The Potential of Human-Centred Design (Thinking) For Education

The Potential of Human-Centred
Design (Thinking) for Education

LILIANA RUCTTINGER | NSW DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
AARE 2015 | Fremantle, WA
Human-Centred Design is based on the philosophy that developing useful products,

services, environments, organizations, and modes of interaction begins by learning from
the people for which the solution is being designed. The implementation of Human-
Centred Design is based on the adoption of a number of mindsets, focused on the
practice of resilience, creative confidence, empathy, the acceptance of ambiguity,
optimism and a willingness to iterate.
Human-Centred Design requires critical and creative thinking. It is also underpinned by

empathy. The work of practitioners is based on the contexts, emotions and needs of their
stakeholders through the building of a respectful understanding of their position. This
connection to the ACARA General Capabilities suggests that the thinking “tools” offered
by this design paradigm may be of particular value to the development of educational
activities for students. As a design practice, Human-Centred Design offers a particular
perspective to the design of educational “products” such as curricula and assessments.
Adopting the viewpoint of the beneficiaries of these products is potentially disruptive to
established notions of expertise.
In relation to the design of systems that are human-centred by definition, this design
philosophy may provide insights to address persistent systemic challenges. Such challenges
include the development of teacher support systems and professional networks, as well as
the communication of organizational policies and practices.
The characteristics of Human-Centred Design present a potential divergence from certain

types of research practice. Following the cycles of inspiration, ideation and
implementation, the role and authority of the research practitioner is blurred with that of
the stakeholder. Experience suggests that practitioners in a range of domains are likely to
be open to research findings to inform their practice only if researchers understand their
specific context and working conditions. The ability for Human-Centred Design to address
this issue may provide a potential bridge between research and practice.
This paper discusses the potential that Human-Centred Design has for educational
practice, research and communication systems that foster communities of practice.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this paper are the author’s own and are not representative of those
of her employer, the NSW Department of Education
au.linkedin.com/in/lilianaructtinger paper prezi

liliana.ructtinger@det.nsw.edu.au https://goo.gl/m95X05 http://goo.gl/ifuiRL
LI LI AN A R U C T TI N G ER
Contents
Introduction to Human-Centred Design ......................................................................................... 3
What is Human-Centred Design? .................................................................................................... 3
The people in Human-Centred Design ....................................................................................... 4
Mindsets................................................................................................................................................. 6
Empathy ........................................................................................................................................ 6
Optimism ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Iteration ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Creative confidence .................................................................................................................. 6
Making ........................................................................................................................................... 6
Embracing ambiguity ................................................................................................................. 6
Learning from failure ................................................................................................................... 7
Phases .................................................................................................................................................... 8
Inspiration ...................................................................................................................................... 8
Ideation ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Implementation ........................................................................................................................... 8
Methods ............................................................................................................................................ 9
How might HCD be used in the field of education?.................................................................. 19
HCD for Government and policymakers.................................................................................. 20
Inspiration ........................................................................................................................................ 22
1. Organisation and planning ............................................................................................. 22
2. Data collection .................................................................................................................. 22
Ideation ........................................................................................................................................... 22
3. Data sharing and synthesis.............................................................................................. 22
4. Generating ideas .............................................................................................................. 22
5. Creation .............................................................................................................................. 22
Implementation ............................................................................................................................. 22
6. Testing .................................................................................................................................. 22
7. Revising and revisiting ...................................................................................................... 22
8. Launching ........................................................................................................................... 22
Revised business process ......................................................................................................... 23
HCD in the classroom ................................................................................................................... 23
Designing digital learning tools .............................................................................................. 23
Informing the design of learning spaces .............................................................................. 24
1
Encouraging students to adopt positive mindsets ............................................................. 24

HCD for teacher professional development ........................................................................... 25
Designing a knowledge management platform ............................................................... 25
HCD for research ........................................................................................................................... 25
Developing communication plans for projects that involve multidisciplinary teams . 25
How is Human-Centred Design different to what we do already? ........................................ 27
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 29
Appendix A. Related concepts ..................................................................................................... 30
Frameworks..................................................................................................................................... 30
Tensions........................................................................................................................................ 30
Design Contribution Square .................................................................................................... 31
Appendix B. Other problem-solving approaches ...................................................................... 33
Citizen-centric approach ............................................................................................................ 33
Science-based design ................................................................................................................. 34
Environmentally sustainable design .......................................................................................... 34
Technology-driven design ........................................................................................................... 34
References.......................................................................................................................................... 37
2
Introduction to Human-Centred Design

The human world is complex and interesting. It presents countless combinations of novel
problems which are open to interpretation and potential solutions. The domain of
education is no exception to these complexities. Human-Centred Design offers an
approach to solving problems in ways that designers do and in ways that keep humans
at the heart of the solution.
This paper outlines what Human-Centred Design is, how it can be implemented and the
sorts of problems it could help to solve in policymaking, classrooms, teacher professional
development and education research.
What is Human-Centred Design?

Human-Centred Design is a problem-solving approach that is focused on learning from
the customer of the intended solution, particularly through empathic methods – its
defining feature (Sklar & Madsen, 2010). As an “outside-in” approach, Human-Centred
Design is based on the philosophy that developing useful products, services,
environments, organizations, and modes of interaction requires learning from and
understanding the people for whom the solution is being designed.
The growing adoption of this approach mirrors the transition of economies in the
developed world, shifting from industrial manufacturing to knowledge work. Design is
more frequently accepted as a way to solve problems beyond the design of aesthetic
physical products – it is increasingly being applied to the development of new
processes, services, computer-mediated interactions, entertainment and ways of
communicating and collaborating (Brown, 2008). The methods of Human-Centred
Design may also have potential applications beyond customer service to the areas of
educational practice, research, and communication systems that foster communities of
practice.
Human-Centred Design is part of the family of Design thinking; in practice these terms
are used synonymously (Brown, 2008). The relation between the two could be
considered the distinction between design thinking as a property of the “thinker” and
Human-Centred Design as a set of principles and processes to solve a particular
problem in ways that preference the “user’s” needs (Roschuni, Goodman, & Agogino,
2013). Furthermore, some design research literature present user interactions primarily as
learning opportunities to advance the design, not in empathic terms (Stoker & John,
2009). For of these reasons, the term Human-Centred Design better aligns with the
practical orientation of this paper and on the importance of the empathic mindset.
Designers have historically borrowed various methods from more established human
research disciplines, such as marketing, psychology and anthropology, to collect
information about users in a valid and reliable manner. These conventional methods
based on ‘scientism’ were found incapable of embracing people’s felt-experiences and
design imagination – this inadequacy is attributed to the researcher being objective and
distant from the subject. Empathic design attempts to make sense of how human
3
beings experience the world, through their bodies and minds and situates that
experience in their own socio-cultural context (Lee, 2011).
Empathic methods incorporate shared language (using spoken, written text, body
language or visuals), collaboration (including users in the research rather than doing it to
them), ethnography (observing and recording interactions and artefacts of users in situ)
and empathic modelling (experiencing with your own body the physical situations of
others), practitioners are able to apply and integrate the insights and awareness of users
with functional design rather than simply responding to a user’s perceived needs
(Thomas & McDonagh, 2013).
Human-Centred Design consists of three considerations: mindsets, necessary for being

