Meredith Silverman

Kerpoof has three different activities at different levels: make a picture, make a story, and make a movie. The first and second are easy and interesting enough for kids around 7-12 years old. The third activity, make a movie, is a lot harder. Some very interested 12-year-olds might be able to use it, but it could be used by any age up to adults.

The activity, overall, is fun and appealing. There are a couple of pitfalls that I ran into, that would certainly effect the experience for kids using the software. Most importantly, it’s easy to lose your work. When you hit done, or go to another screen, you lose your work. The software doesn’t warn you or give you a chance to change your mind.

The main appeal of the software – the fact that images on screen recede behind each other using perspective – makes it easy to immediately succeed but hard to further customize. You can’t pile objects on top of each other, for instance. This can be annoying if you want to put the kitty in the box or the vase on the table.

In addition to the activities you can do on screen, you can easily send your picture to a friend or print it out to color it.

I read the first chapter of this book – The Design of Everyday Things by Donald A. Norman – last year for Physical Computing.  I decided to read the rest when it was mentioned favorably in Bob Hughes’ Dust or Magic.

This book is certainly relevant to Dust or Magic, as well as Physical Computing and almost any other production class.

Norman’s tone is like Andy Rooney’s on 60 Minutes.  He strikes me as a half-crazy curmudgeon who loves to complain about the petty things that make life unlivable.  Like Rooney, however, he’s both informative and entertaining.

In his preface, Norman asks: “I can use complicated things.  I am quite expert at computer, and electronics, and complex laboratory equipment.  Who do I have trouble with doors, light switches, and water faucets?”  His answer: poor design.  He hopes this book will guide aspiring designers toward natural design and ease of use.

Qualities of good design include:

• Visibility – Make it immediately evident what actions are possible.  Moving or important parts should convey the correct information.
• Simplicity – Make it easy to evaluate the current state of the system, and give feedback when an action is performed. “I do not think that simple home appliances – stoves, washing machines, audio and television sets – should look like Hollywood’s idea of a spaceship control room.”
• Naturalness – Make use of natural mappings (e.g. knobs on stove follow layout of burners) and cultural mappings (e.g. clockwise means open or on).

There are certain ways design can make it easy to perform both everyday and complex tasks:

• Use affordances to encourage correct actions (like a push plate and pull handle on a door) and physical constraints to prevent incorrect or dangerous actions (like the microwave turning off when you open the door).
• Make visible what would otherwise be invisible – by providing visual, sound, feel, or other feedback (this is why anyone can use DVR or TiVo but no one could ever successfully program their VCR).
• Store knowledge both in the world (like the painted letters on a typing keyboard) and in the head (like our ability to type or our understanding of what the shift key does).

Unfortunately, bad design does happen.  Here are some of the reasons for poor design:

• Designers have to please the buyer, not the end user (because, for instance, landlords buy kitchen appliances; managers buy office equipment).
• Items get bought for their cache, not their usability – Norman calls this “the worshipping of false images.”  He cites a law firm that put an expensive but overly complicated copy machine in the sightline of its waiting room.
• Design gets watered down by committee decisions.  Where cost is an issue (and where isn’t it?), good ideas can get replaced by more affordable ones.  “Most design is not done by professional designers, it’s done by engineers, programmers, and managers.”
• There’s pressure to come out with “new and improved” designs, rather than keep the ones that work.  Often designers keep adding features (what Norman calls “creeping featurism” until the whole system becomes unusable.  When adding features, it’s important to keep the interface simple – even if it means reworking the interface.
• Entrenched systems keep us from adapting better ones.  The Dvorak keyboard allows people to type 10% faster… but, because QWERTY is good enough, the universal adoption of another system is unlikely.

Norman believes that good design can improve our lives.  “The sum total of all the trivial mal-design unnecessarily adds to the trauma of everyday life… [but] proper design can make a difference in our quality of life.”

Right now it’s just one page, but stay tuned for more.

http://www.themeredith.com/magnabeads/

Mandy and I have gotten together twice to work prototype our Magna Beads. We covered our magnets in an air-dry clay that looked promising. But it dried brittle. We sprayed a little sealant on the beds in hopes of making them stronger… but then I dropped them and the clay shattered to pieces.

A few days later, we went to Pearl and picked up two different varieties of air-dry clay. The second time was the charm. We redid all our claywork and they came out exactly as we envisioned. The beads are strong enough to hold up to accidental drops, but light enough that the magnets still work.

