Reflection – Visualization 

 Challenge 

 Re - imagine Library Entranceway . 

 The entranceway in question has become a dumping ground for litter and   frequent loitering , not only blocking traffic flow but also appearing unkempt &   unprofessional . The entranceway is frequented daily by a diverse cross - section   of stakeholders ranging from staff , students , visitors and guests . It was decided   by management a solution had to be found in somehow re - imagining the   space . 

 Selection 

 I chose the Visualization Tool as it provides clarity in depicting the current   problem . It also enables stakeholders to capture , express and communicate   inherent perceptions and other potential options during the Exploration   process . By visually expressing thoughts & ideas , clarity to seemingly abstract   concepts can become made readily accessible and understandable to both   individuals and the group . ( Ref : Module 1 - Angela Meyer : Visualization video ) 

 Application 

 Over a three - day period , comprising of a 30 minute session per day , 7   stakeholders across various age groups , roles and responsibilities were   selected . 3 staff members , 2 of which who work in the library building   adjoining the entranceway , 1 from Library Management along with an   additional 4 members of the student community participated in the design   thinking process . 

 Session 1 Situated in a relatively small Meeting Room , members of the student   community met on the first day to partake in a casual interview . Due to time   restraints the session was divided into three sections . For the first 10 minutes   participants were given an introduction where they were shown photographs   of the entranceway in its current state along with a set of questions on paper   aimed at getting them to consider the problem . Blank sheets of paper , sticky   notes , pens and coloured pencils were provided . The following questions were 

 asked : 1 What were your first impressions of the entranceway ? 2 Write down   any likes / dislikes you have regarding the entranceway . 3 How do you feel the   entranceway could be improved or changed ? Participants were then left to   their own devices expressing their views . This 10 minute window mainly   focused on the first two questions based around the “ What is ” and “ What if ”   stage of the design thinking process . The final 10 minutes centred on the third   question allowing the “ What if ” aspect of the problem be examined . At the end   of the session feedback was gathered . 

 The following day , Session 2 involved two staff members who were given the   equivalent format , a brief introduction , same set of questions divided into   three 10 - minute segments . They expressed their thoughts via materials   provided followed by general discussion . This session provided a staff   perspective of the “ What is , What if ” side of the problem revealing both similar   and extremely different viewpoints . 

 On the final day , Session 3 , the last official session , data gathered was   displayed on a whiteboard including photographs of the existing entranceway ,   sticky notes and loose - leaf paper gathered from previous sessions .   Unfortunately , only 3 members of the initial 4 student body could attend along   with the 2 staff members . The data itself mainly comprised of hand - written   notes but there were a few rudimentary sketches in the mix depicting new   insights . 

 Having representatives from both student & staff bodies provided an   interesting mix of perspectives . Both parties verbally highlighted their views   reinstating what had already been visually expressed and this sparked some   new considerations based upon concerns and ideas displayed . There was some   healthy disagreement which led to not so much totally abandoning , but   moving to one side particular suggestions deemed too difficult or impractical   to implement at this moment in time . For example , significant structural   changes and costly additional hardware be installed . However , some mutual   insights became clearly apparent especially in relation to the “ What is ” stage in   the process .   All agreed the entranceway was an eyesore and in desperate   need of change . “ Dull ” “ drab ” & “ boring ” were some of the commonalities   described . While different opinions abounded functionality of the space also   met some mutual understanding .   In the final 10 minutes , participants also had 

 the option of re - imagining the space using visualization as a means of   expression . This allowed all participants to examine the “ What if ” and touch on   the “ What wows ” via an assortment of interiors featuring various educational   institutions , public libraries and retailers displayed for inspiration . Ideas which   met general consensus remained centred on the board with other possibilities   placed nearby . Unfortunately , due to time restraints this concluded our   sessions . Taking collected data from the final session I then made a graphic   featuring shared feedback plus new insights branching off from the main   problem then presented it to management for further exploration . 

 Insight 

 Insight gathered during this process revealed how valuable visualization can be   in igniting healthy debate surrounding a problem , harnessing a better   understanding across diverse viewpoints and perspectives , but most   importantly , working collectively and for a common good in tackling a   problem . Information surrounding more ambiguous details also became   apparent . For example : how “ heavy ” the door felt to open , the shape of the   handle itself , even concerns regarding tiny scuff marks on the wall , seemingly   oblivious to most , were expressed along with numerous customer - centric   suggestions such as providing useful resources , scenting the space via a   diffuser and perhaps play low - level , soothing music , aspects of the initial   challenge that could have easily been over - looked if design thinking had not   been implemented . 

 Approach 

 Upon reflection I would choose the Co - creation tool . ( Ref : Module 1 - The   Good Kitchen video ) Reasons for this include conducting additional workshops   over an increased period ( 1 - 2 weeks ) including a broader cross - section of   stakeholders ; visitors and guests , providing a larger co - creation landscape to   address the problem , increase potential for honest , open debate , thus nurture   new ideas , more specifically , exploring the “ What wows and What works ”   aspects of design thinking . Improved measurements in the administering and   collection of data would be implemented ( Ref : Module 3 – The Idea   Generation Process video ) including a well - structured Design Brief & Research 

 Plan in order to obtain more accurate results . I would also like to suggest   management be more involved in the overall process from start to finish . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Reflection – Visualization 

 Challenge 

 Re - imagine Library Entranceway . 

