Design Thinking in Action

After going through a design-type process to redesign what learning looked like across two of our learning commons (see post here) with 3 other teachers, we decided to use this process with some of our students when we came to the project phase of our learning.

Theme: Effective Communication  

With our theme in mind, we immersed our students in a world they may not have encountered before. For six weeks, we (teachers in learning common 1 & 2) offered a range of workshops with this theme in mind.  Workshops had mini themes each week including:

- working in a team

- spoken language looking at debating and public speaking skills

- visual language (how do people communicate through art?)

- symbols and codes

- signs and media

- digital communication (through digital citizenship)

- animal communication 

Through these themes, we were able to offer a broad range of experiences and different ways people and animals communicate effectively.  We also had our students working with a range of people and ages as learning common 1 (year 0 - 2) & 2 (year 2 - 5) worked together. We had some great feedback from students, with many surprised with how well they were able to work with five year old - one of the initial issues learning common 2 thought they might encounter (check out this post about how our start went).  With the teachers involved, we planned each immersion session beforehand, making sure one teacher was roving and collecting evidence for students (taking photos) as we got students to complete a quick reflection (discussing their highlights/ challenges) after each workshop knowing at the end they would chose one area of particular interest and documenting this would help students to remember all of the exposure they had had (not just the last one they remembered). These reflections where put into folders and displayed for parents/ caregivers to share the journey (on the reflection sheet, we highlighted what curriculum areas where being covered).

After our six weeks of immersion, we broke off into our project phase. In learning common 2, we put students into two groups. One more supported group where given a lot more support in either continuing with some immersion-type activities or following a interested they had developed over the past six weeks.  The other group where taken through the design process:

To start this, I shared the process that we will be going through and the resources adapted from NoTosh to guide us through the journey.  

Immersion

Identify: What is the issue?Our first step was to be "problem finders" (McIntosh, 2011: TEDxLondon: The Problem Finders). We identified some of the issues through the themes we had been immersed in. Students looked through their folders and had many discussion with other students to identify these issues.  After identifying these issues, students chose one they felt particularly passionate/ interested in.  At this point, there were lots of solutions being discussed - it was interesting to hear the groups who were fixed on one solution and thinking they had solved the problem - job done (not quite).

Finding Problems

Pairing the problems with the themes we explored during immersion

From here, students began to group together with others who had chosen similar or the same issue. Some students wanted to work on their own. We shared what issue we wanted to delve into and after many discussions about each issue, moved onto the synthesis part of the process.

Synthesis

First we developed a 'How Might We' statement. This would define our problem to be solved. Giving examples, students quickly developed their how might we statement then shared their statement for others to help refine. Groups where introduced to the so what, who cares questioning and the HAKRS critique protocol for this refinement. 

Statements:

• How Might We design a product for people to communicate with a deaf person at HPPS
• How Might We design a product for student new to HPPS so they know what happens here
• How Might We invent a way that helps people communicate with each other when in a team situation
• How Might We design a product in order to help people learn a different language at HPPS 
• How Might We invent an exciting way to teach Maori to students at HPPS
• How Might We help kids at playtime who don’t have anyone at HPPS to play with
• How Might We invent an effective way for people be able to communicate with animals

How might we framework

HAKRS Critique Protocol

Ideation

Ideate: Generate as many ideas as you can

With our how might we statements refined, we could begin looking at potential ways to solve these problems. We stood up and came up with 100 ideas in 10 minutes.  From the way out to the easily 'doable', students spent the first couple of minutes on their own, then bought their ideas together.  We then went around read and added to groups ideas. 

Reading and adding to ideas from other groups.

We then looked at our ideas and circled the ones we thought would be best to solve our problem.

Prototyping

The 'doing' part! Students began to make quick versions of their solutions and gathered feedback from others.  Then refined and gathered more feedback.

We also had a dedicated wall for displaying our thinking. This has been a great talking point for students, teachers and parents where you can see the progress along the way. When groups have made changes, we made amendments and stuck it over the previous page.

Our design process journey

Launch Pad
We started this quite late and were unable to complete a lot of the solutions. Most groups have been working over the holidays with the idea that they will launch in February when the new school year starts. Over the holidays several groups have been emailing asking advice and giving me updates on their progress.  

So starting the new year, at HPPS we should have up and running a friendship seat; language rooms (including Te Reo Maori); website for deaf students at HPPS; induction website for students new to HPPS; regular lunchtime activities for students who may not have anyone to play with an much more...

