Reflective Journals from CIT Enterprise Camp 2017

Reflective Journal – Day 1

Understanding of the prototyping concepts:

Group 7


  • It was hard to tell whether this group didn’t understand the concepts or if they were just too lazy or not interested to get involved. They were heard talking about TV programmes, who was more spoilt by their parents and fighting with their siblings. When I walked around to see how each group was getting on, they had no mind map created and they had failed to come up with a number of ideas. One female member of the group appeared to be  interested and she had one vague idea. One male member of the group was slouched down on his chair on his phone for the duration of the class. He appeared to be disinterested.
  • Similar to the first stage, when it came to creating a storyboard they were very kiddy and they weren’t talking about the task assigned to then. They drew one sketch but it didn’t evolve into a storyboard. The appeared to be more interested in their off the topic conversations.
  • During the modelling stage, one member created a French man out of modelling clay and a burger. When asked about the model of the chair, he replied “well that wasn’t my job”. He didn’t take the task seriously. The same girl who took came up with the idea made a small chair and she added a sensor tag to it. She appeared to be the only one who actually took on the task of modelling their idea.


Group 8


  • This group were the only group who mind-mapped. They struggled to develop a design for the user. In their problem statement, they were asked to design a chair for a runner who didn’t like to be stationary so they couldn’t understand why they were designing a chair for her to sit down. One member of this group looked bored and not interested in what was going on. He wasn’t getting involved in the group discussion. This group and group 9 sat infront and behind each other. Group 9 sat in a straight line and then moved for the modelling section.
  • For the storyboarding section, they started by sketching on a sheet and then they used the sheets provided. The group were hearing saying, ‘oh we’ll have to add a description, we’ll have to add text, all because of the lines on the sheet.
  • They all appeared to work together for the modelling section except for one member who was sitting down, talking to the group. All members remained sitting for the modelling section, like group 7 but unlike group 9.
  • They appeared to understand the prototyping techniques


Group 9


  • Each member of the team worked on their own first to come up with ideas – two created mind maps while two drew a number of sketches. They then came together after ten minutes to discuss their ideas and to decide on a final one together. They appeared to work very well as a group and they were all actively involved in the ideation process
  • They took a similar approach to the storyboarding section where they all worked on separate aspects of the storyboard and then they came together and nominated one team members to create the final storyboard. They called him their ‘artist’. They appeared to understand the concept of creating a story of how the user would interact with the chair.
  • For the modelling section, they were the only group who moved to the front of the classroom to create their model because there was more room. They were also the only group to stand while making their model and they were the only group who all went to the materials table to either look or take some extra material. They worked together to make a model of the chair/their idea on a piece of cardboard and they all took charge of a different element of the design. One member of their team, the same person who drew their final storyboard, presented their model at the top of the classroom at the end of the session.


Group Cohesion:


  • All members of group 9 worked together but some members of groups 7 and 8 appeared to be disinterested and they didn’t get actively involved in the task. There was plenty of talking among most members of each group but not all of it was related to the prototyping class.
  • The groups didn’t really move around the room, still stuck in the school mindset, asking to go and use the bathroom, had to be reminded that they could use the materials on the table.


Use of materials:

  • All groups used the modelling clay for their models. Two groups used the sheets of cardboard to place their modelling clay on top of. The play dough was also used by each group. One group didn’t realise they were allowed to cut up the cardboard. The coloured card wasn’t used at all. Paper and pencil were the most commonly used tools throughout the session.


  • One member of group 8 said “this modelling clay has to do us for the week?!”




  • The member of group 7 who was slouched down on chair connected the sensor without even having to be told how to do so. This group showed how the technology could be used in their model but they used the example that was given. I don’t know if they fully understood how the tag actually worked. The app kept crashing for group 8 every time they attempted to use it. And the app took 20 minutes to download for group 9 and they just put the tag into their model but it wasn’t working and it had no purpose.



Reflective Journal – Day 2

  • The groups were a lot quieter today and in general they weren’t as active as they were yesterday.
  • One group came in with their final idea already decided but they had not thought deeply about their user or how their wifi device would actually work. When asked questions they only gave one word answers and they only drew one sketch in the entire class. That sketch was drawn by one team member but the other team members didn’t get involved in the task. They were talking about sport and one member was seen taking snapchats. I tried to get them to expand on their idea and to think about how they would model it but they laughed and didn’t seem interested in doing anymore work
  • Two groups came in with a number of ideas and they used the start of the class to determine what the best idea to go with was. Both groups referred to the questions on the board to define their idea. One of the groups went with one idea whereas the other group still had three ideas at the end of the class, they were struggling to pick one because they all had individual favourites. They didn’t argue or fight, they just seemed to give up.
  • It was clear that each group struggled to think outside the box. They seemed to go with the first idea to come into their head but they struggled to expand on that idea and to do things differently. They didn’t check to see if the ideas they thought of already existed. The didn’t think about the characteristics of the user.
  • Only two groups interacted with materials and interestingly none of the groups used the modelling clay like they did the day before. One group used lollipop sticks, glue, paper and playdough. Another group used playdough but did very little with it. The final group didn’t do any modelling. Similar to Day 1, pen and paper were the most commonly used tools
  • They require more structure and more guidance to develop their idea and to come up with a number of ideas for the one problem. The struggled to think creatively and this could be because of the system they are used to in schools.
  • They didn’t move around the room or use the space
  • One student was on her phone for the entire class and didn’t interact with her group, only when I interrupted to see how they were getting on
  • The groups appeared less engaged than they did on Day 1, some of them looked bored. They may have found the task challenging.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s