Phase 4 Week 13 04/25–05/01

🌹Rose:

• Lots of good feedback on wednesday and finally making something
• 1st testing workshop
• implement workshop

🌱Bud:

• several rounds of user testing
• excited to see how we prototype
• how we will deal with the feedback

🌵Thorn:

• finding participants
• haven’t spent time incorporating feedback from presentation
• finding more people
• why don’t people reply to me

04/26: Prospect Studio Feedback

On reflecting on our teams written feedback from Prospect Studio we were able to find a number of key insights that we could leverage to our advantage. The feedback spanned a number of topics from robotics to social psychiatry. We also gained a fair amount of advice on not relying too hard on our rough wireframing this early in the project. In order to sell potential users on a concept the system must be developed first and then the potential screens to substantiate this claim.

For our potential testing strategies it became clear that we needed to either focus on the interface or vocal interaction. For the vocal aspect of our research we considered using wizard of Oz techniques to test thre voice UI but it in the ned would not have best suited our needs. In the end we chose the interface but didn’t adjust our copy enough to support this which caused confusion with our research participant.

04/28

As we prepare for our final presentation our professors spirit is high about our team remains critical of the work we have done so far. If we cannot receive critical feedback from our professor we must rely on it from the many research subjects we will interview this week.

In the end we did receive critical feedback both from our research protocol test with a CMU student to the reach draft with Santa Clara Unified School District graduates. Our volunteers passion regarding her home district was admirable. After showing her our latest issue of our design our volunteer showed a fair amount of excitement. With our nevevest adaptations I hope she will continue to feel so.