Teaching HCI by fostering
Experience and Reflection
Nadia Berthouze
UCL Interaction Centre
This portfolio describes my teaching practice in the master course on “HCI with Ergonomics” at the University College London Interaction Centre. It discusses the context in which I teach and my teaching philosophy. It then presents the structure of the module I teach and the tools set in place within the module to support student self-development.
1.
Context
I teach in the MSc course on HCI with Ergonomics (MSc HCI-E) run by the UCL Interaction Centre (UCLIC). UCLIC is a HCI centre with formal interdisciplinary support, drawing its members from both the UCL Psychology Department and the UCL Computer Science Department. The students enrolled in the MSc course reflect the interdisciplinary aspect of UCLIC and of the field and practice of HCI. Their background covers the various disciplines related to psychology and computer science. The students are also inhomogeneous from an age and working experience viewpoint. Some of them enrol in the course directly after having completed a BSc, others are students that have already worked in the HCI field for a number of years and feel the need to acquire a more structured and informed approach to designing interactive technology that would eventually help them reach higher responsibilities in their working environment. They are generally very motivated students with a strong commitment to acquire knowledge and skills in this area. Some of the students enrolled as part-time students commit to spreading their education in HCI over a two or three-year period in order to continue to work.
The teaching within the MSc draws on a wide range of disciplines that introduces graduates to the problems, knowledge and practice of HCI and ergonomics. The MSc consists of 8 modules specially designed and integrated around this aim:
· Applied Cognitive Science
· Design Experience
· Design Tools and Techniques
· Organisational Informatics
· Physical Ergonomics 1
· Physical Ergonomics 2
· Perspectives on Design
· Usability Evaluation Methods
To complete
the course, the students must also carry out a three-month research project within the academic environment or hosted
by a company. The project gives students the opportunity to investigate the
areas they are most interested in. A more detailed description of the aims of
each module can be obtained from http://www.uclic.ucl.ac.uk/course.
It is within this context that I teach Design Experience. This module is the last module taken by the students. It aims to support students in consolidating the HCI knowledge and skills acquired through the other seven modules and in reflecting on their development and their ability to work as designers.
2.
Teaching
Philosophy
Even though I inherited this module when I first joined UCLIC two years ago, its structure completely reflects and even takes to the extreme my philosophy of teaching. Rather than being based on lectures, the Design Experience module “employs a problem-based learning approach, whereby students [grouped in teams of 4-6 students] must draw on relevant theory and methods to develop a successful and effective design for a specific user interface or human/machine system. The two-week long practical project is followed by the writing of a reflective essay that should represent the growth in knowledge and experience of the student during the taught part of the course. The essay is assessed in terms of (a) the students’ argumentation of how the taught modules and coursework have shaped their thought process during the practical part of this module and (b) the students’ critical reflection on their ability to function as a designer in the future.” Generally, a teaching approach completely based on practical experience would not take into consideration the different learning styles of the students as defined by Kolb’s learning cycle (Kolb, 1984). From this perspective, we can think of Design Experience as the active experimentation and reflective observation stages of Kolb’s learning cycle within our MSc in HCI-E, whereas the other modules offer the space for abstract conceptualization and concrete experience.
I believe that a teacher should not just be a source of knowledge; instead, his/her main role is to motivate and facilitate the search and acquisition of new knowledge and new skills. A teacher should support students to develop knowledge and skills related to a particular area, i.e., the ability to identify problems and set their solution in an informed way, but also to critically reflect and define their own personal growth, i.e., to identify their own abilities and weaknesses and to set new objectives in their development. In this way, the educational development of the student can be tailored to their needs and can also continue outside the educational structure.
|
Day & Staff |
Task |
|
Thursday 6th
March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Introduction Definition
and selection of system -
User research |
|
Friday 7th
March Duncan, Hassard ( |
Definition
and selection of system -
User research -
Requirements specification |
|
Monday 10th
March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Initial
specification -
Task level analysis -
Functional design -
Evaluation against requirements |
|
Tuesday 11th
March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Low
fidelity prototyping -
Specification and implementation -
Evaluation -
Requirements development |
|
Wednesday
12th March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Iteration -
Requirements development -
Further development of prototype |
|
Thursday 13th
March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Evaluation -
Evaluation of prototype |
|
Friday 14th
March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Iteration -
Requirements development -
Further development of prototype |
|
Thursday 17th
March Berthouze,
Hassard ( |
Evaluation -
Evaluation of prototype |
|
Tuesday 18th
March |
Poster
preparation |
|
Wednesday 19th
March (judges to
be decided) |
|
3.