 The entranceway in question has become a dumping ground for litter and   frequent loitering , not only blocking traffic flow but also appearing unkempt &   unprofessional . The entranceway is frequented daily by a diverse cross - section   of stakeholders ranging from staff , students , visitors and guests . It was decided   by management a solution had to be found in somehow re - imagining the   space . 

 Selection 

 I chose the Visualization Tool as it provides clarity in depicting the current   problem . It also enables stakeholders to capture , express and communicate   inherent perceptions and other potential options during the Exploration   process . By visually expressing thoughts & ideas , clarity to seemingly abstract   concepts can become made readily accessible and understandable to both   individuals and the group . ( Ref : Module 1 - Angela Meyer : Visualization video ) 

 Application 

 Over a three - day period , comprising of a 30 minute session per day , 7   stakeholders across various age groups , roles and responsibilities were   selected . 3 staff members , 2 of which who work in the library building   adjoining the entranceway , 1 from Library Management along with an   additional 4 members of the student community participated in the design   thinking process . 

 Session 1 Situated in a relatively small Meeting Room , members of the student   community met on the first day to partake in a casual interview . Due to time   restraints the session was divided into three sections . For the first 10 minutes   participants were given an introduction where they were shown photographs   of the entranceway in its current state along with a set of questions on paper   aimed at getting them to consider the problem . Blank sheets of paper , sticky   notes , pens and coloured pencils were provided . The following questions were 

 asked : 1 What were your first impressions of the entranceway ? 2 Write down   any likes / dislikes you have regarding the entranceway . 3 How do you feel the   entranceway could be improved or changed ? Participants were then left to   their own devices expressing their views . This 10 minute window mainly   focused on the first two questions based around the “ What is ” and “ What if ”   stage of the design thinking process . The final 10 minutes centred on the third   question allowing the “ What if ” aspect of the problem be examined . At the end   of the session feedback was gathered . 

 The following day , Session 2 involved two staff members who were given the   equivalent format , a brief introduction , same set of questions divided into   three 10 - minute segments . They expressed their thoughts via materials   provided followed by general discussion . This session provided a staff   perspective of the “ What is , What if ” side of the problem revealing both similar   and extremely different viewpoints . 

 On the final day , Session 3 , the last official session , data gathered was   displayed on a whiteboard including photographs of the existing entranceway ,   sticky notes and loose - leaf paper gathered from previous sessions .   Unfortunately , only 3 members of the initial 4 student body could attend along   with the 2 staff members . The data itself mainly comprised of hand - written   notes but there were a few rudimentary sketches in the mix depicting new   insights . 

 Having representatives from both student & staff bodies provided an   interesting mix of perspectives . Both parties verbally highlighted their views   reinstating what had already been visually expressed and this sparked some   new considerations based upon concerns and ideas displayed . There was some   healthy disagreement which led to not so much totally abandoning , but   moving to one side particular suggestions deemed too difficult or impractical   to implement at this moment in time . For example , significant structural   changes and costly additional hardware be installed . However , some mutual   insights became clearly apparent especially in relation to the “ What is ” stage in   the process .   All agreed the entranceway was an eyesore and in desperate   need of change . “ Dull ” “ drab ” & “ boring ” were some of the commonalities   described . While different opinions abounded functionality of the space also   met some mutual understanding .   In the final 10 minutes , participants also had 

 the option of re - imagining the space using visualization as a means of   expression . This allowed all participants to examine the “ What if ” and touch on   the “ What wows ” via an assortment of interiors featuring various educational   institutions , public libraries and retailers displayed for inspiration . Ideas which   met general consensus remained centred on the board with other possibilities   placed nearby . Unfortunately , due to time restraints this concluded our   sessions . Taking collected data from the final session I then made a graphic   featuring shared feedback plus new insights branching off from the main   problem then presented it to management for further exploration . 

 Insight 

 Insight gathered during this process revealed how valuable visualization can be   in igniting healthy debate surrounding a problem , harnessing a better   understanding across diverse viewpoints and perspectives , but most   importantly , working collectively and for a common good in tackling a   problem . Information surrounding more ambiguous details also became   apparent . For example : how “ heavy ” the door felt to open , the shape of the   handle itself , even concerns regarding tiny scuff marks on the wall , seemingly   oblivious to most , were expressed along with numerous customer - centric   suggestions such as providing useful resources , scenting the space via a   diffuser and perhaps play low - level , soothing music , aspects of the initial   challenge that could have easily been over - looked if design thinking had not   been implemented . 

 Approach 

 Upon reflection I would choose the Co - creation tool . ( Ref : Module 1 - The   Good Kitchen video ) Reasons for this include conducting additional workshops   over an increased period ( 1 - 2 weeks ) including a broader cross - section of   stakeholders ; visitors and guests , providing a larger co - creation landscape to   address the problem , increase potential for honest , open debate , thus nurture   new ideas , more specifically , exploring the “ What wows and What works ”   aspects of design thinking . Improved measurements in the administering and   collection of data would be implemented ( Ref : Module 3 – The Idea   Generation Process video ) including a well - structured Design Brief & Research 

 Plan in order to obtain more accurate results . I would also like to suggest   management be more involved in the overall process from start to finish .
### Output: 