Color Room
Color Room
A student group project for Oslo Children’s Museum
By
Mads Helno Jahren, Henning Lundheim, Tommy Madsen and Geirr Sætre
UNIVERSITETET I OSLO
01.12.2010
1
Color Room
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................... 3 ASSUMPTIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 PROBLEM SPACE .................................................................................................................................................. 4 COLLABORATIVE LEARNING .............................................................................................................................................. 4 PRIMARY COLORS .......................................................................................................................................................... 5 USER GROUP........................................................................................................................................................ 5 PRIMARY USERS ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 SECONDARY USERS......................................................................................................................................................... 5 TERTIARY USERS ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 STAKEHOLDERS ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 CONCEPTUAL MODEL ........................................................................................................................................... 6 USABILITY GOALS .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 USER EXPERIENCE GOALS ................................................................................................................................................ 7 DESIGN PROCESS.................................................................................................................................................. 8 METHODS .................................................................................................................................................................... 8 BRAINSTORMING ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 DATA GATHERING ................................................................................................................................................ 9 INTERVIEW WITH A MULTI‐TOUCH EXPERT .......................................................................................................................... 9 INTERVIEW WITH A TEACHER .......................................................................................................................................... 10 THE PILOT:................................................................................................................................................................. 11 THE WORKSHOP: ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 RESULTS FROM THE WORKSHOP AT DISEN ........................................................................................................................ 14 EVALUATION AFTER DISEN WORKSHOP............................................................................................................................. 16 FINAL PROTOTYPE ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 CONCLUSION & FUTURE DIRECTION................................................................................................................... 21 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................................... 24 2
Color Room
Abstract
This paper researches a potential installation for Oslo Children´s Museum, The Color Room - an
interactive model for teaching color theory to children. Exploration of new technology offers
new possibilities in education, this project being one such possibility.The findings emphasises the
value of cooperation and competition as motivating aspects for children. During the research
process a number of different prototypes were designed and tested with users. The last prototype
is not a final product but can be used as a foundation for further development.
Keywords: Computer Supported Collaborative Work, Color Theory, User Centered Design,
Prototyping, Children as Users
Introduction
The colors that surrounds human beings has been documented as a source of inspiration and has
affected art and human made artifacts throughout history. One way to look at colors is as a kind
of language that expresses certain experiences. This can vary from person to person and depend
on ones cultural background. We often use colors as a way of expressing emotions through art
and design, but also as important cultural codes i.e. traffic lights (Amundsen 1991).
Knowledge of colors is a part of the national teaching plan in Arts & Crafts. One of the goals is
to teach children about basic forms, compositions and colors for the purpose of creating a visual
message in an appropriate way. According to the Norwegian department of education, the
increasing level of digital and visual communication in today´s society makes it important to
learn about these things. After completing second grade the kids should have a basic knowledge
of mixing and using primary colors in their own creative work. (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2010)
When designing for children, fun is an important factor. Having fun when doing a task increases
motivation which influences learning (Ormrod 2009). Motivation is also influenced by a various
cognitive factors including interest, expectancies, goals, attributions, mastery and locus of
control (Ormrod 2009, Furnham 2005). “Percieved control over task engagement and outcomes
is central to many views of intrinsic motivation.” (Schunk et.al 2010: 244). These are all factors
that this research will emphasize.
3
Color Room
Assumptions
Considering that our design will be an artifact for a children's museum, we made the following
assumptions : An interactive color room will be a way to support collaborative learning,
according to the CSCL (Computer supported collaborative learning) paradigm.
●
Children are able to cooperate to achieve a goal.
●
Children in primary school have basic skills regarding color theory. They are familiar
with the RYB(red,yellow,blue) color wheel.
●
An interactive color room will make learning colors more exiting.
●
The children’s museum will primarily be used by groups of children, particularly, school
classes.
Problem Space
Collaborative learning
Most children are familiar with various artifacts that are supposed to give training and give an
understanding of colors like traditional color pens and paper, watercolor etc. Traditional artifacts
like these are suited for individual experimentation as they are tools designed for use by
individuals. In recent years we have seen paradigms like CSCL emerging according to a more
sociocultural practice implemented in modern institutions of education. According to the new
paradigms in learning from a more sociocultural perspective, we find that digital technology
offers new ways to support the collaborative aspect of learning colors. Our model will thus build
on Roschelle and Behrend’s (1995:70) view of the underlying work in CSCL as “the mutual
engagement of participants in a coordinated effort to solve [a] problem together” (Koschmann
1996:13).
