Use short words, active verbs, and common nouns.

Be friendly. Use contractions. Talk directly to the reader using second person (“you”). If your text doesn’t read the way you’d say it in casual conversation, it’s probably not the way you should write it.

Put the most important thing first. The first two words (around 11 characters, including spaces) should include at least a taste of the most important information in the string. If they don’t, start over. Describe only what’s necessary, and no more. Don’t try to explain subtle differences. They will be lost on most users.

Avoid repetition. If a significant term gets repeated within a screen or block of text, find a way to use it just once.

Again we might explore how these simple guidelines strongly influence a user as they depict the character of the technology being worn. BJ Fogg has written about the social cues we pick up on from technology and their social influence. Bear these elements in mind when we are learning and experiencing more everyday about personalised or wearable technology.

…people respond to computer systems as though the computers were social entities that used principles of motivation and influence.

As shown in Table 5.1, I propose that five primary types of social cues cause people to make inferences about social presence in a computing product: physical, psychological, language, social dynamics, and social roles. The rest of this chapter will address these categories of social cues and explore their implications for persuasive technology.

Primary social cues

We have had a quick look at how the Language cue is being carefully tailored on the Glass platform (and elsewhere in Search and Siri of course) and it is pretty easy to begin to understand how the other elements appear in the user experience.

Psychologically we pick up on how a device such as Glass can learn our preferences and begin to provide hyper contextual information to us, as explained earlier in one of the design principles: “The most relevant experiences are also the most magical and lead to increased engagement and satisfaction.”

The psychological connection here is linked to the social dynamic and how it would seem our technology is cooperating positively with us. The reciprocity of our interactions would fall in line with some of the research BJ Fogg outlines in his chapter – the more helpful technology is to us the more engaged we become and the more likely we are to reciprocate.

The social role of the device is an interesting one – my son would happily call Google Search his assistant or guide and so it would not seem too big a step to appreciate a wearable technology being a close ally in getting life done more efficiently.

The physical cue is perhaps the most curious because it is not so much a floating disembodied AI head doing our bidding but something that is closer to being part of us. Physically it would seem the cue has in fact become much more subtle in the fire-and-forget notifications and the seamless in-vision experience. Yet the overt nature of wearing the technology has caused some interesting consternation, raising questions about privacy and safety.

Funnily enough I have not had the chance to play with the device or even experience it yet, but the developer pages have certainly helped me to better understand the direction things are heading in and made me reflect about the influence this type of technology will have on the way we speak and think.

If you are a Glass Explorer I would love to hear your thoughts on some of the subjects raised in this post – please share a comment below.

Pic: Google Glass by wilbertbaan

Google Teacher Academy UK 2012: My Reflections and the Future

Earlier this week the Google Teacher Academy ran for a second UK outing at the new London offices on St Giles High Street. It was a privilege once again to have the opportunity to help plan, organise and be part of the 2 days.

50 educators from around the world came together for some rapid professional learning and discussion and the chance to work alongside Google employees to help make change happen in their communities. These are a handful of my reflections about the 2 days and what the future may hold for the event.

2012 04 04 17.45.54

Google Engineers

One of the most unique features of the teacher academy is the access to and contribution by Google product managers and employees to the learning. During our 2 day event we had the chance to spend some time in the company of YouTube, Google Docs and Google+ product managers who joined us for hangouts. The Google Docs team were there in force and shared with us some incredible new features to this ever changing tool. Jeff Harris the product lead for Google Docs document, presentation, and drawing editors did some great demos and talked about the future developments of the tool. It is always exciting to have access to this type of group and have them share their expertise with us.

Google+ Potential

One thing that the GTA did for me was to put the potential of G+ back on the table, not because of any great demo or future road-map session, it was more to do with a group using it loads. There was lots of sharing to just the GTAUK group and so the circles came into their own, I think I will probably spend a bit more time figuring out how best to use it alongside Twitter.

Whoop!

I do enjoy a dose of “whooping” (I suspect you are pleased I didn’t add “cough” to that phrase) to raise the enthusiasm in the room. Don’t get me wrong I am not so keen on the use of the ‘whoop” in cinemas where it doesn’t have much place, but at the GTA the enthusiasm for the learning opportunities we can offer our classes was great. And when you unpick it, that is all it is, an enthusiastic public gesture of our delight for a potential future learning opportunity for our students. Jo Badge describes it as the GTA “philosophy” and in many ways it is important as it kept the energy up – you wonder what the event would be like without the wearing of our emotions on our sleeves. Huzzah!

Reflections from GTAUK participants

Reflections on google teacher academy UK 2012 #gtauk « DrBadgr by Jo Badge.

Learnbuzz reflections on the GTA from Steph Ladbrooke.

Google Teacher Academy: Reflection | Anseo.net from Simon Lewis.

Carry on Learning: GTAUK posts from Sheli Blackburn

The Future of the GTA in the UK

It has been about 5 or 6 years since I began to email Cristin Frodella from Google about bringing the GTA to the UK and it has been great to now see the second event conclude. However this leaves me somewhat pensive about the event over here, the model of organisation and how much more could be done. The bottom line is that I want more of this type of opportunity for UK teachers, not just a few places over the course of 2 years but more like 3 big, full blown academy events every year.

It doesn’t seem that much to ask for UK teachers, who are, in my opinion, one of the most innovative and inspiring communities of teachers in the world. This is what I am pushing for and will do what I can to help make it happen.

74 Interesting Ways to Use Google Forms in the Classroom

The Interesting Ways series of resources continue to grow as the community add ideas from the classroom. Below is one of the most popular with over 70 ideas shared by teachers for using Google Forms in a range of different ways.

Make sure that you explore nearly 40 other crowdsourced resource like the one above – you can see the full series of resources on the Interesting Ways page