Today, Mandy and I presented our progress on Magna Beads in class. The beads are still white, but I think we got our idea across. In the coming days and weeks, we plan to decorate the beads as kids would be able to decorate them using the various kits. And then we’ll work on a website.

In class, Warren suggested that we add a stronger web component to our project. I think once the website’s up, however, it’ll speak for itself.

See Mandy’s post here.

Magna Beads

Magna Beads are a creative way to express yourself with custom-made jewelry.  They’re fun to make, fun to play with, and fun to wear.

Each bead contains a powerful rare earth magnet, housed in a protective covering.  Build a necklace or a bracelet just by putting them end to end.

The starter kit contains 20 beads, enough for a small necklace and bracelet.  Additional kits allow you to explore different artistic media – and add to your Magna Beads collection.

Magna Beads kits:
Starter kit – paint between the lines to create geometric designs
Magna Sticker – create, print, and stick using our beadmaking website
Magna Sparkle – attach rhinestones to create a glamorous look
Magna Mod – paint to personalize these mod, 60s-inspired beads
Magna Friendship – create tradeable beads to share with your best friend

Check out our website for new kits and new ideas.  And don’t forget to visit our Glam Gallery, where you can show the world a picture of you and your Magna Beads creation.

For ages 10 and up.

——————————————————–

Attractive!
Irresistible!
Positively magnetic!

Bob Hughes’ book, Dust or Magic, was the inspiration for both the conference and the class of the same name. I can see why so many people have rallied around it; I’m glad we’ll be discussing it in class, but would’ve read it just for pleasure.

Hughes’ basic point is this: the best new media projects come out of small teams (sometimes of just one) where people have a clear vision of the goal and are empowered and self-motivated to achieve it.

Environments that are likely to produce good software:

• encourage fiddling and experimentation
• value hands-on work
• give workers the time and space they need to research and explore
• empower workers to make decisions
• build small, multi-talented teams (less than 10 people)
• allow people and software to take risks
• encourage intuition, emotion, and idiosyncrasy
• create a strong shared vision
• test the product at every stage
• have subsidiary goals or a “deliverable minimum”
• do work that is interesting and enjoyable

Environments that are unlikely to produce good software:

• meticulously plan projects in advance
• require the approval of “suits” before “creatives” can get to work
• are so over-specialized that no one can see the big picture
• insist on products that can be easily categorized
• fear “creative self-indulgence”
• end up over-budget, over-time, and under-producing
• are hierarchical, fear-ridden, and military-style
• are unpleasant to work in

The very best software:

• considers its audience every step of the way — whether it’s captive or discretionary
• allows the user to feel in control, or part of the action
• pays attention to details
• uses good audio to enhance the graphics or video
• sticks to consistent, natural-feeling conventions; teaches you its conventions intuitively
• anticipates user errors and uses them as a learning opportunity
• allows you to create a mental map of the “information space” at all times
• gives you clear choices, gives feedback as you make a choice, and gives you a response that’s as good or better than you expected

On the other hand, software pitfalls to avoid include:

• getting invested in programs, metaphors, or technologies that will eventually hold you back
• reinventing the wheel when existing technology will get you halfway there
• mixing techniques, resulting in “cognitive train wrecks”
• talking heads, introductions, or instructions that users can’t skip

I would recommend this book to anyone who works in a creative field or manages people who produce creative output. I’d recommend the first half of the book to anyone who is interested in the history of the computer as a medium.

Hughes’ enthusiasm is contagious.  I’m excited to explore many of the works he references, including Romain Victor-Pujebet’s Lulu.  Hughes also renewed my interest in designer/writer Donald Norman.  I think I’ll go back and re-read The Design of Everyday Things — more on that later.

Last Friday in class, we were asked to start thinking about ideas for a final project. This one came to me out of the blue. I wanted to keep it under wraps until we had a clearer idea if it would work.

The idea is to use small, strong magnets to make beads that kids can arrange into necklaces and bracelets. Like pop beads, they should be fun to put together, fun to pull apart, and different enough to allow kids to create their own patterns.

I immediately whispered the idea to Mandy and she agreed we should work together and start ordering rare earth magnets.

The magnets arrived today, and preliminary testing is very promising. They are definitely going to hold enough to support their own weight, along with some kind of decorative casing (which will make them prettier and also easier to stick together end-to-end than side-to-side).

And if my experience with them is any indication, kids are going to have a lot of fun with the feel of putting these magnets together, taking them apart, and enjoying the sensation of objects held together around your body by the mysterious, invisible force of magnetism.