Studies has shown advantages of kids working collaboratively, and that peer based learning
affect the quality of the learning outcome. “Working with a peer may support a creative process
of converging upon a single, systematizing object-a hypothesis, a prediction, a model, or
whatever [13].” (Crook 1997:238)
4
Color Room
Primary Colors
It is worth noticing that, although the Department of Education emphasises the importance of
knowledge about colors in digital visualizations, schools are teaching the RYB (red, yellow,
blue) color wheel. In our modern digital society, the additive primary colors, RGB (red, green,
blue), may be more valuable for the students to learn, as it is used almost exclusively by
everything that uses a screen, like computers, TVs, cameras etc.
By teaching RGB, the teachers could increase the students’ future computer literacy. If the
reason for teaching RYB is that it is to be used for art, where subtractive colors are generally
used, RYB are not the real primary colors. The subtractive primary colors are CMY (cyan,
magenta, yellow). (RGB World 2010)
User Group
An important part of the design process is to find out, ”who are the users?” This is not just the
people who directly interact with the system you are designing, but also people who affect the
system indirectly. Knowing who the users are is an essential part of designing a successful
system. There are three categories of users: primary users, secondary users and tertiary users:
”Primary users are those likely to be frequent hands-on users of the system; secondary
users are occasional users or those who use the system through an intermediary; and
tertiary users are those affected by the introduction of the system or who will influence
it´s purchase”(Sharp et.al 2007:430)
It is also important to find requirements related to other people or organizations who may have a
influence on the system. These people are the stakeholders. The stakeholders are a bigger group
than what you normally consider your users, and involves everyone that is in some way affected
by the system. (Sharp et.al 2007:430)
Primary users
The primary users of color room is going to be children attending primary school (3-7th grade).
Color room is designed for both boys and girls. Since the installation is going to be at Oslo
Children’s museum, we assume that the kids will mainly travel to this museum together with
their own school class.
Secondary users
5
Color Room
Some of the secondary users of color room is going to be teachers, parents and maintenance at
the museum. The children will probably not come to the museum without a guardian. This will in
many cases be their teachers. Since the color room is supposed to have an educational aspect to
it, teachers will bring the children to the museum for both having fun and enhance educational
skills. When children come to the museum without their school class, it will probably be with
their parents or other relatives. The parents will look after their kids, and maybe help them if
they don´t understand what to do. In some cases the parents may also even have to participate in
using the color room. It is also important to keep in mind the maintenance staff at the museum.
They are the people who are going to fix and clean up after the kids when the museum is closed,
and make sure that everything is ready for use the next day.
Tertiary users
The tertiary users will be the museum administration. It is their responsibility to make sure that
the color room is working the way it´s supposed to at all times. They are in charge of both
handling the daily care of the museum and delegating different tasks to the museum staff for
maintaining the installation.
Stakeholders
In addition to the user groups mentioned above there are several different stakeholders we need
to be aware of. We need to talk to the community and different primary schools to get the
information we need to make the best possible design. In the design process we also need to use
children for testing out different prototypes. It is crucial to get feedback from the children in the
early stages of the design process since they are the end-users of the system. Educational
authorities and politicians are two important stakeholders to help us get funding for the project.
Conceptual Model
The conceptual model of the “Color Room”’- project is an interactive computer-based system for
teaching children about colors. Our goal is to create an interactive system that is both fun for the
users (children 3 - 7th grade) as well as instructive. We will also try to create a system which will
require as little instructions as possible to operate. The main interaction type of the system will
be exploration, where the kids explore the system by trying and failing (Sharp et.al 2007:64).
Ultimately we want this project to be installed in the new Children's Museum in Oslo. Our
6
Color Room
system design aim to build knowledge about primary, secondary and tertiary colors. To support
the paradigms of collaborative learning, the children will be responsible for one primary color
and have to collaborate on the amount of color to recreate a given color that is provided by the
system. Their ability to cooperate will be crucial to how well they succeed in recreating a given
color.
We also want the system to offer a relevant type of feedback as to what the users are doing. This
is because feedback can be an important motivator for users performing a task, which again
enhances the learning process. (Ormrod 2009, Furnham 2005). Technically the system will be
based on sensor-based software which can detect positioning of different elements, and which is
able to mix colors accordingly. The created color will be presented in a form as feedback to the
users on how their actions are affecting color.
