Final design
The concept is a cooperative game where you need to build structures out of wooden blocks based on a card containing different views of the model. This game is a one-off product that caters towards Arne's interest while challenging him in his intelligence and communication skills.
The blocks are made out of laser cut plates that slot together using finger joints and glue. After the blocks were painted based on selected Pantone colours. Together with the blocks the game comes with a catalogue like booklet, laminated assignment cards and a storage backpack.
The game is played by dividing the blocks among the players. To complete their building assignments the players need to share blocks with each other. There is no winning condition as the focus is completely on cooperation. The players can stop the game whenever they want.
The goal of the concept is to help develop Arne's communication and collaboration skills by gamifying the learning process. While playing the game Arne, as well as the other players, need to ask for the pieces that they need. Together with the emphasis on cooperation during the game the communication skills are trained in a fun and interactive way.
It can be argued that the process of developing the concepts together with Arne, by means of the co-design session, is just as important as the outcome itself. During the codesign session a lot of progress was observed and with every iteration that was received, although still nascent, better responses and feedback.
Final Game Rules
Materials
- a set of blocks: different in shape and colour
- catalogue: contains information about the blocks
- building cards: 2D and 3D views
- backpack: to store all materials of the game
How the game is played
1. All blocks will be placed in the middle of the table.
2. Divide the blocks among the players.
3. All players receive one tangram building card.
4. The players need to create the shape that is on the card.
5. When someone has made the right shape, all other
players need to check whether it is correct.
6. When all players complete their task, new tangram
building cards will be divided.
Getting new blocks
All blocks are divided among the players, which means that you may not have the right blocks to create the shape on your building card. In this case, you can trade your blocks with other players. There are three options:
1. You ask another player if you may have a block.
2. You trade a block with another player.
3. You merge your blocks with another player and build the shape on the cards together.
4. Any other thing you can think of, as long as all players agree with it.
End of the game / winner
- The players can choose to stop the game at any time they want.
- The game does not have a winner, it is a collaborative / communicative game.
Extra
- A timer can be integrated where all players need to finish their building card in time.
- Players can draw their own tangrams and challenge each other.
- Players can guess what shape is created.
Here you can find the 3D models of the blocks that were made with the colors Arne chose.
Evaluation
Here you can find two evaluation forms, one is filled in by the parents, with the aim of evaluating the game and the process and the other one filled in by Arne's mentor, with the aim to try the game in a completely different context and players.
The evaluation from the parents is not complete as they decided to discuss some of the points during the meeting. According to the evaluation form and the explanation of the parents, it became clear that bringing the game to school was really nice. At school, the game (and also variants of the game) were played and they found out that it is fun and useful for kids to play. The kids of Arne's school were really enthusiastic that Arne (partly) designed the game. According to the parents, who followed the whole co-design process, the game is really useful and nice for Arne. At this moment, Arne is not yet able to explain the game, but they think this game is an opportunity for Arne to practice explaining since he is the only one who knows the rules. Besides that, the backpack makes storage easier, Arne does not carry it, but keeping everything together is nice. An improvement could be some pockets on the side of the smaller things or the catalogue. The ware of the game is very good. They played already a lot with it, the blocks fall, but it feels it will last for a long time. The building assignments are challenging enough for Arne, not everything is equally difficult which makes it a nice combination. Also, the fact that there are no solutions is really good for Arne, although it is sometimes harder for others. It is good, because if there were solutions, he would be focused on that, and would not see the purpose of it. The communication and collaboration are definitely triggered by the game. When Arne starts, he is motivated enough to ask to get the blocks. Arne's communication has definitely improved during this process, as he automatically asks questions now. The collaboration and motivation to talk was a valuable process for Arne. The collaboration and designing his own blocks were very helpful and he really enjoyed it. The process as well as the outcome have value, but in a different way. The game itself is valuable, there is potential for him, it has a lot of opportunities and it is useful for the longer term. The rules are simple, but stimulating. The process was also very useful, because Arne needed to communicate and behave. But the combination of the process and the outcome are especially valuable, because if he bought this in the shop, it would not have had the same impact as if he was part of the game. It would not have the same results. After the feedback on the game and the process, some feedback for the group was provided. When Arne comes to the University of Twente, he runs from the parking to the building, because he likes to come here with the group. He always wants to come. The group was able to really find Arne's level and his challenges, which is a very positive sign since it is not easy to get that. Besides that, the communication was great and clear. The expectations of the parents are exceeded, as they have no idea how to approach it. The collaborative process was really useful.
List of Requirements
To check whether the product fulfills the requirements set at the beginning of the process, each requirement is graded with a '+', '∿', or '-'.
'+' means that the requirement is completely met, '∿' means that the requirement is partially met, and '-' means that the requirement is not met. An extensive explanation can be found in the document.
Project Requirements
+ 1.1 The product shall support the participant in maintaining a healthy lifestyle.
+ 1.2 The specific needs and wishes of the participant shall be taken into account. / The defined problem based on the user’s needs and wishes shall be solved.
+ 1.3 The product shall be made through co-design with the participant.
“Although the problem is not solved (the challenge is a long term problem). Large steps have been made in Arnes communication with room for further development”
Conclusion
At the beginning of this project ‘Designing for specific users’ the group was assigned to a specific case owner, called Arne. Arne is a five years old, highly gifted boy, who likes everything that has to do with mathematics and graphic design. He likes to be in a social environment but prefers to do things on his own. During his daily life, he and his parents struggle with his somewhat poorer communication and collaboration skills.
