Desktop version

Home arrow Communication

  • Increase font
  • Decrease font

<<   CONTENTS   >>

Appendix A: Radical Collaboration Survey Questionnaire

Name: Your Role:

Please use a word or a phrase to describe your overall experience as a member of the WRC this semester.

In what ways was invitation achieved and/or not achieved in your experience with the WRC this semester?

To what degree do you think invitation was actualized this semester: 0-1-2-3-4-5

In what ways was sharing achieved and/or not achieved in your experience with the WRC this semester?

To what degree do you think sharing was actualized this semester: 0-1-2-3-4-5

In what ways was collaboration achieved and/or not achieved in your experience with the WRC this semester?

To what degree do you think collaboration was actualized this semester: 0-1-2-3-4-5

In what ways was radical imagination achieved and/or not achieved in your experience with the WRC this semester?

To what degree do you think radical imagination was actualized this semester: 0-1-2- 3-4-5

In what ways was suspension achieved and/or not achieved in your experience with the WRC this semester?

To what degree do you think suspension was actualized this semester: 0-1-2-3-4-5

In what ways was exposure achieved and/or not achieved in your experience with the WRC this semester?

To what degree do you think exposure was actualized this semester: 0-1-2-3-4-5

The dimensions/features of Radical Collaboration:

  • • Invite and welcome perspectives that span theoretical, personal, and professional boundaries;
  • • Expose participants to the complexities of problems regardless of experience;
  • • Invite radical imagination to what learning in academia can mean and be;
  • • Share leadership, research, and teaching roles;
  • • Suspend beliefs about knowledge boundaries; Suspend judgement of people and ideas; Suspend closure; and Sustain openness. You need to
  • • Resist hierarchical structures; Invite and welcome perspectives across institutional boundaries; and Value team learning


Appendix B: Design Thinking Methods and Exercises

Overview: This appendix contains some signature design exercises and research methods employed by design thinkers and makers. While it is organized by the design thinking process, it does not suggest these methods and exercises are to be applied in a linear fashion.


Bodystorming Contextual inquiry Journalistic questioning Journey mapping Photovoice

See UX Advocacy Methods in Chapter 3, p. 74 See Pedagogical Exercises in Chapter 4, p. 95 See UX Advocacy Methods in Chapter 3, p. 72 See UX Advocacy Methods in Chapter 3, p. 74 See UX Advocacy Methods in Chapter 3, p. 73


Asking “How might we?” (HMW) "

HMW questions are questions that spark ideas during open- ended brainstorming sessions. In order to perform this exercise, you should have your POV statement ready. For example, say your POV is this:

“First-year employees need to learn about company cultures in order to participate in company activities meaningfully”

You may ask HMW questions like:

  • • How might we make company cultures learnable?
  • • How might we inspire new employees to participate in company activities?
  • • How might we create meaningful activities?

The goal of this exercise is to create actionable (hence “how” questions) statements that can guide the ideation phase later.

Empathy mapping Point-of-view (POV) statement

See UX Advocacy Methods in Chapter 3, p. 73 See Pedagogical Exercises in Chapter 4, p. 96


Affinity mapping or affinity diagramming

Affinity mapping is borrowed from UX design to help teams organize related ideas into distinct clusters or categories. This is typically done with post-it notes. First, the team leader presents all available ideas on a wall. Looking at these ideas, the entire team helps to create top-level categories that are then split into subcategories that could house all of the ideas. All of these categories/subcategories should be clearly labeled (and better if color coded). The last step is to organize all ideas into these subcategories.

It is best to put categories that are close to each other (in nature, execution, etc.) so team members can visually identify the relationships (hence “affinity”).

When done organizing the ideas into categories, team members will take turns to present the ideas within a category and summarize them in simple narratives.

Dot voting

Depending on the materials used for this activity, it is sometimes called post-it voting. Using a given number of dot stickers or post-its, each member casts their votes to the corresponding ideas they like best. This simple exercise is a quick way for team members to choose their favorite ideas and shortlist options.

Four-category mapping

This method involves dividing generated ideas into relative abstract categories: the rational, the delightful, the darling, and the long shot. Similar to affinity mapping, team members should first have a view of all available ideas, then they assign these ideas into either of the four categories. The purpose of these categories is to create a set of doable ideas and those that may require more resources to accomplish, and may well be saved for the future. For some design teams, this exercise allows them to combine ideas to create hybrid yet achievable solutions, e.g., both rational and darling.