Instructional
Design and Delivery
Definition of the project
Each year, I present students with a brief that only roughly delineates a scenario and it is up to each team of students (see next subsection) to identify a problem within that scenario. To reflect the user centred approach that is at the core of this MSc course, the students must identify the problem by doing a user search rather than by simply coming up with an original idea. The scenarios (see below for two examples) are designed on the basis of topics from either research or real world.
In the
last 10 years, Japanese companies have been working on creating robots that
could become social companions for humans. This marketing direction has been
motivated by the rapid aging of the Japanese population and the impeding lack
of human resources for taking care of elderly people. Pet-robots for entertainment
and for health-care are some of the proposed products (….). They are endowed with both affective and
health monitoring capabilities. An example of such robot is Paro,
the seal robot created by Shibata (AIST). These robots have been quite well
accepted by the Japanese, probably due to the fact that robots and virtual
characters are a strong component of Japanese culture as movies and Manga continuously show. Now robots are reaching the
western market and companies want to know what type of social robot could have
good marketing possibility in
Scenario 2007
Apple
has just announced their new generation of smart phones: the iPhone. It combines the functions of a powerful phone
(conference, etc.), a music/video delivery system and a fully-fledged internet
system and an emailer: …. Each group is a design team for the SmartPDA company. SmartPDA is asking your team to answer to this challenge
by designing a new multi-function smart phone. Rather than simply redesigning
the interface of iPhone, you should think to
different market segments and to the different functionalities that answer the
needs of that selected segment. In your device, at least one functionality of iPhone must have been swapped with a new one required by
the selected population. Whilst you should keep in mind how different
functionalities relate with one another, your design should focus on that new
functionality. Each team should select a unique product type/market segment.
Validation of the selection will be made on a first-come first-served basis.
The table below gives some possible combinations.
Scenario 2008
Energy tracking
and Health issues are very important topics that concern us as individuals and
also as members of society. Devices and websites (e.g., carbon foot print
calculator) to help us tackle these issues are starting to appear. However,
their impact is yet to be visible. While many people are already aware of the
problems, not so many are ready to do something or know what to do. Each group
is a design team for Energy&Health Ltd. Energy&Health Ltd. is asking your team to design
either an interactive device (e.g., for a household, single person, services)
or a social network site to encourage and support behavioural changes. Each
team should select a unique product type/market segment combination according
to the table below ….
Energy tracking and Health issues are very important topics that concern us as individuals and also as members of society. Devices and websites (e.g., carbon foot print calculator) to help us tackle these issues are starting to appear. However, their impact is yet to be visible. While many people are already aware of the problems, not so many are ready to do something or know what to do. Each group is a design team for Energy&Health Ltd. Energy&Health Ltd. is asking your team to design either an interactive device (e.g., for a household, single person, services) or a social network site to encourage and support behavioural changes. Each team should select a unique product type/market segment combination.
Team work
Given the strong interdisciplinary nature of HCI design, the teams are created by grouping together students from a different background. Students find this configuration very useful to learn to look at problems from various perspectives through the different educational and working experience of the team members.
In order to provide a space for reflection and development, the project is organized within a framework of peer-support and peer-learning where the role of the lecturer is that of a supervisor that supports the progress of each team by stimulating discussion within the team, and by driving them to analyse their problems from the various perspectives delivered by the other modules of the MSc.
Figure 1: setting of team working
To facilitate the team dynamics and peer-learning, I and a colleague (teaching on a different module) defined three schemes: a self-reflection scheme, a peer-support scheme and a peer-evaluation scheme.
The aim of the self-reflection scheme is to create a daily space for each individual member of a team to set his/her own learning outcomes (within the context of DE: personal and project oriented) and to reflect on his/her ability to reach them. This scheme takes the form of a diary (see below for an example), and whilst it was hoped that sharing one’s diary with the rest of the team would facilitate self-reflection through peer-support, some students reported feeling uncomfortable sharing their own thoughts with others and therefore we let students decide whether or not to make their diary available to the team.