able to engage with the work; phases, providing conceptual guidance to frame the
process; and methods. An important part of understanding Human-Centred Design is
distinguishing between roles, and the ways in which they are referred to in the literature.
The people in Human-Centred Design

Human-Centred Design terminology varies depending on the field of expertise of the
writers. For example, writers with a design background tend to focus on the “users” and
“designers”, whereas writers with backgrounds in the human services tend to use the
language of “stakeholders” and “practitioners”. The intentional blurring between these
roles promoted by Human-Centred Design is captured in the varied use of this language
which is used in the literature as presented in Figure 1.
“Users” and “customers” are interchangeable terms, depending on the context,

referring to individuals that will have direct experience with the solution that is being
designed. They may also be beneficiaries; those that stand to gain from the solution.
Beneficiaries are a type of stakeholder; those that have an interest in the solution being
developed in ways that may benefit or harm them. In an education context
stakeholders may include policymakers, teachers, students and researchers. Practitioners
generally lead Human-Centred Design projects.
Figure 1. Individuals involved in Human-Centred Design
The core members of the Human-Centred Design team are practitioners (composed of
researchers and designers) and users or customers (who may also be beneficiaries or
4
stakeholders of the outcome of the work). The Human-Centred Design team come
together at different points throughout the project, depending on changing needs.
While an individual may move in and out of the Human-Centred Design at different
times, a defining part of their participation is the mindsets that they adopt throughout.
This is particularly important to remember in the context of schools, where students may
take on these roles as part of projects they are working on.
5
Mindsets
A particular pattern of mindsets, or perhaps more accurately, the acceptance of
particular practices, are considered to set Human-Centred Designers apart from other
problem solvers. These need to be adopted to successfully engage with the Human-
Centred Design process (IDEO.org, 2015). These mindsets reflect openness to ideas and
solutions unrestricted by current operational limitations or dogma.
Empathy
At the cornerstone of Human-Centred Design, empathy is a key mindset that is required
to understand different people, scenarios and places. It provides a way to include the
people you’re designing for into the design process, to leave behind preconceived
ideas and old thinking and to keep work grounded in the reality of users.
Optimism
Practitioners must hold the belief that design is inherently optimistic, that an answer is not
yet known but that a way is out there to be found. Optimism is necessary for
perseverance throughout the iteration process.
Iteration
Iteration is integral to Human-Centred Design. It requires feedback, which presents an
opportunity to further the participation of those being designed for. Essential to iteration
is the need to venture outside of the design team to test and reflect. Being open to
iteration is important because there will be a need to revisit initial ideas and strive to
constantly improve on them.
Creative confidence
This mindset relates to the confidence in the ability to act on ones ideas combined with
the belief that everyone is creative in the way that they understand the world. Creative
confidence involves trusting intuition and going forth with ideas that you haven’t quite
mapped out in detail yet.
Making
The ability to make is about being able to first convey an idea and then to turn it into a
solution. This mindset builds on the notion that theory (the idea behind a solution) and
making (a solution without a theoretical grounding reasons) in isolation less powerful as
the two combined. The making mindset is required to prototype, which needs to be
done throughout the process.
Embracing ambiguity
This mindset requires an acceptance that not all the factors involved in a problem can
be known at once, if at all. It involves being open to the idea that there will always be
more ideas; there is no need to hang on to any one of them. It is this inability to know all
of the answers that allows innovation to happen, since it means that the boundaries of
the problem space are not clear and open to possibility.
6
Learning from failure

It’s rare to achieve the right solution the first time, so the ability to learn from failure is
essential to Human-Centred Design. Refusing to take risks limits designers to only
incremental solutions rather than opportunities to innovate through radical departures
from the norm and known.
Mindsets are important throughout all phases of Human-Centred Design, although some
of them will become more relevant at particular phases than at others.
7
Phases
The process of Human-Centred Design falls under the three broad phases of inspiration,
ideation and implementation (IDEO.org, 2015). These phases are overlapping,
complementary and non-linear. There are aspects of the process that are already
commonplace in the practices of any established organisation.
Inspiration
This is the research phase in which practitioners use different means to learn about their
customers. Organisation and planning is a key part of this phase, which begins by
defining the design challenge – what to set out to achieve. It also involves identifying the
individuals and groups that will be a part of the research – this includes the beneficiaries
and stakeholders as well as the people who will be a part of the design team. Inspiration
activities provide the framework for data collection, consisting of insights and evidence
from primary and secondary sources, particularly the people who will be impacted by
the solution.
Ideation
During the ideation phase team members share and analyse the insights that they have
gathered from their work during the inspiration phase. The team participates in
collective brainstorming and synthesis activities which lead towards the development of
ideas that can be created into prototypes, ready for testing.
Implementation
Team members are involved in gathering feedback about prototypes through rapid
testing and extended piloting activities. Importantly, this phase of the process requires an
openness to revising and revisiting assumptions as well as the solution itself. Launching
the solution incorporates a plan for ongoing evaluation and monitoring.
Keep in mind that these phases are not linear and that Human-Centred Design methods
are applied throughout the project. The following section details these methods, when
they can be used, why and where to find further information.
8
L I LI AN A R U C TTI N G ER
Methods
A selection of Human-Centred Design methods are detailed in Table 1 as they pertain to the purpose of this paper. This table uses the phases of
inspiration, ideation and implementation (Brown, 2008; Brown & Wyatt, 2010; IDEO.org, 2015). Methods are also labelled according to more familiar
project language, as shown in the Collection column. Italicised text refers to another method in the table or in the Further information column of the
same row. Underlined text refers to a Collection name. Further information provides references including exemplars, template documents and
hyperlinks to NSW Department of Education internal documents. A process for applying these methods is presented in the next section.
Method Why to use it How to do it When to use it Collection Further

