Hide menu

TDDD75 Effects-Driven Development and Human-Centred Design of Interactive Systems

Assignment 3 Readings and Workshops

The mandatory parts must be performed to receive grade 3 on the assignment, and the optional parts are performed for the possibility to receive grade 4 or 5.

Mandatory parts

Attendance at the workshops is mandatory.

You need to prepare for the workshops by reading and summarizing the literature. The written summary serve as your entrance ticket to the workshop. Make one brief summary for every piece of text for the seminar and include what the main points of the text are. Your written preparations for a workshop should be no more than 2 pages.

There are slots in the timetable called "Reading Groups". Use these time slots to sit down in your projects groups and discuss what you have read and how you might apply your insights in your particular design project.

The workshops will start with a short introduction by the teacher. It will be followed by structured group work. You will not do all project work during scheduled workshops, but they will work as a starting point for your own work in the groups. The workshops end with feedback to the whole group and discussions.

You will not receive any further feedback on your preparations for the workshop; they are only a way of checking that you actually have processed the literature before attending the seminar. This means that no news from the teacher after the workshop are good news.

The workshops are mandatory, but there are a few valid reasons for missing a seminar. Information about missed workshop can be found on the Examination page on this homepage.

Literature for Workshop 1 - Design brief and research planning:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 1-48.
  • Arvola & Holmlid (2015).

Literature for Workshop 2 - Visualization and journey mapping:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 49-73.
  • Vidal Quinteiro (2018).

Literature for Workshop 3 - Value and impact mapping:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 75-91.
  • Overkamp, Blomkvist, Rodrigues, Arvola, & Holmlid (2018).
  • Adzic (2012).

Literature for Workshop 4 - Brainstorming and concept development:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 93-120.
  • Mansfield, D. (2018).

Literature for Workshop 5 - Assumption testing, costs, and benefits:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 121-139.
  • Turner (2011).

Literature for Workshop 6 - Rapid prototyping:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 141-150.
  • Justinmind (2018).
  • Nessler, D. (2016).

Literature for Workshop 7 - Customer co-creation:

  • Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011), pp. 151-178.
  • Bertini & Plumley (2014).

Optional parts

For Grade 4: Use 4-5 of your summaries as a starting point and write a critical review of the mandatory course literature that largely meets the academic standards of the grading criteria below.

For Grade 5: Do the task described under Grade 4, but extend the critical review with 2-3 papers from the optional course literature, that meets the academic standards of the grading criteria mentioned below.

For higher grades you have to go further with the summaries and questions you prepared for the seminars. You have to make use of them to write a critical review with a certain degree of analytical distinction to deserve the higher grades. The review should not exceed six pages single-spaced text (about 3000 words), not counting cover and list of references. A review for Grade 5 can be slightly longer. Writing a critical review implies an analysis and evaluation of the text, and not only a summary of the texts. To write a good review you need to understand the material, and apply appropriate techniques and criteria for analysis and evaluation. A good critical review with analytical distinction is required for the highest grades. There are examples of critical reviews available at WritingforCollege.org.

Attention to detail and quality of academic writing at a certain level is expected. The following grading criteria are used:

  • Is there a cover page with assignment number, course, name and LiU ID?
  • Are the main points of the reviewed texts introduced and described?
  • Are evaluations of the argument and evidence behind the texts provided?
  • Is the relevance and implications of the texts discussed?
  • Are meaningful connections between the different texts drawn?
  • Are the conclusions in the review reasonable?
  • Are references correctly made using the Harvard style?
  • Bonus criterion: Are any original and thought provoking conclusions reached in the review? (Is not only readable but also worth reading?)

Deadline and submissions: The literature review should be submitted in PDF via Lisam. The deadline for submission is at the end of the course.

Page responsible: Johan Blomkvist
Last updated: 2019-03-12