The diary serves also as a means to collect evidence and reflections for the reflective essay (second coursework for this module). Even though the essay does not actually take the form of a diary, the diary can help students recollect contributions, abilities, and difficulties during the project and hence write a more insightful piece of reflective work.
|
Reflective Diary: Day 3 (Extract from a student’s
diary) |
|
|
Group project goals to be
met today |
Integrate the two
perspectives taken on the system, in the home and on the mobile. Evaluation
of prototype and iteration; Contribute to
informal presentation of groups participating in Design Experience. |
|
Personal learning goals to
be met today (through the project) |
To understand
more about the fitness of our design to the research made in this field and
to avoid producing something based on a concept that has already been disproven by research or in practice. |
|
Time spent and activities
covered today |
10 hrs –
integration of the prototypes - reflection on the validity of our
requirements – more research and production of a Rich Picture to guide the
rest of the work |
|
Achievements in project
goals |
We realized that
more user research was needed to accommodate new ideas. The questionnaires we
used before showed too narrow a view, and we realized that a more general
ethnographic stance was needed to find ideas for a design that could be taken
up by many people. Also we found
more relevant ethnographic studies and psychological theories to inform our
choices. With this new and
more complete information we produced a Rich Picture to help us keeping an
eye on important factors and we also refined the personas to integrate the
new knowledge. |
|
Achievements in personal
goals |
The work done
today made apparent how the process is cyclical and sometimes it is necessary
to take a step back and rethink something. The value of involving the users
and get a reality check is fundamental in this. |
|
Feedback received: strengths |
Critical sense
and ability to question past decisions. |
|
Feedback received: What could be improved |
Critical sense
can sometimes not be compatible with achieving something in a limited
timeframe or lead to an increased workload. |
The peer-support scheme is aimed to support the learning of each member of the team by providing constructive feedback at the end of each project phase (e.g., every two or three days), i.e., by identifying the strengths of the work the member produced and by making suggestions for improvement. The feedback should be made in a professional way and not be judgemental. The role of the constructive feedback is to support reflection on one’s own work. Often, we are not aware of the real contribution we have made. Discussion can help gain a better understanding of how we contributed and how we can contribute further. Such feedback was aimed to be helpful to its recipient but also useful to the person who gives it. In order to avoid conflicts within the team, we let each team decide whether to use an anonymous way to provide feedback, or whether to be more open and promote discussion. It is also made clear to the students that this feedback cannot affect in anyway the final mark they will receive.
Given the difficulty of giving feedback, the students are provided with a simple feedback structure and each member can decide whether to set topics on which s/he would like to get feedback. Sharing of the diary with the team before feedback can facilitate this process, by providing further insights to other team members into the rationale behind the student’s strategy and performance.
Discussion within the team is moderated by a team leader. It is a decision of the team how often the leadership should change. One of the roles of the team leader is to make sure that each member get the space for presenting his/her own ideas. Often, extrovert or stronger personalities take control of the discussion leaving very little space to other to contribute.
A peer-evaluation scheme is set up to help each team deal with lack of cooperation or involvement by a member in the project. The scheme requires the team to select priority criteria to decide if all members are contributing evenly to the project. The criteria are decided on the first day of the group work. The criteria can be used to (a) warn members that are not following them and (b) eventually decide how the final mark should be shared among the members. To facilitate this process, a set of priority criteria is provided. Students can choose from this list or they can make their own. Note that the criteria are not about the product they have to create for the project, but about the process they undertake. Once decided, the criteria are registered in a peer-evaluation diary maintained by the team leader and shared by the group. When a problem arises with the behaviour of a team member, students can use this diary to record such problem after a discussion moderated by the team leader has taken place.
Peer-valuation scheme set by
one of the team
Peer-evaluation criteria
Participation in group meeting
In-class attendance 9.30 – 6.00
Promptness and reliability
Willingness to take on task
Thoroughness of task completion
Willingness to help group cohesion and prevent
conflict
Participation in constructive feedback to other group
members
Sharing-mark scheme decided
by one of the team: Final
percentages should add up to 100%. Everyone will start off with 25%. If someone
does not meet the norms selected above (i.e. slacker), she will be docked
percentage points, the amount of which will be determined by non-slacker group
members, and docked percentage points will be divided amongst non-slacker group
members
On the last day of the project, the members have to decide the total contribution of each member to the project. The total contribution has to be expressed as a percentage and must be supported by the evidence shown in the peer-evaluation diary. A group can agree on the default state, whereby all students are assumed to have made an equal contribution (no need of evidence in this case), or they can decide for individual percentages for each member of the team. Each team can choose the weighting scheme they feel more comfortable with but this scheme must be set up on the first day of the project.
