Presentation at EdMedia 2018

1. Design Thinking for Inclusive Community
Design: (How) Does it Work?
Dr. Stefanie Panke
Instructional Analyst
University of NorthCarolina at
ChapelHill, USA
Social Media Coordinator
Association for the Advancement
of Computing in Education(AACE)
aace.org/review
Prof. Dr. Thilo Harth
University of Applied Sciences
Münster, Germany
Institut für Berufliche
Lehrerbildung
Wandelwerk. Zentrumfür
Qualitätsentwicklung

2. Overview
o Design Thinking
Background
o Workshop Concept
o Evaluation Results
o Next Steps

3. What’s
the
idea?
Design
Thinking
Design Thinking is problem solving method geared to overcome wicked
problems.
o Transcend the immediate boundaries of the problem to ensure that the right questions are
being addressed
o Analyze, synthesize, diverge, generate insights from different domains
o Drawing, prototypingand storytelling (Brown,2009)
o Constraints as inspiration (Brown,2009)
o Not directed towarda technological "quick fix” but towardnew integrations of signs, things,
actions, and environments (Buchanan, 1992)
o Fosters civic literacy, empathy, cultural awareness and risk taking (Sharples at al., 2016)
Design Thinking

4. Design Thinking and Cognitive Bias (Liedtka, 2015)
• Projection bias: People have a tendency to project their past experiences
and thus over-estimate the extentto which the futurewill resemblethe
present.
• Hot/cold gap: People’s emotional state, whether emotion-laden (hot) or
not (cold), unduly influences their assessmentof the potential value of an
idea.
• Egocentric empathy gap: People consistently overestimatethe similarity
between what they value and what others value.
• Focusing illusion: People tend to over-estimatethe effect of one factor at
the expenseof others,overreactingto specific stimuli,and ignoring others.

5. o February2018: Design thinking workshop at Muenster
University of Applied Sciences(Germany)
o Workshop theme:Inclusive community development -
designing neighborhoods for engagement,social cohesion
and inclusion
o Part of the researchcluster‘participation and well-being’
o Participants:Faculty from differentdisciplines,city planners,
architectsand students
Case Study

6. Ice Breaker: Tell Me About Your Neighborhood – Who / What
Is Not On the Map?
o Draw a map of your own
neighborhood.
o What are some barriersto
inclusivenessand social activities
that you experience?
o Who do you never meet in your
neighborhood?Why do you think
that is?

7. ‘I do not interact with the
people in my neighborhood.
Everyone has a house with
garden,every yard is fenced
in.And everyone gets home
from work to do their own
thing.
Results: Unexpected Barriers

8. Audience:
Personas
Personasare fictional, yet data-driven,user biographiesthat allow design
teams to relateto the users’point of viewinstead of focusing on personal
experiencesand anecdotes.
Personas

9. Personas
o Input: brief overview of statistical data
on typical demographics in a German
neighborhood
o Material: Posters with prompts,variety
of headshots
o Goal: Construct fictional biography
outlines and reflect on needs and
barriers forcivic inclusion.
o Outcome: 11 personas

10. (1) DEFINE & FOCUS: Pick one of the personas and
specify which social inclusion problem you want to
solve forthis person.
(2) GENERATE & DEBATE Generate 3-5 ideas to address
the problem with novel solutions or disruptive
technologies.
(3) SELECT & SKETCH Choose one of your ideas and
sketch it out in more detail (literally).
(4) BUILD & PRESENT: Design a prototype orthree-
dimensional representation of your solution with
the materials in the room(card board,paper, tape,
clay).
Design Thinking Cycle

11. Design Thinking Outcomes

12. Evaluation Results

13. Evaluation Results – Positive Aspects
o To receiveimpulsesto think in other directions.
o Interdisciplinary approach
o The developmentof personas and the subsequent
prototyping
o The open approach and the integration of different
perspectives.
o Creativity, possibility to think through unconventional
ideas.

14. Evaluation Results – Negative Aspects
o It is unclear how to move from first ideasto further
development of innovative,marketableproducts / services.
o Unclearwhat is alreadyon the market.That would need to
be researched in a timely manner so that ideas do not fizzle
out.
o It lacks the opportunity to research whether the imagined
solution alreadyexists,and whether it makesany sense.
o Realistic assessments of models and ideas:all comments
and ideaswere treatedequal (both strength and weakness),
missing data (ideas arisefrom a ‘gut feeling’)

15. Give morespecific prompts to target
diversity,e.g.:
o Createa persona that significantly
differsfrom your own background.
o What feelsdifficult about telling this
person’s story?
o What assumptions are you making?
o How can you learn more?
Lessons Learned Personas

16. o # of rounds: Make surethat
participants do not get ‘tired
out’, and feeltheir creativity
whither.
o StructuredFollow-up: Allow
users to furtherdevelop /
researchan idea,and share
back with the group through
time delay,two-day, follow-up
meeting,blendedapproach
Lessons Learned Design Thinking

17. http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/
80 minute, interactive
video with individual and
partner activities,more at
https://goo.gl/LU8q8F
Design Thinking: Resources