reflective design

reflections on teaching interaction design

teaching in the swamp

Posted by Marty Siegel on September 6, 2008

One of the challenges of teaching and learning complex skills such as interaction design is that one needs to know everything on day one; I made reference to this during Thursday’s Q&A session. I call this the teaching-learning paradox. Think about Project #1. In order to “successfully”complete the thermostat challenge, you need to be an expert in persona creation, evaluation techniques, ethnographic research, graphic design, team collaboration, solution generation (not just creating one or two possible “answers” but generating a dozen or more solutions), green-thinking, writing, presentation skills and so on. And yet, if one waits until you become an expert in each of these areas, you’d never do the first project.

So, instead, we follow a process of successive approximations. This is a step-wise progression to an idealized goal (in our case, of becoming an interaction design expert). We can never fully get there anymore than we can achieve total wholeness as a human being. However, we can try one thing and another, and hope that we get good feedback (or critique) along the way. We encourage you to “fail rapidly and fail often.” It’s through this process of trying, questioning, failing, and succeeding, all in small steps, that we improve our skills. We teach a little and you do a little; some would say, you do a lot!

As I implied in the syllabus, this is not like a math class where we can assign simple problems in the beginning and then systematically increase the complexity of the problems as you learn new concepts and techniques. Even small problems in interaction design, if they have any relevance to the real-world, are messy and difficult to complete. We’re swamp dwellers!

To make the point even clearer, let’s examine the differences between real world problems and classroom problems. This is adopted from Sternberg, Robert J. (1985). “Teaching critical thinking, part 1: Are we making critical mistakes?” Phi Delta Kappan, 67, 194-198.

In the real world, the first and sometimes most difficult step in problem solving is recognition that a problem exists. In the classroom, the instructor or textbook signals that a problem exists.

In the real world, it is often harder to figure out just what the problem is than to figure out how to solve it. In the classroom, the instructor or textbook provides the problem.

Real world problems tend to be ill-structured. In the classroom, the instructor or textbook defines all aspects of  the problem.

In the real world, it is not usually clear just what information will be needed to solve a given problem, nor is it always clear where the information can be found. In the classroom, needed information to solve classroom or text-based problems is found in the associated chapter or lecture; often parallel problems (examples) are solved for the student.

The solutions to real world problems depend on and interact with the contexts in which the problems occur. Classroom or text-based problems are self-contained; little or no context is provided.

Real world problems generally have no one right solution, and even the criteria for what constitutes a best solution are often not clear. Classroom or textbook-based problems have one right solution; textbook solutions are found in the back of the book.

Solutions to important real world problems have consequences that matter. Solutions to classroom or textbook-based problems have no consequences other than a grade or school advancement.

Real world problem solving often occurs in teams. Classroom or textbook-based problem solving often occurs alone.

Real world problems can be complicated, messy, and stubbornly persistent. Classroom or textbook-based problems are clear, well-defined, and easily forgotten.

While Interaction Design Practice is conducted in a classroom setting, much of what we do is presented in an authentic context. We are trying to simulate what will happen when you enter the workforce, the so-called “real world” (and I’m not talking about the MTV series). The trick for you is to see a world of possibility. Only fear will hold you back, and it will crush you.

I’m reminded of a favorite book by Noah benShea, Jacob the Baker: Gentle Wisdom for a Complicated World (1989). It is the “story about a man whose humble life and profound wisdom are a source of both inspiration and reflection to those around him” (from the book’s inside cover). There’s a short segment about fear:

“A community leader came to see Jacob, hoping to find peace of mind, an ease for his burden.

The man was troubled by a repetitive dream that he did not understand.

‘Jacob, in my dream, I have traveled a long distance and am finally arriving at a great city. But, at the entrace to the city, I am met by a tall soldier who says that I must answer two questions before I am admitted. Will you help me?’

Jacob nodded.

‘The first question the soldier asks is ‘What supports the walls of a city?”

‘That is easy,’ said Jacob. ‘Fear supports the walls of a city.’