information
Frame your This is the first step to commencing a A 1-page summary of the problem that the team is Inspiration Organisation (IDEO.org, 2015,
design Human-Centred Design project in attempting to solve. Start with an overarching contextual and p.31; example,
challenge which the team agrees about the statement and then answer the following 5 questions in no planning p.33; template,
p.165)
problem they are solving. more than one sentence each to narrow down the design
question that you will answer as a team: An alternative
1) Frame the problem as a design question approach by
2) State the ultimate impact you’re trying to have Brest, Roumani
3) What are some possible solutions to your problem? and Bade
4) Write down some of the context and constraints that (2015) is not
you’re facing recommended
5) Revise your original question since the
problem is
defined by the
decision-maker
Create a To consider project logistics and Refer to established internal organisational procedures. Inspiration Organisation Seek advice
project plan follow any organisational and from a business
requirements to commence the planning development
unit on project
work.
planning.
Secondary An essential stage of understanding Conducting a Literature Review. Inspiration Data Consult PP&R
research existing information about the collection Literature
context, history and data related to Investigate whether other organisation are already Review Process
and Literature
your problem. This knowledge addressing the problem.
Review
provides a foundation to build upon Rationale.
with primary data collection.
See also,
Learning
whether other
organisations
are addressing
9
the problem
effectively
(Brest et al.,
2015, Step 8,
p.14)
Identifying This is an important set of resources After you Create a project plan, identify essential areas of Inspiration Organisation (IDEO.org, 2015;
the right to use when identifying the right need and then consider how to Build a team with an Implementation and build a team,
people people for different aspects of the interdisciplinary mix. Limiting your team to the traditional planning p.35; recruiting
tools, p.36;
(project project. project specialisations will likely result in a traditional solution.
define your
team, You may develop insights about who these non-traditional audience, p.44;
participants It is necessary for building a team, project members may be after Data sharing and synthesis extremes and
and recruiting participants, defining the activities. Once you reach implementation, you may need to mainstreams,
customers) customers who will use your solution. rethink who you need to Staff Your Project. p.49; staff your
project, p.144)
Start to Define Your Audience – these are the people you are
designing for (customers). This involves identifying your direct
beneficiaries and then peripherally relevant groups and
individuals – both those that may be in favour or opposed to
your work. Use post-its to write each person or group.
Consider how they relate to your work and the solution and
write those on separate post-its, then arrange them to reflect
the relationships that need to be considered throughout the
project.
Use Recruiting Tools to develop a strategy to find the right

people to learn from. Your participants are not necessarily
the same people that will use the solution. Be mindful of
incorporating both Extremes and Mainstreams.
Interviews Interviews are one of the primary Plan to conduct interviews in the participant’s space or the Inspiration Data (IDEO.org, 2015,
ways in which you will be collecting problem setting if it is one and the same. The responses of the collection p.39; example,
information about the needs of your participants will likely be more meaningful when understood p.41; group
interview, p.42;
customers. They should form at least in their natural context.
expert
some part of every Human-Centred interview, p.43;
Design project. Consider whether it would be beneficial to conduct a one- conversation
on-one Interview, a Group Interview or an Expert Interview. starters, p.45;
The Human-Centred Design process template:
can benefit from the combination of Up to three research team members may attend an p.166)
individual, group and expert interview and each with a clear role, such as interviewer,
interviews. Group interviews can note-taker or photographer. Use an interview protocol and
serve as starting points for identifying consider using Conversation Starters. Start broad and
key individuals who may be suitable shallow, asking questions about the person’s life, values, and
10
for the individual and expert phases habits as they relate to the problem context. Then go deeper
of the research. on questions that relate specifically to the design challenge.
Your participant’s responses should be recorded verbatim –
interpretation happens later.
During the interview, notice body language, the surroundings

and anything can learn from the context – you may decide
to take photos.
Immersion This technique is useful in Observation of the setting in which the people that you are Inspiration Data (IDEO.org, 2015,
understanding a cultural change designing for spend their day. This may be the same location collection p.52; guided
that you are attempting to facilitate. as the solution. You may decide to shadow the participant, tour, p.64)
It is likely to be relevant in cases to be an inconspicuous observer from afar or to have them
where it is difficult for participants to walk and talk through what they are doing and why – a
articulate their ingrained day-to-day Guided Tour. The approach will depend on the relationship
experience. that you are establishing with the participant, if any exists at
this stage. Documentation is essential.
Analogous This is an explorative technique that Start by listing the activities, behaviours and emotions that Inspiration Data (IDEO.org, 2015,
inspiration allows consideration of possibilities you’re looking to research. Then write down a setting or collection p.53)
that are not available in the setting situation where you might observe each one. Decide on the
that you are designing for but are setting or situation and conduct an observation, paying
plausible and accepted in other attention to the particular activity, behaviour or emotion that
settings. It can work well with Mash- connects it to your research goal.
ups.
Card Sort Understand your participant’s values Prepare a deck of cards with one word or image on each. Inspiration Data (IDEO.org, 2015,
in the context of data collected The contents of the cards will likely come from earlier collection p.57)
from earlier inspiration activities and inspiration activities, such as those collected from interviews.
preliminary data sharing and Participants are asked to order them according to what is
synthesis activities. most important, or to sort them according to a hypothetical
scenario, such as working different hours, having a different
work role, or different responsibilities.
Peers See the design setting through the Equip the people that you are designing for with materials to Inspiration Data (IDEO.org, 2015,
Observing eyes of those you are designing for. record their experiences. This can include traditional pen and collection p.60)
Peers This is particularly useful when the paper, cameras and audio equipment.
setting is logistically difficult to
observe. It is also useful to overcome
perceptions of invasion or fear of
outsiders that may be encountered
by participants by building
relationships with them. This is distinct
from Immersion, since it relies on
participants acting as researchers,
11
rather than the project team doing

