The Kindness of Strangers: Change Observer: Design Observer
Debate about designers’ agendas when designing for social causes…
Experiencing Abstract Information | Fubiz™
Using technology to show results of abstract data like: How long do you have to work in different cities, to afford a Big Mac or a kilogramm of bread? or Projected pollution in real water
Bachelor Thesis, 2010 project
students Jochen Winker and Stefan Kuzaj from University of Applied Sciences Schwabishch Gmund
Core 77’s Allan Chochinov showcases some really interesting socially driven graphic design work here from his SVA grads at a lecture at IDxA conference Interaction 10 in Savannah, GA…
MIT Student Designs All-Terrain Wheelchair for the Poor
Matt McCambridge, a designer for Whirlwind Wheelchair International, designed the all-terrain wheelchair you see above to address the needs stated below by the MIT News Office:
by Morgan Bettex, MIT News Office
“The U.N. Development Programme estimates that less than 1 percent of the need for wheelchairs in developing countries is met by local production, partly because small workshops can’t exploit economies of scale to be profitable. Moreover, the wheelchairs that are available aren’t designed for people who must push themselves over rough roads and muddy walking paths often encountered in the Third World. As a result, millions of people must rely on others to carry them or be stranded inside their homes.”
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/amos-wheelchair-0218.html
Tips for Learning and Listening
While doing research on Dr. Richard Farson, I stumbled across this write up in, of all places, a site for ski lessons. WAIT! WAIT! WAIT! I was skeptical too, but there are actually some really good tips here that we could all learn from…I mean, he does quote Farson.
Ten Instructional Paradoxes: Learning does not entirely come from the teacher, but from within. The student, too, has an opportunity to enhance the learning process and its results—even a responsibility. Ponder the points below, and the suggested responses in italics (responses added to Dr. Farson’s points):
by Dr. Richard Farson
1. People learn most when they are talking, not when they are listening. So, talk in your lesson; ask questions, relate successes and failures.
2. More of certain types of learning can take place when one tries not to teach. Your instructor may suggest a “free” run, for this reason; be receptive. Odds are you’ll be attempting what you have just been working on and will be more playful than when “under the lens” of your teacher and/or peers—and will probably be more successful.
3. Some things are learn-able, but not teachable. Such as the sensation of control while sliding, although this can be set up by an instructor with your participation.
4. Everything we try works. But some things work better; seek those even though they may be harder at first.
5. What is true for children is probably true for adults too. Often true; you can even think and do like a child for results.
6. We think we learn from our failures and other people’s successes, but it is the other way around. It is hard for us to accept our failures due to the ego factor but we can see what causes others to fail; we love our successes and like to be told of them and will therefore add them to our systems.
7. We grow from calamities, not from virtues. Overcoming difficulties is part of life and we are better for it; same in skiing, but as in life we must persevere and will grow if we do.
8. Don’t try to improve people, improve the situation. In better situations—easier slopes, clearer explanations, greater attention— people then can improve. Can you, too, find ways to improve your learning situation—avoid the cell phone, point out your need for rest room or warming-hut stops, get adequate rest the night before, refuel the body, manage your fears?
9. Students can learn more from each other than from the teacher. We respond best to our peers, not our superiors; join in to sessions where you are paired with another lesson-taker. Observe their progress and failures and consider their questions and comments.
10. We learn to ski in the summer and swim in the winter. Somehow we retain over the summer what our bodies learned to do in our skiing from the prior winter and are often better at the sport the next winter; so be patient with your progress, for your breakthrough may not come until the following season!
The ten worst listening habits in America—and how to correct them for a more effective ski lesson.
Communication is a two-way street. Listeners can get more out of the time invested listening by correcting any of the 10 worst listening habits in America they may be afflicted by. On the other hand, speakers should assume their audience is afflicted by all of the habits and make their presentations that much more effective and forceful.
1. Calling the subject uninteresting. Listen attentively for information. Be selfish in listening for things you can use.
2. Criticizing the speaker’s delivery. Accept speech, grammar, and delivery defects by listening around them.
3. Becoming over-stimulated on an objectionable point. Hear the speaker out instead. Don’t let a point of disagreement block your thought process.
4. Listening only for facts. Absorb the underlying principles as well.
5. Trying to rigidly outline every speech. Instead, listen for awhile. Then take summary notes. And, you can’t outline the un-outlinable.
6. Faking attention. Listening is an active process, not passive. Gazing steadily at the speaker, possibly with head cupped in palm, apparently in rapt attentiveness, often is indicative of a mind “out to lunch”.
7. Tolerating or creating a disturbance. Avoid extraneous stimuli. Quell it if possible. For instance, a lift ride could be used by the instructor to give needed verbal explanations saving on-slope time or by students needing to communicate with friends or family.
