Developing my intervention proposal has been an intellectually challenging yet deeply rewarding journey. It provided an invaluable opportunity to reflect on my teaching practice and focus extensively on a unit that has proven difficult to structure in a way that is both accessible and meaningful for staff and students.
Reflecting on the analytical methods I employed to frame and explore the intervention offers insight into the strategies and tools that shaped my approach, as well as the academic grounding that informed my choices. Below, I outline the key methods and how they contributed to the proposal, supported by relevant academic references.
1. Brainstorm Graphic Organizer
The use of brainstorming webs and tree diagrams, inspired by Universal Methods of Design (Martin & Hanington, 2012), provided an essential starting point for ideating and mapping the problem space – other reflection posts offer evidence on that. These visual frameworks facilitated the organization of ideas into coherent clusters, enabling a clear understanding of the intervention’s focus. As Martin and Hanington emphasize, brainstorming tools are pivotal in fostering divergent thinking, which was crucial in exploring innovative solutions to the challenges faced by the unit.
2. Case Study Analysis
Examining the historical context of how the unit was previously run offered valuable insights into existing practices and gaps. This retrospective analysis was guided by methodologies discussed in Universal Methods of Design, particularly case studies as a means to explore real-world contexts. According to Yin (2018), case studies are indispensable for understanding complex phenomena within their contextual boundaries, making this approach important for my analytical process.
3. Content Analysis
Content analysis served as a critical method to interpret the issues and deepen my understanding of the intervention’s purpose. This approach allowed for a systematic examination of qualitative data, identifying themes and patterns relevant to the unit’s operations and needs. Krippendorff (2018) highlights content analysis as a rigorous method for drawing inferences from text or other content forms, providing a robust framework for understanding the intricacies of the problem.
4. Design Workshops and Surveys
The design workshops and surveys played complementary roles as methods for co-creating solutions and validating research findings. Workshops fostered collaborative engagement, allowing diverse perspectives to shape the intervention, while surveys provided quantitative insights and a broader understanding of stakeholder needs and perceptions. Sanders and Stappers (2008) argue that participatory design methods, such as workshops, are instrumental in bridging the gap between research insights and actionable outcomes, a perspective that aligns with my intention to create a relevant and impactful intervention and links back to my industry practice base background where that is constantly present and I wanted to bring that to the academic environment. Surveys further supported this goal by ensuring the intervention was informed by both qualitative collaboration and quantitative evidence.
5. Diary Studies
Incorporating diary studies added another dimension to the analysis, capturing participants’ experiences and reflections over time, that includes visual examples of before and after the intervention was completed – more visual evidence of that can be found across many reflective blog posts here. This method aligns with Zimmerman and Wieder’s (1977) foundational work on diaries as a qualitative research tool that offers rich, personal insights into user behaviour (the students in this case) and attitudes. Diary studies proved particularly effective in highlighting the evolving needs and experiences that informed the intervention – this was both conducted during this unit, but also informed by surveys ran during the Inclusive Practices unit also.
6. Evaluative Research of Prototypes
Finally, evaluative research on the prototype – a cards and template bank resource (still in progress of development) – was a critical step in assessing the intervention’s potential efficacy. This iterative process aligns with the principles of design-based research, which emphasize the refinement of prototypes through cycles of testing and feedback (Brown, 1992). The prototype evaluation illuminated areas for improvement, ensuring the final resource is well-aligned with users’ needs. This will continue to be tested with the teaching team and students to refine it and ensure it becomes a useful tool for everyone.
Through these interconnected methods, my intervention proposal is grounded in a robust, multi-faceted analysis. Each approach, backed by academic insights, has contributed to a comprehensive understanding of the problem and the development of an actionable, contextually relevant and applicable solution. This reflective process underscores the importance of blending creativity with rigor in design-based research.
Bibliography
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings.
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology.
Martin, B., & Hanington, B. (2012). Universal Methods of Design.
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1).
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods.
Zimmerman, D. H., & Wieder, D. L. (1977). The diary-interview method.