Proper evaluation, such that can stand up to a minimal level of scientific scrutiny (it is a proposed medical/therapeutic device after all) will need time and a number of test subjects in the different user case scenarios. This will take time to organize and test, which is beyond the time frame available before the final presentation.
The best I can hope for is a thorough investigation by myself (or other colleagues) to test if works as a prototype as I intended. If there is enough time and opportunity i might be able to get a ‘first impression’ from a professional on of the user case scenarios.
Does it physically work as it is intended to?
Can it be used by those specified in the user cases?
How effective in its intended use is it in the user cases?
Is it used as intended in the the user cases?
How can it be improved in the user cases?
Who will evaluate?
- Working prototype
This will be done by myself.
- User case scenarios
Primarily, for a first impression, a paediatric physical therapist (and practitioner of the Feurestein Method of Learning skills)
In the future, professionals with an interest in trying this prototype within the boundaries of the scenario’s scope will be sourced.
- Does it physically work as it is intended to?
An overall answer, Yes! As the first prototype at the start of a development project, it works quite well. Being the first incarnation of the device, it answers all of the original questions and criteria, with only slight adjustments needed in future design and manufacturing cycles (of course how ‘slight’ will only be known when developing further).
- Can it be used by those specified in the user cases?
It fits adults wrist (as long as they’re not too small), but its robust and chunky proportions (and lack of more holes in the strap) mean it’s loose on the wrists of children and small wrist-ed people. Usage of the device is quite intuitive once the user knows there is a button to press to change ‘program modes’ that change the feedback based on different movement ‘behaviours’ of the user.
- How effective in its intended use is it in the user cases?
For it’s main therapeutic use, extensive usage over a long time will tell if the user’s ‘emotional regulation’ has improved. Which would need evaluating by the ‘user’ their self and those in a supporting role to the user.
As a tool for rehabilitation, i see this being a useful and fun addition to the physical therapist’s collection. Giving the ‘user’ instant feedback in a fun way, rather than relying on the therapist all the time. Special ‘behaviours’ would need to be programmed depending on the type of exercise and results the therapist is looking for (e.g. different sensitivity levels and movements of different parts of the body).
Recreationally (e.g. a dancer using it as an artistic expression), this is the simplest of all. As it only has to fit nicely on the wrist (or other body part) with the desired program mode selected.
- Is it used as intended in the the user cases?
There is always the possibility that the user (in different user cases) may find other possible ways to use it (or want to use it) other than I had originally envisioned. This is partly exciting for me as a designer, and opens the doors to develop it in other ways that I had not foreseen.
So far in simple tests, (the users move their arms around) it shows the expected results. Only long term monitoring and user evaluation would show otherwise.
- How can it be improved in the user cases?
Te ‘development’ strategy as shown in the ‘Plan’, outlines how the device can become more complex (and therefore more useful) to the end users. How useful is a sliding scale with the ‘mood’ user being specifically targeted as the end user, and the recreational user being the user with the least amount of features and complexity needed for their needs.
Details of these improvements can be found on the specific pages relating to their process.
From the start of FabAcademy to this point, I think I have demonstrated how far and how much i have learnt in this time, by creating this complete, integrated and working project. The combination of processes and skills needed to create this project testify to the breadth of knowledge and experience i have gained whilst studying at FabAcademy.
I consider this to be a ‘ground zero’ point from which my learning to make (almost) anything (and fully integrate them) will continue. Something I was unable to do at the start of the study.