Join our network of non-profits, companies and individuals who believe social change can happen through design.

Become A Member
avatar

Jesse Resnick

New York, NY, United States

Member since September 08, 2008

  • Review Feedback

    Communication

    Dec_1_board_2_432_

    Click here for a larger image.

    There were lots of thoughts and ideas brought up during the review, many of which had not crossed my mind. Most of the critics that commented on materials felt that my initial ideas of silicone, Velcro, and plastic able to sustain a live hinge were a good start. It was suggested that I also explore santoprene rubber and thin polyethylene (like the kind sometimes used for Astroturf). Some material inspirations suggested were the Gumby doll (a stiff, flexible elastic material), and the work of artists like David Kroenenberg and Matthew Barney.

    A lot of the critics commented on the notion of interactivity, and felt that the designs I presented did not explore thoroughly enough. I definitely agree with this comment, and received some great suggestions and inspirations. One critic felt that the concept could be taken beyond the wristband – perhaps wrapping around the thumb, or winding down the arm, similar to a sci-fi device. He thought that the kids might respond better to something fun and different like that. He then commented on my bendable concept, and proposed that each piece could click into place, similar to the way Barbie doll joints work. Another critic suggested looking at puzzle/strategy games, like the Rubix Cube. Someone suggested engaging forms - a bubble that when pushed, would blow up on the other side; a series of rings that could twist, and a contour tracing device.

    Some inspirational products mentioned were Indian bracelets, Tickle me Elmo, and the box filled with pins that mimics contours pressed against it. One critic suggested that maybe the timer for the device could become the central part – maybe something that could be pulled out and would gradually retract. It was also mentioned that I could look at other things that are timers, like clocks, eroding food, the moon, temperature, etc. Someone else reminded me to consider that there is a danger in giving children toys with small parts.

    There were some good concerns/suggestions brought up about the product concept. One critic suggested that the device could count the number of times that the device was used per day. This is a great suggestion, and could help to show if the child was especially stressed/nervous/unfocused. One critic wondered what would happen if the child performed very physical behaviours, and if the device would be able to help them. This is a very realistic concern – speaking to the experts, I learned it would be difficult to regulate the very physical behaviours with my device. The critic suggested that I come up with a list of behaviours that the device will address best, and the ones that it won’t. She also suggested that I videotape the kids, both with and without the device to show how they respond. Another critic brought up ethical/legal considerations in terms of testing the device. This is definitely an important consideration, and something that needs to be looked into. Also in regards to product testing, one critic mentioned that it could be valuable to test the product on teachers to see how they respond. They could have some really valuable insight on what works/doesn’t work about my prototypes.

    A few critics felt that the concept could be targeted to an even more specific focus, and suggested that I find the time/setting where kids perform behaviours most often. From my research so far, it seems that the behaviours are performed most during class time, but it is definitely something to look into further. The critics also raised the point that the device could be stigmatic, and draw more attention to the children if it were used outside of the classroom. They suggested that it could be designed to be very subversive and look like a piece of jewellery or a watch. Several critics also raised the question of how I could make the device customizable so it would be unique to each child. A critic gave the example of the buttons that can be added to Crocs.

    I received a few suggestions of other people to speak with or look up. A critic mentioned Son Rise, a school started by individuals against punishment and interested in alternative methods of teaching. Another critic mentioned a woman named Ann Shipley, who works one-on-one with autistic children specifically targeting stereotypic behaviours.

    In terms of teaching how to use the device, someone suggested that I clearly articulate the learning process with words and/or diagrams/storyboards. Speaking to the experts gave me a general idea of how to teach something like this, but I will need to speak to them further to get more detailed information.

    There were also comments on the board – a few critics said that it was clear, and that the information was easy to follow. One critic mentioned that I could include images/illustrations of the children performing stereotypic behaviour to get empathy through my visuals. He also suggested that I could list some of the most common behaviours.

Leave a Response

Fields marked * are required


No file selected (must be a .jpg, .png or .gif image file)


Once published, you will have 15 minutes to edit this response.

Cancel

My Interests

  • Industrial Design
  • Environmental Design
  • Communication Design
  • Fashion Design
  • Audio/Visual Design