Furthermore we want the system to be challenging; “Challenges heighten motivation and
minimize boredom”(Ormrod 2009: 530), but still not too difficult to operate; “Students are more
likely to be intrinsically motivated when they feel confident they can succeed at classroom
tasks.”(Ormrod 2009:483)
Usability Goals
Our system has the following usability goals:
●
Effectiveness - the system has to perform what it is supposed to. Kids should learn about
colors when using the system.
●
Safety - the system has to be safe to use. This is especially important since we are dealing
with kids at a museum.
●
Learnability - the system has to be intuitive and easy to learn, so that the kids understand
what to do when they enter the color room (Sharp et.al 2007:20 ).
User Experience Goals
When designing this installation we have to think about how we want the users to respond to our
system. According to theoretical perspectives and views presented (Ormrod 2009, Furnham
2005, Schunk et.al 2010) the system should be able to provide the following user experience
goals:
●
Enjoyable - the system has to be enjoyable as well as educational.
●
Fun - the kids should have fun together when using the system
7
Color Room
●
Enhancing sociability - through collaborative work the kids learn to communicate and
interact with each other.
●
Motivating - through using new and exciting technology, the kids motivation for learning
about primary colors should be enhanced.
●
Challenging - the system has to be easy to use, but when the kids understand the concept
the level of difficulty should increase step by step (Sharp et.al 2007:26 ).
Design Process
Methods
For our data gathering to be successful, we have focused on the 4 key issues: goal setting,
relationship between the data collector and the data provider, combining techniques
(triangulation) and pilot studies (Sharp et.al 2007:292 ).
The following methods have so far been used in collecting the data:
●
Brainstorming
●
Prototyping (make a lo-fi flexible model that would simulate the system as close as
possible given the restraints of resources at hand)
●
Workshop (Disen school – involving users from 6 to 8 years of age)
●
Video recording (recordings of users trying out the prototype)
●
Audio recording (record the interview sessions to look for patterns)
●
Photo taking(photos used as illustrations in final report)
●
Interview (interview to test various design possibilities and to receive feedback from
actual use)
●
Observation (record and discuss our immediate impressions right after the workshop)
We wanted to base our data gathering techniques on recorded interviews and observations during
testing of a loosely constructed prototype in a workshop environment.
Interviews were chosen as a method because this is a good way to explore issues on how to
construct our prototype. Physical observation, aided by recording the session on film, were
chosen because we needed to understand aspects of user activity and behaviour that was difficult
to foresee without actually observing the children in action. The main goal with the observation
8
Color Room
was to identify how well the children understood primary colors, and how they managed to
communicate depending on factors like age, knowledge and sex.
Brainstorming
In the beginning of the project, we conducted several brainstorming sessions where we came up
with the conceptual model, several different prototype sketches, assumptions and possible
technologies that could be used for the project. We ended up with a concept consisting of two
rooms, where the children would move colored balls in one room to create colors (fig.1). One
corner of the room represents maximum amount of color, while the opposite corner represents
minimum amount of color. Another corner will represent amount of darkness(black), and the last
corner will represent the amount of brightness(white). The other room would be an exhibition
room. We thought that multi-touch technology would work for this project.
Fig. 1
Data gathering
For the workshop we needed to find a easy way to test how the kids could
collaborate, what age was appropriate for mixing primary colors and if this could
be a fun way of learning about colors.
Interview with a multi-touch expert
We conducted an interview with a multi-touch expert to determine the viability of
using multi-touch technology for this project. He meant that multi-touch was a
9
Color Room
poor technological choice for this project and suggested we instead employed
object-recognitioning, pressure plates or laser sensor technology. Use of multi-touch technology
would be too expensive to implement, and would require too much technical resources.
Interview with a teacher
We´ve had two sessions including potential users, where the first sessions goals
was to collect information and get feedback on initial sketches of the interface.
This was a way of testing if our intended design would be understandable for the
user group, and what kind of challenge we would be offering to engage the
children in the task at hand tested on a user belonging to our target group. I.e.
we wanted to know his opinion on the relevance of coloring objects vs. Just
creating color, and if so:
●
What kind of objects was relevant to color?
●
How should they know what to do with the system?
●
Should they move objects or should the user be the object representing a primary color?
●
How should they move about?
●
Which setup was the most intuitive?