the observation.
Game play The use of visual methods allows The contents of the cards are developed in the inspiration Inspiration Data (Sherringham &
stakeholders to imagine other phase. The game play occurs primarily during ideation. Ideation collection Serle, 2011)
scenarios and realities, developing Generating
empathy for those in other situations Create a series of visual cue cards, or reuse cards from the ideas
but also permitting the suspension of Card Sort. These should contain objects and ideas relating to
accepted norms for the duration of the problem you are trying to solve, or relate to issues you
the game. This allows the exploration have seen through your research. They act as a starting point
of alternative futures – a useful tool for a discussion. Create persona cards which reflect the
to use when radical innovation is customers of your project. The scenario cards will include the
intended. settings that your customers work in and relate to your
problem. Have each participant play a persona that is
different to their own real-life role, choose a setting for the
entire group and assign each person a visual cue card.
Observe and record. This is also a good opportunity to have
your own project team participate to help them empathise
with the customers.
Double This approach is useful in cases Informed by initial findings of themes from Data collection Inspiration Data (Roschuni et al.,
ethnography where practitioners are working activities, the research team considers future interactions Ideation collection 2013, p.51)
outside of their team to solve a with the client that may further inform these themes. This may
problem. The aim of this approach is occur during project meetings, when accompanying clients
to identify resistance to change by into the field.
understanding organisational
culture. Future design efforts then Use these findings to identify “sites of inertia”, which are
target these “sites of inertia” in order places that it is possible to achieve cultural change. When
to produce research insights that communicating with your clients Use photographs and non-
can be acted upon and are likely to textual information to communicate findings. This also
be socialised (or shared among the provides a way to demonstrate an understanding of their
HCD team which includes users and context as well as to build empathy between the clients,
customers). This is a form of self- customers and researchers.
reinforcement which is likely to mean
that the solution is likely to work well
since ownership will be ingrained in
the process of conducting the
research. This is particularly useful to
help researchers figure out how to
communicate across boundaries of
expertise, culture, and interests. It is
termed double ethnography
because it requires researcher to
12
treat communication activities that

are part of their HCD project as a
project in itself.
Download It is necessary to share the data you Bring the practitioners together; it is important that this step is Ideation Data sharing (IDEO.org, 2015,
and share have collected with the rest of the conducted as a team. Ask that everyone come to the and p.77, 78)
team so that you can make sense of meeting with all data collected and examples of any synthesis
the context you’re working in. photographs or artefacts that they want to share.
Everyone is given post-its and writing material. Record all key

information you want to share according to: who you met,
what you saw, the facts you gathered, and your impressions
of the experience.
Each person presents their findings in turn by describing what

they have written down as well as sharing inspiring stories
which might spur others to recall another insight that they
can share. Focus on description and detail of aspirations,
barriers and interesting aspects of your observations. All post-
its are arranged on a wall or large visible area.
Ideally, this activity occurs several times throughout the data

collection process and continues to inform your data
collection methods.
Top five This is a flexible method that can Ask team members to reflect on what has been discussed Ideation Data sharing (IDEO.org, 2015,
take place at any stage where there and write down their top five ideas, themes, insights, or and p.79, 80)
is a need to consolidate thinking and challenges on separate post-its. This can be part of a synthesis
draw out next steps. The output of broader Brainstorm and bundle activity.
these sessions can serve as a record
of thinking over the course of the Be specific about which of these categories you are focusing
project. on. You may also like to further narrow down the activity by
specifying a time-frame, such as the top five for the week, or
for a particular data collection activity.
Sharing then takes place where all team members present

their ideas. Go through and rearrange them as a group with
the aim to create rich clusters of related insights that may
inform the next steps such as Create insight statements and
Create a concept.
Label the poster where these are all placed with the specifics
of the activity.
13
Create Insight statements serve as an Take the results of the Top five, work as a team to create Ideation Data sharing (IDEO.org, 2015,
insight important culminating step moving short statements that capture insights that can be taken from and p.81; example,
statements on to narrow down the focus of the each cluster. synthesis p.83; template,
p.176)
problem solving.
Refining these insights, eventually discarding all but a handful
that relate directly to the design challenge will inform the
How might we activity.
You may also like to ask your customers to reflect on your

insight statements to see whether they do in fact reflect
reality.
How might This activity is about making the After you Create Insight Statements, take each one and Ideation Data sharing (IDEO.org, 2015,
we problem solving opportunity explicit. rephrase these as questions. Eventually you may decide to and p.85; example,
It builds on previous Create Insight repeat the Top Five activity, this time focusing on the top synthesis p.87; template,
p.177) See also,
Statements steps to reach a single “How might we” statements.
Describe the
focus point that will guide the rest of ideal world in
the process. This activity can be framed in terms of being able to imagine the absence of
your ideal world to make the issue more concrete. the problem
(Brest et al.,
2015, Step 4,
p.9)
Create A set of tools for representing the Have somebody on the team draw patterns as they are Ideation Generating (IDEO.org, 2015,
frameworks system that you are studying and to being discussed. This can include the use of Venn diagrams ideas p.89-93)
organise data collections and or 2x2 matrices.
insights. This is a useful method to use
during Data sharing and synthesis If it becomes clear that there is a process that is emerging
when the topic is part of a larger from the discussion, use a journey map to show how the
system or related another topic that customer experiences the problem.
has arisen. This works well when
solving complex challenges that A relational map, which identifies how different groups and
involve different actors, interactions participants relate to each other, can also help to make
and time-scales. This activity helps sense of areas where you may need to focus attention.
visualize patterns, understand
different customer perspectives and
context.
Brainstorm This is a creative and fast-paced Provide all team members with writing materials and post-its. Ideation Generating (IDEO.org, 2015,
and bundle way to generate ideas based on the Pose the question you would like the group to work on, ideas p.94, 95, 97)
data and insights that the group has methods such as Mash-ups can help.
discussed so far. The activity requires
optimism, welcoming attitudes from Provide a short time in which everyone works independently
to write separate ideas on each post-it. The session then
14
all team members and a freedom moves to each person explaining each idea as they place it
from fear of failure or criticism. on the whiteboard, wall or poster.
Each team member should adopt a mindset in which they

