10.27.11 - Response to Buxton

Buxton: Sketching User Experiences

Buxton seems to get it. His book provides an excellent example of images that support his text. The images used aren't superfluous; they compliment what he's discussing. He makes things more concrete for me. With my background in education, I can't help but appreciate the effectiveness of Buxton's writing style and use of examples.

It seems to me that Buxton picked up where Kolko left off. Whereas Kolko gave us a big picture overview of user experience and the process of implementing it, Buxton gives details. He makes things concrete. He gives examples. I appreciate example so found myself thinking Kolko could take some pointers from Buxton. Then again, when the books are read in conjunction, it works. Kolko sets the tone. Buxton gives some of the specifics.

Overall, I appreciate how simplicity is at the heart of Buxton's suggestions. Don't overdo things, which makes perfect sense when you're still in the early stages of the design process. I've heard not to get too specific early on in the process before, but the approach Buxton used further buttressed this design advice. Buxton's sketches and user simulations all kept this in mind. It's ideal for qualitative research before too much is invested in product development. Prototypes don't have to be expensive as long as they convey the experience of the product to the user. Buxton's examples of the Airline Ticket Kiosk, The Listening Typewriter, and the Video Whiteboard all were used to demonstrate this well.

But I do want to go back to discuss sketches; after all, they aren't the prototypes I just discussed. They're ideal for ideas and for sharing. Sharing sketches among a design team (or any team for that matter) makes so much sense. As Buxton notes, "Sketches are social things" (53). As he continues, "...the act of creating a sketch can help an individual designer work through concepts and refine ideas. And sometimes, that is all that is required....But more often than not, a significant--if not the greater--part of the values comes in encouraging its social life" (153). This leads in perfectly to Buxton's argument for posting sketches on bulletin boards. The Portfolio Wall used by GM was also an interesting adaptation of posting digital sketches. I understand how it has some downsides but appreciate how the Portfolio Wall adapted based on its needs.

I was surprised that Buxton's arguments seem incredibly applicable for teachers. Not only does he use the example of Design Echoed in Elementary School with figure 57, but also considers how people learn. For 3 years, Bloom's Taxonomy dictated how I structured units and individual lessons within them when I planned for my 7th graders. If you're unfamiliar with Bloom's Taxonomy here's a link with information: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html. As the website indicates Bloom's only accounts for the cognitive domain. I found it interesting to compare Bloom's Taxonomy to Buxton's use of Gibbons and Hopkins' Scale of Experience in Learning (232). It seems as if Bloom's cognitive levels, spanning from knowledge to evaluation, align with the Scale of Experience. The exception there, however, is levels 9 and 10 of psychosocial experience. What I like about the Scale of Experience is its use of 2 axes. Not only does it show levels of experience, it contrasts them against degrees of learner's responsibility. It seems intuitive that being able to define something (knowledge level) requires less responsibility than being able to critique or justify something (evaluation level). But I like that the Scale of Experience shows this visually.

With Buxton I appreciate how he does not assume that readers already know something (yet another aspect of teaching!). A great example of this is, of course, his telling of The Wizard of Oz story. "For those who know the story and initially thought it strange that I was going to tell it, let this be a lesson to you...about the importance of not making assumptions when designing something that is intended to span cultures" (235). Not only did the story provide context, but it also provided a connection. Had Buxton just mentioned The Wizard of Oz Technique, I don't believe it would have been nearly as effective as his telling of the story (even if the story was just a review).