Its great to see how other teachers introduce their projects.

Today I’m adding a 20 minute section to a subject introduction seminar (post about my bit here), and it’s great to be back in the theater. Kyla’s intro is awesome.. using tinderbox to situate her subject this semester in the context of previous subjects, and what kind of skills you’ll both need and develop during the semester. It’s really encouraging as an example of the pedagogical ideas that the Media program began renewing a few years ago coming to fruition.

This semester the subject is centered on the new roles of Social Media producer. Check out these three job descriptions

Even watching Kyla’s intro makes me think about upgrading my ancient copy of tinderbox.. but then again.. at this stage in my PhD, I need another writing environment like I need a hole in the head. (this is being written in scrivener)

There’s a thread in this issue about how the outcomes drive the tools – Scrivener looks easier to me to fit in the dissertation (ie linear) format. Tinderbox is great for the non-linear type of writing project. But come to think of it, when I’ve use TB in the past it has been to use my ability in the non-linear to create what was essentially a linear work. Rendering a reading of the thought networks flat.

Simon & Buchanan think it always has, but one thing I keep seeing is a ‘resistance’ to using the word “design”.

I think there are a number of reasons for this, one of them being that many people don’t think they ‘do’ design. It’s about this thought that I’ve been thinkin’…

One workshop participant described two courses they have introduced in an IT program. Both courses gave students a grounding in conceptual foundations of programming and the web, and the program saw an immediate increase in the number of students who passed subsequent courses.

To me, this sounds a lot like teaching students to be better designers by teaching them how to ‘read’ as well as ‘write’.

Design is a literacy, and we experience its literature every day.

As a flavour of design that explicitly focuses on experiences enabled by design, ixd is where a lot of solutions, challenges and changes will be prototyped. By extension, IxDA can be seen as an important actor in the way these shifts in design practice and awareness of design play out.

Here’s some areas I can see IxDA playing a role:

Education: currently the world of interaction design education is very fragmented. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I do see an opportunity for IxDA to play a unique role in bringing programs together under the banner of a global education network to discuss approaches, challenges, and attitudes.

Mentorship: IxDA has an ongoing mentorship program (mentees here, mentors here) and has attracted a lot of people to participate. The requests for mentors far exceed those available, and that’s where I think a design approach can begin to help.

In a global network like IxDA, the mentoring relationship can be seen not only as a way to teach and pass on skills, but also as a way to make weak ties strong. Network theory stresses the importance of weak ties in information traversal, but strong ties are important for scaling the culture of an organization.

Its to this point that I think IxDA can really play a big part: scaling culture. The culture of professional collegiality is something I’d be loath to see these kinds of design lose, as I think there’s far more to be gained by working together than there is from working apart. Bodies like IxDA need to design themselves in order to generate the outcomes they seek: and culture is one of them.

What do I mean? well.. for starters: we have more mentees than mentors. How can we use this as the input for a service design that encourages/creates a culture of continual learning and mentorship? How can we mentor more of our network to be mentors?

* yep. I’ll put those two or three ideas together in one sentence. sosumi