defer judgement, encourage wild ideas, build on the ideas
of others, stay focused on the topic, and aim for quantity
over quality, and visual communication by placing all ideas
in open view.
Bundle ideas together as a team to see how turn them into

possibilities to solve the more complex reality of your
problem. Promote active discussion throughout, so that
agreement is reached about the similarities, benefits and
distinctions of each bundle.
Mash-ups This method works well to encourage The leader of the activity isolates a particular quality that is Ideation Generating (IDEO.org, 2015,
thinking beyond the current the focus of the solution. Some examples include efficiency, ideas p.104)
constraints and status quo of the speed or aesthetics. Write that quality down for all to see.
problem that you are trying to solve. Then think of a business, brand or service that is known for
It provides a structure for creative that quality, or does it really well, perhaps in one aspect of
thinking by asking participants or their work. Write that down, also.
team members to come up with
ideas in unusual contexts. Have the team come up with ideas of what the solution
might look like if it were informed by the selected business,
brand or service. For example, if you are looking for a way to
communicate short and succinct pieces of information.
Twitter is an example of a product that does that. The mash-
up would ask – what is the Twitter version of [the context you
are working in].
Design Use design principles and guiding Working from the results of collections of themes created Ideation Generating (IDEO.org, 2015,
principles mantras to ensure that the work of throughout Data sharing and synthesis activities, extract core ideas p.105; example,
and guiding the team is cohesive in its vision. principles that underlie them. p.107)
See also,
mantras These can serve to bound the work,
Articulate
set the tone of the team’s approach Aim for high-level positive principles that provide “design
and focus attention on the parts of opportunities for refinement and exploration, rather than low- mandates” and
the context that matter the most. level prescriptions that limit the solution unnecessarily and posit strategies
prohibit good ideas from emerging (such as a single location that could
for an event to take place, or a particular model of tablet for transcend
a digital artefact). Specifications and refinements of this barriers,
nature can be made later in the process. address needs,
and facilitate
change (Brest
15
et al., 2015,
Step 12, p.17)
Create a A way to move ahead from ideas Start with ideas that emerged from the Brainstorm and Ideation Creation (IDEO.org, 2015,
concept into more polished concepts. The bundle activity. You may need to Create Frameworks if you p.108)
results of this activity are what the are working with a very complex problem. Move from an
team will aim to prototype. idea to a concept – one that describes the solution in
enough detail for prototyping.
Remember to keep in mind how you chose to Frame your

design challenge and follow the Design principles and
guiding mantras to remain on target.
Co-creation Bring the customers back into the Invite specific customers to participate in a co-creation Ideation Creation (IDEO.org, 2015,
session process by inviting them to a co- session in which they work with practitioners on Prototyping or Implementation p.109)
creation session. This is useful to a Brainstorm and bundle session.
continue to engage them and can
be done after the Create a concept Avoid treating this activity as an Interview, or as one-sided.
activity, so that there is a more solid Make it clear as well as possible that the outcome of this
aim to work towards. session can inform the solution. Everyone will be learning from
each other.
Storyboard The storyboard may be used to A storyboard uses visual representations to communicate key Ideation Creation (IDEO.org, 2015,
convey a progressive understanding steps of how your solution will work. You may choose to focus Implementation p.113, 178-179;
of the problem, as well as serve as a on a particular aspect of your solution. examples,
p.114-117)
prototype to describe emerging
solutions. It provides an accessible Use a series of individual comic-book style frames with a small
avenue to convey ideas about who space for drawing and a small space for describing what is
will use the solution, where and how. taking place.
It is also a way to think quite explicitly
about the proposed solution and To keep the focus on designing for people, start with a
serve as a talking platform for team persona frame. This will include an image and specific
members as you start to consider information about your customer including their age, gender,
finer details of your solution as the profession and any other pertinent characteristics you wish to
project progresses through iterations. include. This is the start of a story you will tell about how this
persona will benefit from your solution.
In the frames that follow, depict and describe the persona’s

problem, and how it will be solved in stages by interacting
with your solution.
Focus on creating quick work that conveys only essential

features of the story.
16
Prototyping Making the solution is key to solving The team should decide on a concept or portion of one to Ideation Creation (IDEO.org, 2015,
the problem. Prototyping should take prototype. Next decide on what form the prototype should Implementation p.111, 119, 135)
place throughout the process using take. You may use a Storyboard, structure the outcome to You may like to
begin this
different media and to different be a series of visual cue cards to be used in Game play, a
process in a
degrees of refinement. The aim of model that can be talked-through and explained to more structured
prototyping is to learn about what customers or even a physical product. The form it takes fashion to Turn
works. should reflect what you aim to learn from your prototype. the selected
strategies into
Make collaborative decisions about the development of the logic models
prototype and be prepared to start from scratch once you and compare
Reflect and redo. A prototype is not the final solution. them to one
another (Brest
et al., 2015,
Step 15, p.20)
Get Following on from Prototyping, this Decide on aspects of the prototype you would like feedback Ideation Testing (IDEO.org, 2015,
feedback activity is about collecting data and on. Start with getting overall first impressions, and following a Implementation p.126)
getting reactions about the Reflect and redo activity, follow up with more specific
functionality of the prototype. This is targets.
an opportunity to get some quick
information and first reactions from Identify an appropriate location for testing, ideally the
your customers. solution context. Weigh up the option to conduct a testing
session in a convenient location rather than realistic location
in order to maximise the amount of feedback received. This
perspective may change at each stage of gathering
feedback.
Encourage participants to provide honest responses,

explaining that negative feedback provides an opportunity
for improvement. Use open questioning where more specific
advice can be obtained on-the-fly.
Following this activity, conduct a Data sharing and synthesis