The first interview was with a 7-year-old child and his mother, which also is a teacher at Disen
primary school in Oslo and took about 1 hour. The initial response from the user was that it was
hard to grasp from our sketches how it was supposed to be used, and it became clear that we had
not made enough considerations on how the users more specifically was supposed to be using the
interface, other than to just move around in certain areas on the floor. It became clear that we
needed a more specific system and a better structure on how to move the objects that would
represent the 3 primary colors. Another aspect that came out of the interview was that it should
have some sort of competitive element or a task at hand as motivation for use. Just playing
around with various colors did not seem as challenging or fun for neither the kid or the teacher
involved in the interview, especially the teacher emphasised the need for this. How many objects
a group could manage to color within a certain time frame was suggested.
Figure 2 illustrates the design proposal that came out of the interview structuring the floor into a
3-scale star-shape. The purpose will be to recreate a colored object.
10
Color Room
Fig. 2
The Pilot:
Our next challenge was to find out how we could put together our conceptual model in a
prototype that was loosely enough constructed to be modified by user input, but still managed to
signal it’s purpose and be usable enough to conduct a workshop including testing and generating
useful feedback for our project.
To create the star shaped coordinates representing each primary color and a scale of values from
0 to 100% for each color, we simply used tape and divided the scales with an added value of
20% for each step. A simple computer program called ’ColorMixer 2.0” (fig. 3) was used to
generate a mix of primary colors (RYB) according to the coordinates on the floor, which was
displayed on a screen. An operator did this manually.
The screen had two objects on it. One initially left blank and one with a color that could be
recreated from the scale on the floor. We rehearsed for 2 hours at a multimedia room at “Institutt
11
Color Room
for medier og kommunikasjon(IMK)”. Here we tested the model (fig.4) and tried to make the
changes appear as seamless as possible so that the kids would not be distracted by time lag. After
the testing, we concluded that we could make it work, and that the setup was ready for testing by
real users.
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
12
Color Room
The Workshop:
The workshop involving real users took place at Disen primary school. With help and permission
from the school, we managed to gather 12 pupils that could participate in the project on the
grounds of a written consent from their parents. We intentionally chose 4 as a buffer in case
someone would not get permission. We ended up with a consent for all 12, which was a small
problem, because this meant that each group had 4 instead of 3 participants. This was however
solved with some participatory circulation, and did not cause any specific problems for the
outcome of our session. We had 1 group of children from 1st grade who were 6 years old. The
other 2 groups consisted of children from 3rd grade with an average age of 8 years.
The first group was boys, the second both boys and girls, the last contained only girls. The
workshop was situated in a multimedia room at Disen primary school and was conducted by
taking one group in to test the installation after a short presentation of ourselves, like who we
were and what we were doing there, and the purpose of the session and project. Each group was
then instructed briefly on what they were supposed to do and how they should proceed on their
own. They were given t-shirt with colors matching the color they were to represent. The group
was then taken aside for an interview lasting around 10 to 15 minutes before the next group
entered the room. Like mentioned earlier, we used these interviews were for collecting data on
how our users were reacting to our design. Our interview was of a semi structural character
trying not to pre-empt answers by asking leading questions (Sharp et.al 2007:298). This proved
however quite difficult to do because the children mostly preferred responding in a ’yes’ or ’no’
kind of manner, even if the questions were of an open nature. We also noticed that most of the
children seemed shy at first and that one child often took leadership of the interview situation.
An observer was placed on the floor (fig.5) so he could see what coordinates the children were
standing on at all times. A second person controlled the data program that could fill color into
objects on a screen adding values from the 3 primary colors. The third person present conducted
the interviews with the children. The last person observed and took pictures from a non-intrusive
location.
13
Color Room
Fig. 5
Results from the workshop at Disen
Short summary of findings:
●
6 levels (0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100%) for each primary color seemed to offer to many
possible options for different color combinations for the younger children.
●
Pure color (i.e. just 40% or 100% red) seemed difficult, because the pupils expected all
the given colors to recreate was a blend of colors.
●
The youngest children did not manage without instructions along the way.
●
In each group one of the children took the role as natural leader.
●
Girls did a little better than the boys, especially the group with 8 year old girls proved
most successful, and managed to use the installation more or less on their own.
●
The idea of using time as a competitive element was not as motivating as just figuring out
how the colors was to be created.
14
Color Room
●
The objects seemed less important, and the children gave no special notice to whatever
they were coloring.