8. Listening to the fun material only. Listen to the thought-provoking material also.
9. Allowing loaded words to form barriers to listening. This is much like number 3 above, but is concerned with a single word that has an undesirable connotation to the listener. Granted the speaker should not have used it had the effect been known, but why should the listener miss subsequent points because of the speaker’s error, perhaps unwitting?
10. Wasting the differential between talking speed and listening speed. We talk at 100-125 words per minute. We listen at 400-500 words per minute, and we think at about 750 words per minute. Unless the spare time is used profitably, we soon tune ourselves out and start thinking about an entirely different topic. To avoid this, run mentally ahead of the speaker and anticipate coming points. Identify evidence the speaker uses. Engage in mental recapitulations of what has been said.
—after Wymond Eckhardt, National Park Service Training Center
Found here:
http://www.skimybest.com/skiless.htm
This “Why Take a Ski Lesson from a Professional” page last modified 02/14/2010: \SkiMyBest\skiless.htm. Copyright © 2010 William R Jones.
Fish can improve our ability to extract power from wind
Posted by Thomas Gal:
I read an awesome post, which plugs indirectly, for biomimicry yet again! I read that the emulating the pattern in which swim could squeeze more power out of wind farms using vertical rotors. There are limitations to the caltech study (it is 2D) but it shows potential.
Fish can help consume waste, grow vegetables, AND produce more power with wind. Next thing I’m gonna hear fish oil is good for you…..err…wait…..
Also backs up my comment on Technology -vs- Design. They go hand in hand in any complete notion.
-Tom
I read an article today in Core77 about “Emerging Markets as a Source of Disruptive Innovation” posted by Niti Bhan and I wanted to share some of my thoughts…
Why do you think?
Reaction by Jill Yoe Graves
Disruptive Technologies*
In the blog post Niti Bhan stated, “Where design of consumer products tended to begin with the assumptions of individual ownership or entertainment or passive consumption of throwaway convenience, its time to look at increasing productivity and opportunities for income generation while minimizing the impact on the environment and need for resources.”
Though I agree with Bhan’s point about creating products that “minimize the impact on the environment and need for resources”, I question the stated agenda behind creating new products. Why is the primary need that is being called for here related to increasing products and opportunities for income generation? If we are really looking at the needs of the lower income demographic or those in the “bottom of the pyramid”, I’m not sure that income generation should be the primary concern.
I have a more idealized view of where I would like to see design impact society. A view where designers see needs, extensions of the design’s life, how these designs could improve the journey and more positively interact with our lives, rather than an artifact’s brief impact on the market. It seems to me that this incessant creation of things cannot last, and that it would be more valuable to start shifting our thinking of what consumer products are and should be in today’s society. Truly considering the value, before it’s created—considering questions like, how could this design impact our world/community/society/culture in, say, 50 years?
If we are, here, examining the place for disruptive innovations (or design considerations that should be related to those disruptive innovations), maybe what we should be looking at is how to integrate a design approach that considers our true needs and the needs of others—maybe through disruptive innovation, maybe not—into the marketplace.
* Defined here by Niti Bhan on Core 77:
One of the most misunderstood terms in the business world is disruptive technology. Too many companies—and the marketers in charge of bringing these companies’ innovations to market—assume that “disruptive” connotes a highly-sophisticated, high-end product with cutting-edge technology that will appeal to early adopters. Actually, Harvard’s Clayton Christensen argued the opposite in his groundbreaking book on business innovation, The Innovator’s Dilemma. As Christensen pointed out again and again, “disruptive technologies were exactly those that did not appeal to entrenched market leaders because they tended to under-perform existing technologies and served a less-profitable consumer demographic.” (Source: Dominic Basulto)
Taking Christensen’s insight on disruptive innovation (summarized so well by Basulto) as the starting point, we could just as easily extend that thought to say that those innovations that are simpler, cheaper and offer value to the less profitable—those successful at the Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP), in other words—are the ones which contain seeds of disruption in markets outside of their intended audience.
As students, in many ways the newest to the field of design, I am curious to hear your take on the subject.
“Curiosities, Rick Valicenti
+ the 21st Century Thirst
is work from the past decade curated to underscore the collaborative balance and value between the professional commission and the personal research.
An opening reception for the exhibition, beginning with a lecture by Valicenti, will be presented on Friday, February 12 from 7 to 9 pm. In association with our exhibition, the department of theatre and dance’s FAU Dance Ensemble will premiere a work on February 5–7 that Rick Valicenti is collaborating on with graduate students in dance and visual arts.”
Thanks for the heads up from the Daily Heller
“What is design?” talk by University of Alberta Masters student Robert Andruchow at Pecha Kucha night in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Found on the blog:
Check out my other design blog where my friend, Brandy, and I post things we are working on and things we like. 