activity.
Ways to This activity is designed to provide a Use the template provided to plot solutions according to Implementation Testing (IDEO.org, 2015,
grow quick and visual sense of how their novelty and whether new or existing users will be Launching p.141,
framework difficult the solutions may be to adopted. Given their nature, consider whether particular template:
p.184)
implement. This is done by helping to solutions may be more suitable than others. Be cognisant of
understand how revolutionary, the organisational culture and other constraints that you
evolutionary or incremental a have learnt about along the way, especially through the
solution may be. It can be used to Double ethnography.
compare several potential and
existing solutions.
17
Roadmap Often referred to as a project Follow established organisational standards and procedures Implementation Testing Seek advice
timeline, this activity is intended to for managing project objectives. Launching from a business
keep projects on track. It will likely be development
unit on project
ongoing throughout several phases
timelines.
of the project.
Pilot This activity takes place once a The pilot is a way to live test the solution for a longer period of Implementation Testing (IDEO.org, 2015,
prototype has been developed to time than might be intended in a Get feedback activity. p.146)
the point that the team considers it
to be ready to operate as intended Arrange to pilot your solution in its intended context. It may
in the field and needs to be trialled. be useful to Define success in order to guide how to collect
The mindset throughout this activity evidence of how well your solution is working in the field.
should be one of expecting to
Reflect and redo – it is unlikely that a Use Data collection activities to learn about how well your
pilot will be identical to the solution is working.
completed solution.
Reflect and Of particular use following Your team will come together with results from testing and Ideation Revising and (IDEO.org, 2015,
redo prototyping, this is a set of methods piloting to prepare to modify the solution. Using a Implementation revisiting p.127, 148, 157)
to use throughout to continue to combination of methods that were used earlier in the
receive feedback from the people process, such as Create frameworks, and Brainstorm and
you are using for, integrating the bundle, plan for how you can improve the idea.
feedback and iterate.
Define A way to orient your team towards The Frame your design challenge activity will provide a Implementation Testing (IDEO.org, 2015,
success success includes coming to a shared starting point to defining success. Work this into the Launching p.147)
agreement about how it should be milestones that you identified in the Roadmap to build more See also,
Prioritize and
defined. This can be conceptualised specific success criteria at different stages of the project.
narrow the
as a series of milestones as well as These definitions can also be used when you Get feedback range of your
ultimate functionality. to find out whether you are on track. intended
beneficiaries
(Brest et al.,
2015, Step 6,
p.11)
Monitor and Plan to evaluate the efficacy and The Department has a series of established practices relating Implementation Revising and Consult the
evaluate monitor progress of the solution in to the evaluation of programs which can be used for these revisiting evaluation
operation. This is key, even when the purposes. Use the output from the Define success activity to Testing team and refer
to the
solution is “final” to ensure that work guide what you measure.
departmental
that has gone into producing the Evaluation
solution is responding to customer Framework.
needs.
Table 1. Human-Centred Design methods
18
How might HCD be used in the field of

education?
Human-Centred Design could help to solve problems in policymaking, classrooms,
teacher professional development and education research.
A constant feature throughout the process is that it be informed by research derived

from customers, whether it is during the initial inspiration phases, reflecting on the results
of a prototype to inform iteration or planning for implementation. While the narrative
structure of the framework presented in Table 2 connotes a linear process, it is expected
that each project will take its own path. Some activities have natural precursors, others
may be conducted in parallel or skipped altogether. There is also the expectation that
many activities will be revisited throughout – prototyping and testing quickly and often is
key to breaking down the fear of failure that can stifle innovative solutions.
In many cases, the best tools to use are most basic: pens, pencil, paper, post-its, butcher
paper, whiteboards, posters, and different coloured media to reflect different categories
and significance. Since iteration is built into the process, the use of low fidelity media
makes it is easy to build on ideas without concerns about presentation or use of
resources. It also establishes a flatter relational dynamic; each contribution is as visible
and therefore validated as being as valuable as any other. By providing each team
member with the same tools that allow for contributions to materialise instantly, it is much
more difficult to discount contributions without first acknowledging them. It is also
enables ideas to be shared immediately and rearranged as needed for each activity.
Post-its are particularly useful in this sense, because they allow for a neutral platform
through which to compile ideas, group them and rearrange as needed. They also allow
for ideas to be placed where they need to be seen to be worked from and provide a
consistent reference point.
The use of digital artefacts, such as video recordings, audio recordings, photos, word
documents, webpages and interactive devices such as tablets may also be
incorporated. For alternative conceptualisations of how the work of Human-Centred
Design may be used by organisations, see the related concepts are available in
Appendix A.
Human-Centred Design could be used in work characterised as:
 Project-based
 Requiring long-term planning and investment
 Resource-intensive
 Involving the design of a solution that will impact other processes and workflows
 Communication-intensive
 Impacting a number of stakeholders with a diversity of views and responsibilities
 Complex or “wicked”
 Multidisciplinary.
19
HCD for Government and policymakers

Human-Centred Design can help public institutions and policymakers explore new and
better ways of doing business. Public institutions exist to provide public value, as
authorised by the electorate (Moore, 1997). This view is situated within the NSW
Government’s 2020 plan and open government models which adopt the position that
Government does not always know how best to serve the public and to meet the needs
of its constituents. In fact, public institutions are about more than delivering public value,
they are about creating public good.
Value is something that can be co-created with customers. One way to be more
responsive to the needs of customers is to use an “outside-in” approach, where
practices are responsive to the changing needs and context of customers. This is in
contrast to a more traditional “inside-out” approach that assumes that the best solutions
are already known by the organisation that delivers them.
Fulfilling expectations and providing public value are good. Innovating beyond these
expectations is even better and relies on creative solutions that diverge from current
expectations.
Government institutions do business with a range of individuals and groups that are
provide with a service as well as with stakeholders or those providing advice. Business
relationships fall into the following broad categories relating to the degree and nature of
reciprocity, whether services result in financial or in-kind transactions, and the legislative
and policy context.
 School communities, teachers, and principals