4.
Assessment
|
Coursework brief |
||||
|
Component/Module |
Design Experience |
|||
|
Set by |
Nadia Berthouze |
Moderated by |
XXXX |
|
|
Learning Outcomes to be assessed: The aims of the module are to get
students to develop their HCI design skills and explicitly reflect on that
development. The programme component provides opportunities for students to
develop and demonstrate: ·
knowledge
from all course components ·
knowledge
of user-centred design processes ·
the
ability to conduct user research ·
the
ability to make effective use of design tools and techniques ·
the
ability to work as part of a team ·
the
ability to prepare and present a poster and, overall, to develop the ability to
justify the use of user-centred design processes and critically evaluate
their contribution to the overall product. This module aims to put together skills
and knowledge acquired in the separate modules of the rest of the course. The
module employs a problem-based learning approach, whereby students must draw
on relevant theory and methods to develop a successful and effective design
for a specific user interface or human/machine system. The two-week long
practical project is followed by the writing of a reflective essay that
should represent the growth in knowledge and experience of the student during
the taught part of the course. The essay will be assessed in terms of (a) the
students’ argumentation of how the taught modules and coursework have shaped
their thought process during the practical part of this module and (b) the
students’ critical reflection on their ability to function as a designer in
the future. |
||||
|
Assignment 1 |
A group poster
presentation (25%) |
|||
|
Assignment 2 |
An individual 3,000 word
word-processed essay
(75%) |
|||
|
………………….. |
||||
The assessment is divided into two parts: team work assessment and individual essay.
Team work assessment:
This first part aims at assessing the result of the group work. Each team has to prepare a poster and a low-level prototype of the system designed. A team of researchers in HCI is recruited to play as judges in the evaluation process. Each team presents its poster to each judge separately. This gives the team the opportunity to improve its presentation as this is one of the few times during the MSc when they are involved in a poster presentation. Up to now, the judges have been recruited from staff involved in the HCI-E MSc. In the future, however, I plan to involve researchers from companies as well. Although the students are already well motivated, this could give them the chance to get feedback from the outside world.
Figure 2: posters and material for final presentation
Reflective Essay:
The second part of the assessment takes the form of a reflective essay. The essay is a form of portfolio that aims to give the student the opportunity to reflect on how the course has shaped him/her as a designer. Students are asked to reflect on how the modules taught in the MSc have shaped their thought process during the practical session of this module and also to reflect on their ability to work as designers in the future. This is a challenging task as many students are not used to report on their reflections and the tendency of many is simply to write a technical report describing the process. The diary they have kept during the 10 days of the Design Experience is meant to help them reflect on these issues while working on the design of their system and in collecting evidence to write this essay.
5.
Evaluation
The feedback for evaluating my teaching and improving it comes from various sources: peers, students, students’ results and self-reflection. Two forms of peer-evaluation are in place: course brief moderation and class observation. Similarly, I have two sessions of students’ feedback. On the last day of the module, after the poster assessment, I run an informal appraisal session during which I try to get feedback from the students on how the various setups of the process worked. The appraisal session lasts about 1h and it is very valuable. Still warm from 2 weeks of intensive work, students are generally very open and ready to point out what worked and what did not. Discussion about different opinions is also useful to get a better understanding of the problems. A second source of feedback comes from an anonymous questionnaire students are asked to fill up within two months of the end of the module. The questionnaire is divided into two parts: a first part related to the module itself (i.e., content, structure, assessment, etc.), the second part about my way of leading the module. This questionnaire can often be very informative as not all the students feel that they can openly express their thinking in a face-to-face discussion with the tutor. Course evaluation questionnaires, however, suffer from the fact that not all students fill a form. Assessment of the students’ work provides yet another form of feedback. Assessment is done against the learning outcomes set when preparing the course brief and even earlier when the module is defined. Finally it is the time for self-reflection. In order to encourage this step, each module leader in our MSc course is asked to write a few paragraphs and comment on his/her teaching went, feedback received and to start to delineate changes for the following year. These reflections are presented and discussed with all other module leaders at the end of the course.