How to / Self evaluation

How to: Self evaluation

What problem did you identify?

For the how to brief our group consisted of myself, Joel, Lisa and Emily our main notion was paper, and the problem we decided to identify was ‘how to make a paper airplane?’

What evidence did you find to support your decisions?

Initially we all made an action plan; this consisted of what each of us should research. My role was to investigate paper folding techniques for airplanes, the different models one can make from a piece of paper, and what type of paper works best for making aircrafts.

What methods did you use to gather your evidence and what forms did it take?

Primary quantitative- data, numerical: a questionnaire queering about paper air planes, opinions, crafting and knowledge.

Primary qualitative- data, written: a questionnaire asking individuals about paper air planes, opinions crafting and knowledge.

Secondary quantitative- data, numerical: collecting information about different models of air planes, paper weights, entertainment which applies to air planes and smartphone application data.

Secondary qualitative- data, written: collecting information about different models of air planes, paper weights, entertainment which applies to air planes and smartphone application data, motion graphics, logos, message and delivery options.

What methods of research did you find useful?

I believe the best methods applied to our group was the research we all gathered, it helped us to initiate what we wanted to do with our ‘how to’, in particular primary qualitative and secondary qualitative, merely because we wanted people opinions and views on paper air planes, how necessary they are to people, what would one do with a paper plane and why, if anyone was interested in the crafting of paper planes. As well as a secondary version of this, looking into origami, paper crafting, games, sticker art, logo designs and smart phone applications were all the steps we researched for us to get to our final design.

How did these inform a response to your problem?

 As a group we discovered that there was no existing purpose for making a paper air plane, other than for fun, yet that reason alone wouldn’t have a distinct reason for making one, in any shape or form, from then on we decided a physical paper air plane wasn’t exactly necessary, in fact, knowing how to make a paper plane digitally and still physically could be quite interesting.

What methods did you encounter as problematic?

Unfortunately each of us four members if the groups had been absence at least once within the two weeks, which put us behind with group decisions, but we overcome that problem by keeping in touch through email and texting to make sure all of us agreed on any further input, ideas, designs that was added to our ‘how to’. Aside that reason, out time management could have been a little more organised, however the entire project pulled together in the end, which we were very happy with, we agreed if we had of thought of the concept of our work a week earlier we could had made it a lot more exciting as a brief.

How did you overcome this?

In response to the previous question, we all kept in touch for the progress of the brief, and helped each other develop the project as a whole, overall I believe our group worked well aside small inconveniences.

What research could you have carried out that would have proved more useful?

Initially I believe we should have done a good deal more primary research, collected more data, and gave people surveys to fill out.

Our final idea concluded as an application for a smart phone, the application was called ‘air craft messenger’, it was a function which served a purpose of message and delivery through the concept of paper and airmail in the form of a paper plane. Not the average paper plane, instead a digital version. Because this idea was raised later on into the project, out ideas, designs and research was limited to what came to us first to bring the idea together and work, I think that if we had of worked at it sooner, we could have grasped and initiated the design to its full advantage. We could have through roughly observed smartphone applications, how they work, and possibly made our application work on an iPhone as an instant messenger service. 

Five things that you have learnt about the design process over the last two weeks:

-That I need to involve myself more in the design process, suggesting final designs not initial ideas.

-Those final outcomes always work best with a lot of research to back up the concept, design, and motive.

-Working in a group designing works well in the sense there are a lot of ideas flowing, yet decision making can be sometimes hard or correct.

-I have learnt that as a group we should have thoroughly designed a lot more to achieve the outcome we could of with the how to brief.

-In particular to our design approach, as a group we felt we needed more time to make it to the standard we wanted it.

List five things you would do different next time:

-Manage time more effectively

-Plan ideas though roughly

-Research all aspect necessary

-not rush, but try to full fill time to its full advantage to achieve a better body of work

-have more input into final designs, literally, not just idea input