 Commercial entities, such as technology vendors and banks
 Non-profit organisations such as charities and service providers
 Educational research and training institutions such as universities, course
providers, research organisations and non-government education sectors
 Other government agencies
 Internal corporate units
 Advocacy groups and professional associations
Expectations placed on government employees vary between activities. Arriving at

solutions that address this characteristic diversity is particularly well suited to the Human-
Centred Design approach.
It is particularly useful for improving customer service. Human-Centred Design is a way to

provide insights into customer need by providing a framework to achieve solutions that
intersect the desirable, viable and feasible realms of a problem space, represented in
Figure 2. Given that empathy is the central mindset of this approach, it is naturally
conducive to better understanding customers. Empathy elucidates the desirable
aspects of a solution, which are usually uncovered during the inspiration phase of the
process. Human-Centred Design is also able to incorporate the viable and feasible
components of a solution – these mean that customer service can be improved by
relating it to the real-life business demands and technology or resource constraints that
20
are faced by an organisation. The viable and feasible aspects of the problem space are
usually uncovered during the ideation and implementation phases of the process.
Figure 2. Impact potential of Human-Centred Design (IDEO.org, 2015).
The application Human-Centred Design methods requires a holistic approach which will
ensure that activities are not used in isolation but integrated into a meaningful and goal-
directed process. A process for using Human-Centred Design for Government and
policymakers is presented in Table 2. The methods shown as bolded and highlighted
text and are grouped by Collections – conceptual groupings that may support Human-
Centred Design teams by providing them with language that is more likely to be familiar.
21
Inspiration
1. Organisation and planning
Frame your design challenge.
Create a project plan where you will be Identifying the right people (project team).
2. Data collection
Conduct Secondary research to help you with Identifying the right people
(participants and customers).
You will need to use Interviews at several points and in different ways throughout the
research.
You will choose from additional methods such as Immersion, Analogous inspiration,
Card Sort, Game play, Peers Observing Peers and Double ethnography
Ideation
3. Data sharing and synthesis
Download and share what you have learned from data collection, refining by
identifying the Top five that you can use to Create insight statements which can be
rephrased into How might we questions that guide the rest of the work.
4. Generating ideas
Stimulate creativity through Brainstorm and bundle activities, which may incorporate
techniques such as Mash-ups.
When grappling with complexity, Create frameworks which can be used to inform
Design principles and guiding mantras.
5. Creation
Move from ideas to Create a concept that can be used for Prototyping as well as put
to use in a Co-creation session.
You may like to use a Ways to grow framework if deciding between several possible
solutions.
Communicate concepts using a Storyboard which can later be used in…
Implementation
6. Testing
Get feedback at several stages of the process.
You will likely revisit Identifying the right people (project team) and prepare to Pilot.
7. Revising and revisiting
Throughout the process will be opportunities to Reflect and redo, guided by Design
principles and guiding mantras.
8. Launching
Be guided by how you Frame your design challenge to Define success. This may be
helped by the use of a Roadmap which should provide scope for ongoing activities to
Monitor and evaluate your solution.
Table 2. Human-Centred Design process for Government and policymakers
22
Revised business process

In trying to understand how best to collaborate with the groups and individuals that we
do business with, Human-Centred Design provides a process for identifying need and
building buy-in to the ultimate outcome by including stakeholders in the development
process.
One successful example of this is the nurse knowledge exchange (Lin, Hughes, Katica,
Dining-Zuber, & Plsek, 2011). A network of hospitals in the United States sought to address
the problem of how nurses communicated information between shifts and completed
handovers. The initial solution failed because it had not involved users (medical staff), in
its design. The product did not fit their needs and required behavioural changes that
were too extensive a departure from their norm. In response, a Human-Centred Design
approach was used to design, implement and scale The Nurse Knowledge Exchange
following a series of mini-trials and extensive field observations and continuous iteration.
This “soft start” approach was credited with the ultimate success of the finished product,
since it had the buy-in from end users.
HCD in the classroom

Bereiter and Scardamalia (2008) distinguish between pedagogies that ask questions in
“belief mode” or “design mode”. The kinds of questions asked in belief mode are:
What does this statement mean?

Is it true?
What is the evidence?
What are the arguments for and against?
According to Bereiter and Scardamalia (2008), this form of questioning is historically

dominant in curricula, yet knowledge is created by moving back and for the between
belief and design questions. There are benefits to including questions in design mode,
such as:
What is this idea good for?

What does it do and fail to do?
Does it have a future?
How could it be improved?
Applying Human-Centred Design in the classroom is a way to flow between “belief

mode” and “design mode”.
Several examples of the potential for Human-Centred Design in the classroom are
provided below. A practical resource for educators is available at the Design Thinking for
Educators website (IDEO.org, 2012).
Designing digital learning tools

Given Human-Centred Design’s affinity with user research, the methodology is a close
evolution of those likely already being used by the designers and developers of digital
learning tools. One study demonstrated that Human-Centred Design can be used for
the design of computer-supported collaborative tools (CSCL; Leinonen & Durall-Gazulla,
23
2014). The authors suggest that CSCL can be seen as a wicked problem – those which
are complex, open-ended and intractable (Australian Public Service Commission, 2007;
Head, 2008) – and one which is well-suited to Human-Centred Design approaches.
Attention is focused at five levels: design details, user interface, systems, social issues and
broad societal implications (Leinonen & Durall-Gazulla, 2014). Interestingly, the authors
did not identify the learning content as a layer – given that different tools are
appropriate for teaching different learning content (think, for example, of pedagogies
as tools (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 2008; van den Broek, 2012), this is an unexplained
omission.
Informing the design of learning spaces

Sherringham and Serle (2011) demonstrate how visual action methods can be used to
design learning spaces in the higher education context. In particular, that of “next
generation” learning environments. They argue that change requires the adoption of
frameworks that are participatory, inclusive and appreciative, that support change
through the co-creation by stakeholders of shared visions of their future. They consider
that this necessitates methods that interrupt normative, habitual patterns of thinking,
such as human-centred visual action methods (Sherringham & Serle, 2011). The authors
discuss participatory methods that promote the use of play and imagination to distance
participants from their current constraints; they are based on the creation of a visual
dialogue that disrupts the dominant and esteemed text-based forms of expression.
Practices include the use of visual cue cards and probes to stimulate discussion, role-
playing, and the generation of new meaning through adoption of imaginary personas.
Exploratory physical activities, such as those suggested by Sherringham and Serle (2011)
are considered to be important in the production of novel ideas, especially when they
occur in a playful environment that encourages risk-taking, suspension of premature
judgment, tolerance of ambiguity and an appreciation of ideas from broad
perspectives (Oviatt, 2013). These environmental characteristics align well with the
mindsets that are necessary for the implementation of Human-Centred Design.
Encouraging students to adopt positive mindsets