The main issue with the prototype was the technology. The program we used was not optimal for
the task. While it gave a decent representation of the concept, it had several weaknesses. The
program was not made for rapid color-changes, so there was a considerable lag-effect, which
meant that the children had to wait for a few seconds before the color showed on the screen. This
caused some issues, as the prototype became much less intuitive. The children could not move
freely and see what color they ended up with, they had to move more slowly and wait. It became
much harder for them to see the connection between the floor-scale and the colors on the screen.
This lead to a notable increase in demanded instructions from us.
A second technological problem was with the lack of color-calibration on the screen. The school
had lost the control to the projector, and the colors were not accurately projected on the screen.
They took on a slightly greener hue than originally intended. This created a problem with some
of the colors. We had a 100% yellow slide that became yellow-green on the screen. The children
quickly solved it anyway, but we also had a purple slide that none of the children seemed to
solve correctly. The green hue probably made it harder for the children.
The last technical issue was with the colored tape we used. We didn’t have enough of the red and
yellow tape, and had to fill it in with the blue. This seemed to create some confusion among the
children. When asked to stand at the “0” point, the kids in one group stood at the end of the
yellow/red tape until told to go all the way to the end. Another child commented on the different
colored tape. This could also have made the prototype less intuitive.
Even with these issues, the children managed to find many colors, and they seemed to have a lot
of fun doing so.
15
Color Room
Interviews with the children:
The purpose of the interviews was to get a more general impression on how the prototype
worked for the children; we emphasize here the most common patterns from the interview
session:
●
None of the children were familiar with the term primary, secondary or tertiary colors.
●
11 of the 12 children participating thought it was fun to experiment with colors.
●
None of them thought this would be fun to do on their own; it was mainly the cooperative
element that they liked the most.
●
The first grade pupils thought it was a bit difficult to understand what to do.
●
The children suggested that to give points as opposed to manage within a time frame
would be a better motivation for competition.
●
The children expressed a wish to learn more about colors in this way, which they said
was fun.
●
It seemed to be a general agreement on a wish for homogeneous groups consisting of
only boys or girls.
●
Objects didn’t matter, colors was of most importance.
Evaluation after Disen workshop
The workshop gave room for using combined approaches to evaluation, such as usability testing
to measure and analyze how well the users performed when using the prototype, and a typical
field studies approach like interviewing the children taking place in familiar surroundings (at
school). By changing the multimedia room at Disen into a field lab, we also applied typical
usability testing methods like recording on video and measuring performance of the system.
Even though we revealed a lot of weaknesses during the workshop, the children’s feedback
supported the collaborate aspects of the model as a positive way of learning about colors.
The data suggested that we might take the following steps to improve the system design:
1. Improve the technology so that the color-change will happen quicker.
2. Focus on interface options to make the system easier to understand
3. Creating a ”score” functionality like in a computer game as a competitive element
4. Focus on recreating given colors and not coloring specific objects
5. Centre-based interface
16
Color Room
Analyzing the videotapes made us realize that we needed to position the monitoring of color and
coloring activity differently. The star-shaped model gives all the users an obvious natural focus
point to the centre of the star. One of the children had to turn his/her head to see the screen. To
solve this issue, we will use an object in the centre of the room instead of a screen. As the test
showed that the type of figure has no real value, we have decided that we will have two prisms in
the centre of the room, one hanging from the roof, and another on the floor. The one in the roof
will project a color, while the one on the floor will be the one that reacts to the children’s
movement. When the children manage to make the same color as the top prism, a tube
connecting the two prisms will light up, creating an illusion of a beam of light connecting the
two prisms. The top prism will then change color, while the lower prism will raise itself slightly
off the floor.
This suggested a need for analytical approach with a possibility to look into various models for
comparing different interfaces. Throughout the rest of the project we used this approach to
continuously evaluate optimal arrangement and location of features regarding future interface.
Fig. 6 - Sketch of future prototype model based upon user input from workshop
17
Color Room
We noticed that our assumptions regarding the children’s level of color understanding was
wrong. None of the children had any knowledge about the RYB color wheel, although they had
some prior knowledge with mixing paint for art. The workshop supported our assumptions
regarding collaboration and that this would be an exciting way to learn about colors.