Observations:

- Students struggled with the idea of solving 'real world' problems. Although very creative with some of their thinking, some where quite unrealistic. Once groups started seeing that other groups where actually solving their problems, they jumped onboard.  

- Engagement: students where highly engaged with making a real difference in the world.  Our theme was around effective communication and being a new school, a lot of the problems groups had identified where to do with new students to Hobsonville Point Primary School. 

What is E(ffective) Learning?

Framework for Learning
The NCREL, enGauge 21st Century Skills is the guiding framework for our phases of learning. Instead of each term having a new topic/ proverb, we have broken up the year into three phases where we will explore a range of "21st Century" skills: Innovative thinking, digital-age literacy and effective communication.

Block One: Innovative Thinking
Provocation: If I could invent one thing to make the world a better place...
Lisa Squire discusses how project-based learning can engage learners and honour student voice. In Learning Common 2, we started by immersing our learners in a range of experiences relating to innovative thinking. We documented much of this process through our weekly common blog. We wanted the students to experience how people design products and the processes they can use and apply to their own products. First we immersed them through a series of experience including:

- Visiting to The Mind Lab where we explored robotics through making rodent traps and simple how simple circuits work through making music using a MaKey MaKey kit and programming via Scratch,

- Tim from Mindkits came in and showed us how easy it is to programme a robot,

- Visiting Hobsonville Point Secondary School where some students had a master class with Steve Mouldey (Robotics) and Pete McGhie (Cooking),

- Ria from Learning Common 3 took a master-class in programming robots using lego mindstorm,

- students grew and cooked from the school garden,

- Sharyn and Daniel lead cooking master-classes.

As you can see from the immersion activities, we were going down two roads: robotics and cooking. In the beginning, we didn't plan this path, but through our students showing interests in these areas, we delved deeper and deeper. Students began branching off into these groups and then grouped to investigate our provocation. Erin and I researched around project-based learning and found some key readings to help with the process:

- Buck Institution for Education PBL Resources
- Edutopia: Project Based Learning
- Seven essentials for Project Based Learning
- Project Based Learning Explained

Through our research we shared with our learners the design process (including a planning sheet and criteria) for their invention. 

The groups where created and the students began planning their projects.  Erin and I divvied up the groups and helped them gather resources and further learn what they needed for their inventions. We had regular (daily for some groups) check-ins with the notes from these conferences emailed home to parents. We had a range of projects including walking beds, solar powered go karts and several different themed restaurants, cleaning robots, baby helper robots and a house that had a moving floor.  

Reading, writing, maths and everything in between were centred around their projects - what did they need to be successful?  Having our check-ins meant we could be responsive to their needs. 

As part of the process, we knew we were going to share this learning. Early on when the process was shared, we discussed the possibility that some groups may not have a product at the end as they may go back and forth between the first couple of steps (generating ideas, research, testing).  We discussed the importance of being able to share this learning.  Some groups documented their journey along the way, some groups chose to do this in the final week.  All had a presentation to share with their families when it came to our celebration of learning evening. 

Wonderings/ reflections
- Very product driven process;
- 1 - 2 prototypes created - what would have happened if they had created several and had a lot more feedback around this process;
- Saturation: our kids lived and breathed their projects for 4 - 5 weeks - was this too long?
- Kids were definitely interested in their projects, but I am not sure if they were that passionate about them - how can we nurture student passions?
- How much deep thinking was actually involved in these projects?

Block Two: Digital-Age Literacy

"At Hobsonville Point, I ask staff firstly to design learning, not plan. I ask them to think about the natural links between a big concept, the dispositions we want our students to grow and then create clear connections to the NZC learning areas" Daniel Birch posing the question are we being responsive?

With these wonderings/ reflections at the forefront of our mind, Erin and I took a slightly different approach and looked further into Design Thinking (what's the difference between PBL and Design Thinking?)

Ewan McIntosh's ICOT'13 keynote shares the notion that we should be creating problem finders, rather than problem solvers and how can we teach just in time rather than just in case? The team at No Tosh have also been a rich source of information with Ewan McIntosh's Digital Media and Learning Blog and Tom Barrett's The Curious Creative.

We have also checked out The D. School out of Stanford the IDEO and the Nueva Design Thinking Institue all with a vast collection of resources. Hobsonville Point Secondary School has also been a huge source of inspiration. Claire Amos discusses this concept, including an Introduction to Design Thinking. Steve Mouldey shares his experience of problem finding and student ownership.

So with all this in mind, we go forth to co-design a beautifully messy thinking process...watch this space!
Provocation: When I see you through my eyes, I think we are different. When I see you through my heart, I know we are the same.