‘But what supports the fear?’ asked the man. ‘For that is the second question.’

‘The walls,’ answered Jacob. ‘The fears we cannot climb become our walls.’”

7 Responses to “teaching in the swamp”

  1. Jay Steele said

    Thanks Marty. I will use this post to knock down those walls and overcome those fears. What is amazing to me about our fears is that, for most fears, they are only as big (or as small) as we choose to make them because they are our own creations and exist only in our minds. They are often simply distractions that usually appear rather silly and minuscule once we are able to distance ourselves from them over time (or via meta-reflection, as you showed us this week). So, I am casting off those fears and refuse to give them the energy and attention that they are trying to steal from me. Failure is not only an option but it is expected. I cannot think of anyone that has recognized high achievement that did not also experience failure in equal or even greater measure. I will leave you with a quote from one of my favorites:

    It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed.
    Theodore Roosevelt

  2. mattsnyder08 said

    Where does this idea of “only one right solution” come from? Is it nature or nurture? For some reason, even though I know there can be many good solutions to one problem, at the back of my mind there is a voice that tells me there is one perfect solution…

    Having that voice is what drives me to develop a successful design; but when all is said and done, after the group has gone home, and the product turned over–I know it can be better. Like painting a picture, I never feel like it’s finished. So where does that voice come from? Maybe that voice is most quiet when the criteria for the problem at hand is clear.

  3. benserrette said

    Seems to me that there are always 3 sides to every story… My side, your side, and the truth. That doesn’t really have anything to do with design or anything, but it kind of ties into this: There is a “one right solution” somewhere. It’s defined by nature, or god, or whatever you want to believe in. It is The Truth. Because we are but mere humans, we can only see things from our perspective, and, if we’re lucky, the perspective of other humans. There’s no way for a person to get to the One Right Solution, unless by some divine twist of fate, you stumble over it. Even then, because of your human-ness, you might not even recognize it and continue on.

    There are literally infinite possibilities. The chances of someone finding the single right solution is 1 in infinity. Not good odds. The best you can hope for is the best solution for your situation.

    IMHO

    ~Ben

  4. Marty Siegel said

    How would you know a “best solution” if you saw it?

  5. Binaebi said

    I find this “One Truth,” or “The Truth,” very interesting. How do we know there is One Truth? How do we determine that we’ve found The Truth? What is the criteria for the evidence to support our conclusions?

    During the American Civil War, the Truth was that God supported the United States Army because they fought to keep the nation together. Yet, it was also the Truth that God supported the Confederate Army because they fought for their state rights.

    Does the fact that one side won over the other mean that one was wrong/that one side did not know the Truth? Or were they both correct in feeling, in knowing, that The Truth was that God supported their cause?

    Truth is subjective in the real world, despite its idealistic definition. This shouldn’t, however, deter us from looking for the Truth. The same goes for good design. What is the best design now, given our understanding, may be surpassed tomorrow by a better one. Rather than feeling frustrated, we should rejoice! We’re forever getting closer to more optimal solutions.

  6. I took Marty’s course in 1995. The best thing about it then, and clearly now as well, is that you don’t just read about design, you do design.
    I’d echo Marty’s advice to not let fear get in your way. You’ll learn a lot more from trying something risky and seeing which parts work and which don’t than you will from taking the safe, boring route. Those “failures” will teach you what not to do. In many ways, this is as important that knowing what to do.
    When I approach a new design problem now, I don’t immediately know what the “right” solution is. But from seeing what hasn’t worked on similar problems, I can quickly eliminate a lot of dead ends.
    So, have fun, and be fearless!
    -John

  7. Sean Connolly said

    To go along with Binaebi, Ben, and Matt, I find that when I search for the Truth, I inevitably spend a long time looking.

    But you can *pick* the Truth to, as it pertains to you — acknowledging that you have particular limitations, and that you are at a particular point in time, and that this Truth is only temporal in existence. And if you pick Truth for you, and commit to it, you can take meaningful action.

    Like Binaebi said, it’s subjective. But that doesn’t make it any less true.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>