Interview with an engineer
After testing the first prototype at Disen the development process made it important to look
further into the technical issues. High fidelity prototyping will need considerations regarding
non-functional requirements such as type of technology, costs etc., and an expert opinion was at
this point in the process needed to confirm the realism in building a more advanced model.
Before this meeting we thought the solution should be based on pressure sensor technology in
the floor. The sensors would then accurately be passing on input to a computer to identify the
different positions of the participants. The engineer argued on the other hand that this would be
quite expensive, and would require quite a lot of engineering work to function the way we
intended. His proposal was to use cameras in the ceiling to track the participants various
positions. This could easily be done by defining position from the image projected to the
computer. With each position sent to the computer, it would be easy to convert RYB to RGB,
and by using standard projectors we would be able to project colored light.
Interview with leader of Children’s Museum
To get feedback on the viability of our project for the Children’s Museum, we conducted an
interview with the leader of the museum, Katie Coughlin. She gave us the following input:
●
The museum’s primary users are not only school classes as assumed, but also families
with children and kindergarten classes.
●
All installations should avoid the use of text-based instructions, and as such we should
strive to make the model as intuitive as possible
●
●
Limiting the number of participants to three persons may present challenges
○
How can we keep more children from entering
○
Children may get bored waiting in line
She challenged us to incorporate a possibility for families to cooperate
18
Color Room
●
She liked the high-score function, but questioned how we could get the children to enter
their names on a computer before using the installation.
○
She mentioned that the children may have an avatar that could automatically
register this data
●
She would have liked to see more feedback from the model. This could help make the
model more intuitive.
“With further development, this could be an interesting activity for a children's museum.
It has clear learning objectives and promotes cooperation among kids. I think there is
more potential here that you have yet to uncover that would come with further
prototyping sessions and continued refining of the design. Overall, [the] idea has
interesting potential.”
- Katie Coughlin
Final prototype
The last prototype we made was based on the data from our workshop at Disen primary school
and data collected from the interviews with Katie from the Childrens Museum in Oslo and the
engineer. After working on the project for a while, we felt that our group had a good
understanding of how our design was taking form. We experienced however during the
workshop and interviews that the visual image and conceptual model was not as easily
understood by others when explained in words or by simple drawings.
The goal with this last prototype was therefore to make a prototype so that stakeholders and
especially the users would be able to visualize, and better understand how our conceptual model
could look, work and be used.
One way we could achieve this was to build a small-scale model, where the new requirements
that came out as a result from the collected data were taken into consideration. According to
Brandt, there is a relation between how detailed a mock-up of a prototype is, and how that affects
communication between users evaluating it. If the prototype is too detailed, focus can often be
concentrated round details, rather than on exploration and possible improvements (Brandt
2007:190). With this in mind, we paid less attention to details avoiding potential biasing and left
as much as possible open for modification and creative feedback for a future workshop with
users.
19
Color Room
To further illustrate the model in use, we produced a simple animation to visualize the potential
use based on our observations from Disen, and to illustrate movement, such as the bottom pole
rising when completing a task. (fig. 7).
To build the model we used:
1.
One large cardboard box
2.
White carton
3.
Paper prints of triangular gradients in red, yellow and blue
4.
A Plexi glass tube
5.
Thick black paper
6.
Duplo figures
7.
Two lamps with light that could change color
Fig. 7 (Snapshots from animation movie)
To film the session we used software called Boinx IStopMotion, digital videocamera, and PC
(fig. 8 & 9). The poles in the middle are constructed by parts of a plexi glass tube wrapped with
black paper. Colored light was then sent through the plexi tubes from holes at the bottom and the
top of the cardboard box model.
20
Color Room
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Unfortunately there has not been enough time to show the prototype to users and collect further
data, which was the primary goal for building it. The prototype is however still valuable as it
summarizes much of the the work from the design process into a tangible mock-up.
Conclusion & Future Direction
As this research is done with a dominating focus on User Centered Design(UCD), the evaluation
should also have this perspective. Usability testing as an evaluation approach -“Usability testing
involves measuring typical users’ performance on typical tasks.” If we wanted to perform a new
usability test we would have done it on a further improved prototype, where we would have
involved more users (6-12 participants) to get quantitative data on user performance.(Sharp et.al.
2007:591). We would have made the following quantitative measurements : time to complete a
given color, number and type of errors per color, number of times the kids needed help from
their parents or teacher, number of users not being able to find a specific color, number of users
completing a certain amount of colors.(Sharp et.al. 2007:648) After conducting this data we
would have needed to analyse our data by structuring it into different sections. Each section
would represent a task given to the user, and another section would represent the number of
participants that accomplished or failed performing the task.(Sharp et.al. 2007:657) This data
would then have been used to further improve the prototype.