Lisa Guernsey’s book, Into the Minds of Babes, explores how screen time affects children from birth to the age of five.  I learned a lot and took away a couple of key lessons.

Don’t Trust the Media
In a competitive parenting environment, parents are willing to try anything that will give their kids a leg up.  Parental money fuels the multi-billion dollar business of screen-based toys, videos, and educational aids.

But on the other hand, recent scientific studies have posited a link between screen time and ADHD, autism, and obesity. Like many parents, the author felt both ashamed and indignant in 1999 when the AAP put the kabosh on screen time for kids under 2.

So which is it?  Are TV and videos good for kids, or bad for them?  Toy marketing and oversimplified press make parents feel like their instincts are all wrong.

When it comes down to it, you can’t force a child to think beyond her level of cognitive development.  But you can challenge her, keeping her just outside the zone of proximal development, where learning happens.

The latest greatest product is not the cure-all that will turn her into a baby Einstein or Mozart.  Kids need all kinds of stimulation, and media – educational or not – is just one piece of the pie.

Kids’ TV is Fine for Kids
With certain caveats, it turns out that kids’ television and videos are just fine for kids.  Good television – like Blue’s Clues, Dora the Explorer, and Sesame Street – have been shown to help children learn (158).  As long as they’re paying attention, children are picking something up: “young children watch television because they are cognitively engaged in it (34).”

Like rats in enriched or impoverished cages, kids learn more when there’s more available to challenge them.  A television show like Sesame Street really does expose children to stories, ideas, people and places they’ve never seen before.

The most effective programming invites participation and takes the child’s developmental level into account.  Younger kids do better with clear, linear story lines.  Kids also learn better with repetition (124).

But, like I said, there are caveats:

• Children learn better when a person is actually present, interacting with them.  The lack of social interaction seems to account for the “video deficit” observed when the same thing is taught in person vs. via recorded video.  For example, a hearing child of deaf parents got all his language from passively watching television – and as a result had trouble with grammar and syntax (137).
• If a child isn’t paying attention to the video, it is likely distracting her.  Screen media as background noise is not just unhelpful, it’s actually harmful.  Children playing with toys while Jeopardy was on in the background were less able to engage in creative play (73).  Background noise also makes it harder for babies to pick up and segment language.
• Imitation is a key strategy for development.  When children see violence on TV, they may mimic it without understanding its context.  On the other hand, children are just as likely to imitate polite, kind behavior they see on TV: kids who watched Dragon Tales and Mister Rogers were shown to be learning pro-social behaviors (Chapter 9).
• Kids can pick up on the vibe of what parents are watching.  Children as young as 12 months pick up the general feeling of a horror movie, drama, or newscast.  Children as young as 3 months pick up on anxiety in their parents (101).
• Too much screen time can keep kids from the all-important creative pretend play that helps them synthesize all the things they’re learning.

Kids Need a Balanced Diet
Lisa Guernsey’s concludes that screen time is okay for kids, in moderation.  Parents should choose media based on the child’s developmental level.  They should start dialogues with kids about what they’re watching or reinforce what they’ve learned from a particular show.

Children under five need lots of interaction: read to them, talk to them, and describe things going on around you.

And finally, let them do their own thing.  Children need time for creative, open-ended play.  When they’re playing, kids act out and self-reinforce all the things they’re learning.

Don’t worry, I’m not transferring schools. MushaBelly University is the name of an online world I explored for Dust of Magic. You can read my review and view screenshots of the online world here.

Our task in this class is to understand what makes children want to play with certain media or toys — what makes certain activities magic. We started with a couple of limitations.

In general, all-time favorite toys do certain things. They:

• inspire creativity or open-ended play
• use humor and themes kids can relate to
• are cool, often inexpensive items that kids want to own and collect
• pay attention to details (are internally consistent, let kids easily create a mental map or an idea of their progress toward an established goal)
• allow kids to feel mastery (let them immediately play and immediately succeed, add challenges slowly)

Magic toys must be tailored to children’s specific needs, that is:

• reflect their user competency (ability to read, use a mouse or keyboard)
• reflect their cognitive ability (ability to count, identify colors, connect their actions with the feedback they’re receiving)

Those are our guidelines, but they’re far from being a recipe.

We’ve been warned that kids are not just smaller, less experienced grown-ups. They’re a special kind of creature. If you’re trying to get inside their heads, it helps to have one, test with one, or at the very least remember what it was like to be one.