Once again, I will be discussing what went down in our collaborative brainstorming session with visual references and delve into the strengths and weaknesses of the task. Prior to this lesson, I hadn’t really thought about how I would use my research I had gathered and the brainstorms I had generated to form a design response. Thus, the brainstorming session helped flesh out my problem statement and also my specific area of interest within mental health, which I have explained further in Post 8.
As mentioned in Post 8, the brainstorming task enabled my peers and myself to really think conceptually and outside of the box, bouncing and sharing ideas. This allowed us to gain a new perspective that we may not have come across prior. In addition, prior to this session, I did not really think about what potential areas I wanted to take my design response (service, generative, data vis) so the brainstorming really helped in fleshing out these ideas. It was also refreshing to listen to what other peers had to offer in terms of ideas.
With the predictable course of the lesson always resulting to brainstorming, it was difficult to maintain excitement and drive in a four hour tutorial. Whilst it was helpful, new alternatives and exercises should be thought out to combat this issue. Starting the brainstorming session later in class, we were unable to finish our three maps and only finished the service design map. In addition, as not everyone had in-depth knowledge on each other’s specific issue, at times it was difficult to offer them solid design responses. If members had a common understanding on each member’s focus, then maybe participating and ideation would have been easier and more effective.
Overall, because of our limited time, I felt that more ideas could have been generated if the exercises commenced much earlier in the lesson. Nonetheless, helping each other brainstorm possible design responses for each person’s particular topic, we were able to gain new perspectives for each other as well as our individual topic.