ISECON 2006Franklyn Prescod

Charrette

The Design Charrette in the Classroom as a Method for Outcomes Based Action Learning

in IS Design

Ward M. Eagen Ojelanki Ngwenyama Franklyn Prescod

Action Learning•Action Learning is iterative, based on a cycle of reflection, questioning, conjecture and refutation

•Outcomes Based Action Learning focuses on developing learning developing learning competencies that enable competencies that enable students to invent solutions to students to invent solutions to difficult and novel real world difficult and novel real world problemsproblems

OBALThe process combines:The process combines:

•programmed instructionprogrammed instruction

•questioning, critical inquiry questioning, critical inquiry and experimentation with and experimentation with unfamiliar problem situations unfamiliar problem situations

•critical reflection on the critical reflection on the experienceexperience

Basic assumptions•students learn most effectively by doingstudents learn most effectively by doing

•learning is a collaboration between learning is a collaboration between professor and studentprofessor and student

•learning is problem and context driven learning is problem and context driven

•the student is responsible for his/her the student is responsible for his/her learning outcomeslearning outcomes

•the professor is guide and coach the professor is guide and coach

•student competence is demonstrated student competence is demonstrated by effective problem solving by effective problem solving

Charrette•a contemporary use of the term ‘design charrette’ is to describe an intense time limited design session in which a multi-disciplinary team brainstorms the alternatives and charts the broad strokes of a design •the term originates from the École des Beaux Arts in Paris during the 19th century, where proctors circulated a cart, or “charrette”, to collect final drawings while students frantically put finishing touches on their work which was then presented to the whole school... if the concept was approved, the students spent the rest of the year working out the details of their design

The design charrette

• generates engagement and an attitude of involvement

• develops an experience in and an appreciation of, the team approach

• broadens individual perspectives

• dramatically shifts the knowledge domain towards the applied

• dramatically increases individual confidence

• develops timeline awareness

• generates spontaneity, reacting to ‘intuition’ or ‘feelings’

• generates reflection/action/reflection as a cycle

The ground work•Skills development

• programmed instruction is necessary upfront to bring the students to a level that their learning can be applied and appropriated

•Critical comprehension

• critical and analytical skills and their communication and appropriate terminology must be developed prior to implementing the design charrette to achieve appropriation of learning

Skills development• Programmed instruction was used to cover the theory of

website design and to develop students’ skills with the tools needed to build their websites

• Instruction techniques included in-class demonstrations, pre-packaged tutorials, as well as short assignments related to elements of their final project

• for example, the image assignment consisted of a CD cover for their final project, the video assignment was an introduction of themselves that was to be used in the final project, etc.

Critical comprehension

• participating in a creative design environment requires the development of the discourse and the ability to give and receive critique through engagement in an interactive process

• we began the design process of individual web sites with the development of a story board - this instigates the design questions the student will explore and also clarifies for the student the knowledge the student already has in place

Critical comprehension

• students then did a search and evaluation of several similar web sites to identify elements that they would or would not use as precedent in their own design

• precedent, that is, the historical development of designs, and the morphology (the form) of particular typologies (the taxonomy by use) are key concepts in architecture and these ideas where applied to web sites

• a number of these websites were then presented to the class for evaluation - we used a schema based on the concepts, the feelings, and the function of each site to extract what was good, and what was not, what worked, and what did not

The Design Process

1. Team building

2. Timeline

3. Client involvement

4. Space allocation

5. Manager involvement

6. Meeting

7. Presenting alternatives

8. Building

9. Review

10. Deadline

11. Presentation

12. Wrap-up

1. Teams

• teams chosen by the instructor: teams can be chosen in advance to save time but our experience shows that as little fore warning of the charrette as possible works best, usually just enough to generate some apprehension/excitement such as the warning to be on time for a special event.

2. Timeline

• overview of timeline is presented by instructor: the timeline is put up on the board and all the milestones are indicated, times set, and agreed upon

3. Client

• client introduced: the client briefly presents an overview of the project and answers questions from the students and instructor

4. Space

• each team is assigned space: board space is necessary for the group dynamic so that everyone can participate in the process•certain phases of the process, for example, developing the

basic morphology, require participation and agreement from all of the participants

•other phases, for example client consultation, require a flexible and dynamic presentation technique that has low overhead

•critical to the studio environment is the use of a shared space

5. Manager• team manager(s) introduced: the team

manager is introduced to the team and proceeds to inventory the team and assign roles• the team manager has each student list their names

and skills on the whiteboard for the team to review

•a team leader is chosen by the team and particular duties are assigned to individuals and groups

6. Meeting• client meets briefly with team: the client

meets briefly with each team to answer questions• the team reflect and present on the whiteboard the

outline of two or three different initial design concepts for the client to comment on

•the designs are diagrammed on the board in as much detail as possible in order to get as clear a direction from the client as possible

7. Alternatives• client reviews alternatives: the client

reviews the alternatives and chooses one for development, or combines pieces that he likes for a direction for the team to follow• the team reviews the client’s comments, modifies and

clarifies one direction for development

• the team then goes to computer stations for design development

8. Build

• intense building stage: the team manager sets the team on task and coordinates work, aligning decisions with the agreed upon concept

9. Review

• review by client: the client is presented work at 50 - 60% completion for comments, directions, and approvals•client’s comments are considered and implemented.

10. Deadline

• critical deadline: All work must stop at the critical deadline and everyone must understand that design is over and be ready to go to the next mode which is the formal critical evaluation stage

11. Presentation

• presentation: The designs are presented to the entire class• only questions of clarification are entertained at this

point

12. Wrap up• wrap up: open critical discussion with

class, manager, client, and instructor is intended for the maximum degree of participation by the students

• what is or is not the best solution is irrelevant: what is important is the discussion of the process and lessons learned

Conclusions

•The Design Charrette offers a practical and effective way of accelerating and enhancing learning in New Media design.

• Our ongoing research will evaluate further the application of the Design Charrette to other areas of design in IS such as information systems design.