21
Color Room
To discover what the users consider fun we have found that cooperation and competition should
be central factors in the model. By the principles of collaborative learning the children are highly
motivated to perform the task presented in our prototype testing, and our research finds the
model to be instructive. According to Eriksons theory “Children are not able to use their own
initiative until around age 7, at which time they also learn to follow rules.” (Markopoulos et.al.
2008:6 [Erikson, Erik]). This supports that our model could work from the age of 7 and above,
which is not so far from the research findings from Disen, that suggested around age 8 and
above.
The discovery of elements that support both instructive aspects and experiencing fun brings us
closer to our goal of designing “an interactive system that is both fun for the users (children 3 7th grade) as well as instructive”(from conceptual model). We also think the data shows that the
model supported “the mutual engagement of participants in a coordinated effort to solve [a]
problem together” and that this will place our model to fit within the CSCL framework as one
of the new paradigms within the field of IKT and learning.
The goal of instructiveness is of great importance for the Children’s Museum, something our
interview with Katie Choughlin confirmed. Further research on how to improve the model will
be needed before it will be installed in the museum. The possibility of more users than 3 at one
time is also emphasized as something Katie wants from the model.
As a result of the interview with Katie, we found that our assumption that the Children
Museum’s primary users are school classes is flawed. Families are also an important user-group,
and the model should be designed to accommodate those users as well.
Katie also wanted more feedback from the model. Feedback is important so the children can see
their progress and also to make the model more intuitive. This is an area where further research
and prototyping is needed.
The overall impression is that the range of theories, methods and frameworks used throughout
the process gave a lot of important answers as well as new questions to be answered. The process
22
Color Room
has thus shown the importance of prototyping, involving the users and using complementing
methods to gather data. Based on this we have, by following the Star Lifecycle model,
implemented an iterative process. We have aligned requirements for the user experience along
the way by moving between activities such as implementation, functional analysis, requirements,
conceptual design, prototyping, and each step thoroughly evaluated by using important methods
in evaluation, such as: observing users, asking users their opinions and asking experts their
opinion (Sharp et.al 2007).
One of the most important lessons learned during the process was the importance of pilot testing.
In evaluating the workshop at Disen it became clear that it would not have been possible to
accomplish without the pilot because it revealed a lot of issues that had to be dealt with for the
workshop to work according to schedule. This was important because the workshop at Disen was
of vital importance for the process as a whole. The methods of Interaction Design proved to be
important tools we could construct the model according to principles of Interaction Design, but
also if the model would be able to work from an engineering perspective.
23
Color Room
Bibliography
Amundsen, Britt Ring (1991) Tegning form farge © H. Aschehoug & Co (W. Nygaard) 1991.
Brandt, Eva (2005) How Tangible Mock-Ups Support Design Collaboration?. Knowledge,
Technology & Policy 20(39), pp. 179-192.
Crook, Charles(1997) Children as computer users: the case of collaborative learning. Pergamon.
Furnham, Adrian (2005) The Psychology of Behaviour at Work. Psychology Press.
Koschmann, T.: Paradigm Shifts and Instructional Technology. An Introduction, 1996. New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. I Koschmann, T. (1996): CSCL: Theory and
Practice of emerging paradigm, s. 1‐25.
Markopoulos, P. Read, J. Macfarlane, S. Höysniemi, J. (2008) Evaluating Childrens Interactive
Products - Principles and Practices for Interaction Design, s 1-18. © 2008 by Elsevier Inc.
Omrod, Jeanne-Ellis (2009) Human Learning. Fifth Edition. Pearson Education International.
RGB World. (2010). RGB World. Retrieved from http://www.rgbworld.com/color.php
(27.10.2010)
Schunk, Dale H, Pintrich, Paul R, Meece, Judith L(2010) Motivation in Education. Pearson
Educational International.
Sharp, Helen, Preece, Jenny, Rogers, Yvonne(2007) Interaction Design- beyond humancomputer interaction. John Wiley & Sons.
24
Color Room
Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2010). Læreplan i kunst og håndverk. Retrieved from http://
www.udir.no/grep/Lareplan/?laereplanid=127655 (27.10.2010)
25