The group started ideating, but was struggling with what could be suitable and helpful and what not. After several brainstorm sessions a game with blocks came to mind. This idea was presented to Arne during the next co-design session. Since Arne is a child and communication could be hard for him, it was chosen to bring visual low-fidelity prototypes to the meeting to better convey the idea. Arne showed a positive reaction to the game and it was decided to continue developing the idea, while keeping Arne’s preferences in mind.
During the following co-design sessions, Arne gave a lot of input for the game. Sometimes he was asked to do things, such as drawing the blocks in the catalogue, but several times he came up with other things, and the group tried to incorporate it into the prototype. Every new co-design meeting, a new or developed version of the game was brought, and every week Arne did get more excited about the new prototype.
During the co-design meetings, the group already saw a lot of improvement in Arne’s communication skills. He was saying more and more every week, which was very nice to see.
The last meeting with Arne and his parents was the evaluation meeting. Arne had taken the game home with him for a few days and he also brought it to his school. The reactions at school were mainly positive, and the reactions of the parents as well.
The game is stimulating verbal communication and collaboration, while it is challenging enough for Arne to play. Because Arne is part of the design process and one of the designers of the game, it motivates him to play the game with others.
The next step is to let Arne explain things to other people. This game has the potential for Arne to learn to explain things. At his school he is the only one who knows the rules of the game, and since he is one of the designers, it could be easier to explain this game.
The process of collaborating with a specific user, in this case a highly gifted child, was especially in the beginning a challenge. During the co-design sessions, the group learned a lot about working in a team and keeping someone’s preferences in mind.
Reflection of team work
Introduction
At the start of the project, we got together as a team to hash out our expectations and figure out where each of us shines and where we could use some work. Each group member was tasked with noting down their competencies, areas for improvement, and the desired grade on a sheet of paper. Following this personal reflection, we had a group discussion to share our thoughts. This was to synchronize our objectives, both individually and together, and to establish clear learning goals. Despite our desired grade being close to the exact same, our strengths and weaknesses differed quite a bit. Ranging from one member acknowledging a tendency to overburden themselves with work, to another admitting to sometimes lack the discipline to do his/hers action points on time.
From the first impression this posed quite the challenge, synchronizing our efforts. However, we realised it more so presented an opportunity for mutual growth. By learning from each other’s distinct qualities, we aimed to not only advance the project itself, but also develop on a personal level.
Group dynamics
To work as efficiently and effectively as possible, we established roles within our groups. Sophie became chairwomen, following her exquisite leading/coordinating qualities. This meant she would also be the person held responsible for contact with both our client and tutor. As Fenna mentioned she was good at writing text, she became our notetaker. This was also an important role for the group-, client- and tutor meetings. As the project progressed, Leire also naturally assumed a leadership role. Her ability to expect and elicit high-quality work from the team, coupled with her willingness to provide support where necessary, was instrumental in enhancing the overall standard of our project. Without her stepping into this role, the project would likely have achieved a lesser outcome.
Project execution
Throughout our project, numerous meetings were scheduled with our client and tutor, typically occurring weekly. Given this high frequency, maintaining accountability became a pivotal aspect of our process to ensure comprehensive oversight. Whenever a team member failed to complete their assigned tasks or was tardy to a meeting, the issue was addressed promptly. While these measures might have seemed stringent at the time, in retrospect, they were essential. As a group, we are all satisfied with the outcome of our project, and it would have been regrettable if our results had suffered due to some unprofessional conduct. That is the reason punctuality and adherence to responsibilities were of vital importance.
Conclusion of project execution
Reflecting on our project, it is clear that we exceeded our initial expectations, not only in the final outcome but also in our personal and collective growth. Throughout the project, challenges such as reliability issues were met with constructive solutions, like the incorporation of an extra assignment to reinforce the importance of accountability.
Unexpectedly, the project’s direction took a creative turn, ending up extremely different from what any of us had originally envisioned. In the beginning of the project, we thought we would find a clear solution to a clear problem, whereas in the end maybe the process of getting there was most important for us and our client. One of the most significant takeaways in this process for us was learning the importance of co-designing, designing with instead of for. This new practice transformed our approach to design and enriched our professional skills.
In hindsight, establishing a formal contract, outlining specific consequences for specific actions, might have mitigated some early issues. Although we did start the project off with a stripe-list, this was not continued until the end (or strictly written down in general). Nonetheless, this experience has taught us the importance of structure and clear agreements in collaborative environments.
As we move forward from this project, we carry with us not only the technical and design skills enhanced through practice but also deeper insights into team dynamics and project management. These lessons will undoubtedly influence our future projects, making us not only better designers but also more competent and empathetic collaborators.
Expectations for the future
In this case, the focus was put on the whole process of all the meetings with Arne to see him develop and watch as his skills improved towards and with the group. is How the game will help him after the project is less in our control. Since there is a fully functioning prototype, the plan is to hand our game to Arne and his parents so he can play the game at home. Most importantly however, he could bring the game to his school and explain it to his class mates to play it together with others. Arne got to know the group throughout the project and he and his parents know the game, so it would be beneficial for him to play the game with other people who he might not know as well and who he will have to explain the game and talk to in order to further improve his communication and collaboration. Being able to explain things to other people would be a big step for Arne. Because of the simplicity of the game, it provides a perfect opportunity for Arne to practice by trying to explain the rules.