Radical imagination

See Pedagogical Exercises in Chapter 4, p. 96


Storyboard is an extensive ideation method borrowed from motion picture/film/animation practices. It requires team members to sketch a visual representation of their imagined user journey using different personas and user stories.

A storyboard has a beginning and an end, and usually follows the traditional story arc (starting, rising action, climax, anti-climax, resolution). The combination of words and images help create a visible user scenario that can guide designers in understanding user experience (their emotions, pain points, etc.).


3D modeling

This is a technique for producing 3D digital representations of any object design using graphic software like TinkerCAD and Vectary. Some 3D printers come with their associated modeling software. The purpose of performing 3D modeling is to evaluate a design before it is produced into the physical world using tools like 3D printers or CNC milling. It saves manufacturing costs.

3D printing

Also known as additive manufacturing, 3D printing is the process of outputting 3D models using solid materials like carbon fibers. To print in 3D, the printing application takes a 3D model file and slices/divides it into hundreds or thousands of horizontal layers, and feeds the slices to a printer to print them layer by layer.

Computer-numerically controlled (CNC) milling

CNC milling is the process of cutting or drilling materials— wood or metal—using a rotating cylindrical cutter controlled by a computer. Like 3D printing, the milling machine is informed by a 3D model file that determines which point on the material the cylindrical cutter should go, in what angle, and along which axes (X, Y, Z) it should move.

Laser/waterjet cutting

Both of these cutting or engraving methods are popular in the prototyping process to quickly mark or cut thick or tough surfaces (like metal or glass). Like CNC milling, the laser beam or water jet nozzles are controlled by digital files.

Paper prototype

This low-cost prototyping method uses papers and pens to create mock-up interfaces that can be used for quick user testing. You just need to sketch a representative image of the interface design, using stick features, boxes, and scribbles to represent people, buttons, and texts on a piece of paper. It saves time by eliminating professional coding and graphic design in the early stage of design.


Wireframing is the next step from paper prototypes. It is usually done using a graphic software like PowerPoint or InDesign to create mid-fidelity visual representations of a user interface. Applications like InVision and Axure allow designers to create clickable wireframes. The goal of wireframing is to present a clean, bare-bone structure of a layout that can give users a sense of the overall composition without the rich content like images, colors, and copy (texts).


Card sorting

This is a method used by designers to evaluate the information architecture of a website or application. There are open and closed card sorting methods. In open card sorting, participants (users) are asked to organize various topics from a potential website into groups they define, like home,

resources, people, and contact. Doing so allows designers to understand what labels work best to group different topics. In closed card sorting, participants will sort topics from your content into predefined categories (you give them the labels).

This exercise helps designers create navigation or interaction logic that matches the user’s expectations.

Heuristic evaluation

Heuristic evaluation is a straightforward and practical usability' testing method that uses Jakob Nielsen and Rolf Molich’s 10 usability heuristics:

  • 1. Visibility of system status (user knows what’s going on)
  • 2. Match between system and the real world (follows logical conventions)
  • 3. User control and freedom (easy to perform actions and recover from errors)
  • 4. Consistency (standardize words, actions, or feedback)
  • 5. Error prevention (minimize potential user mistakes)
  • 6. Recognition rather than recall (Minimize memory load)
  • 7. Flexibility and efficiency (has “accelerators” that advanced users can apply to speed up actions)
  • 8. Aesthetic (minimalist design)
  • 9. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from mistake (this is self-explanatory')
  • 10. Help and documentation (proper guides are available when needed)

You may invite a group of 3—5 potential users to participate in a heuristic evaluation session of your design, and ask them to rate the above 10 principles from no issue to severe issue based on their interaction/testing with your design.

Think-aloud protocol

A very' popular method used by UX researchers, the think- aloud protocol requires a setup where the user/participant can experiment with your design via a semi-guided manner. First, you generate a set of scenarios and tasks that can be done using your design. Then, you provide minimal instructions to the user and ask them to attempt completing the tasks. When doing so, ask them to speak out their thoughts (hence “think-aloud”) so you can “see” what their thought process or problem-solving approach is, as well as their feelings. This method is usually supplemented with a post-session interview where you may ask the user what they thought was the easiest or most difficult task(s) to perform and why.


<<   CONTENTS   >>

Related topics