One of the findings summarised by a literature review on Human-Centred Design
highlighted that its intrinsic values are commensurate with the values that we aspire to
inculcate in our students, particularly in the context of preparing them for a rapidly
changing and unpredictable future (Foundation for Young Australians, 2015).
Specifically, the design process teaches students skills to “identify needs and define
problems; reflect individually and collaborate with a group; test ideas and evaluate
alternatives; make abstract concepts tangible; communicate verbally and visually; and
see meaningful connections across disciplines”) that are important for engaged
citizenship because they require an understanding of perspective and agency in
shaping environments and communities (Drake, Cerminaro, & Drenttel, 2011). From a
socio-emotional perspective, students are also likely to benefit from the methods of
Human-Centred Design. A study on the effects of the practice of prototyping found that
participants reframed failure as an opportunity for learning, were able to sense progress
and had improved beliefs about their creative abilities (Gerber & Carroll, 2011).
24
HCD for teacher professional development

As one of the largest employers in Australia, the NSW Department of Education has a
wide-ranging and deep level of in-house expertise. However, it could be said that the
house has so many rooms that it can be difficult to know just how to find the right person
to collaborate with, although you know the people in your own room very well. Finding a
way to make these intricate knowledge and relationship connections visible is a
complex problem.
Designing a knowledge management platform

A knowledge management platform, such as that described by Pascal, Thomas and
Romme (2013) is one example of a solution that arose through Human Centred Design
to address a similar issue. Interestingly, Human-Centred Design was combined with
Science-based design (refer to Appendix B) for the successful creation of an interactive
map of competencies to enhance knowledge exchange at a telecommunications and
information technology park. In this example, the project was intended to provide a
solution where individuals working in this industry cluster would be able to identify people
with whom they could collaborate and partner.
HCD for research

The association between design and research is inherent to the applied sciences and
engineering; the same cannot be assumed about the field of education research
(Bereiter & Scardamalia, 2008). There is potential for Human-Centred Design to bridge
this gap between theory and practice by treating issues not only in “belief mode” but
also in “design mode”.
Human-Centred Design has the potential to disrupt the hierarchy of authority that
academia and research sustains. The collaborative nature of Human-Centred Design,
whereby a team is composed of both practitioners and users, creates a blurring
between the expert/novice division; the mainstay dichotomy of traditional research. The
positioning of the research “subject” as a source of knowledge creates an
interdependency between researcher and the researched. A frequent reversal of the
roles of novice and expert throughout the course of the project facilitates mutual
understanding of respective ideologies which is necessary to conduct collaborative
projects, such as ARC linkages. In such situations, Human-Centred Design can be used to
address one difficult aspect of large scale multi-stakeholder efforts: internal
communication.
Developing communication plans for projects that involve

multidisciplinary teams
The establishment of multidisciplinary teams is prone to the complexity that arises from
differing priorities, “world views” and users. A communication plan would attempt to
bring all participants onto the same train of thought to establish common goals by
understanding the drivers for the distinct points of view of each party.
One example comes from a study that demonstrated the need to design a
communication strategy to coordinate the use of research findings within a broader
25
Human-Centred Design problem solving context. Since Human-Centred Design relies on

user research data and observations to guide design decisions, the ability to
communicate research findings to the project team and to keep this knowledge
relevant throughout the process is crucial. This communication effort can be envisaged
as a micro-HCD project within a broader HCD context. In these cases, the use of double
ethnography is considered to be a particularly useful technique (Roschuni et al., 2013).
The researchers suggest the following techniques to address communication issues:
investigate the research environment with a double ethnography approach, focus on
sites of inertia, facilitate the actionability and socialisation (of research findings) by
supplementing traditional project documentations with experiential learning.
26
How is Human-Centred Design different to

what we do already?
It is plausible to think that work conducted in the field of human services and social
sciences is de facto human-centred. It may be less plausible to consider this to be
design work.
While policymakers, teachers and researchers may be required to solve problems for
people, the process by which they arrive at those solutions determine whether these
solutions are human-centred. Treating problem-solving as a design challenge,
establishes a further distinction.
While other problem solving strategies may involve the user at some stage, the success
of a human-centred strategy depends on the importance that their involvement is given
and the manner that users are engaged. One example is the common practice of
consulting with stakeholders as part of project work – consultation is not by default
human-centred, although it has the potential to be.
A human-centred approach would start with the customer or stakeholder even before a
clear picture of the problem to be solved has emerged. It makes no initial assumptions
about the current state of affairs; instead it seeks to uncover these to understand the
problem as it is experienced by the customer. The user is placed in prime position
throughout the process as a source of inspiration; all decisions are guided by their needs,
limitations and context, which are kept at the fore throughout the entire design process.
Introducing the user part of the way through the problem-solving process, or using their
data at only a particular stage of the process does not constitute Human-Centred
Design.
The manner in which customers are engaged is another key aspect of Human-Centred
Design, which uses methods that are qualitative, holistic and ethnographic. Emphasis is
placed on developing a relationship with the customer that is empathic, so that
practitioners are able to get as close as possible to understanding the lived experience
of the customer. Interacting with the user solely to advance design work without an
interest in empathic understanding is not Human-Centred Design (Stoker & John, 2009).
This holistic approach can often mean that stakeholders who are not the beneficiaries or
intended users of the product are involved since they are able to provide insights into
contextual factors that may impact on the customer. The identification of analogous
situations is also a source of inspiration, as a way to think “outside the box” or indeed
outside the constraints of the current state of affairs. These attempts seek to ask what we
can learn from other contexts which may have characteristics in common with the one
that we are working with – it may be a case of avoiding a recreation of the wheel.
Even the term “user-centred design” does not adequately capture the intent of Human-
Centred Design. A user-centred approach restricts the focus on people’s roles as users,
rather than allowing this definition to emerge (Steen, 2011). This can be understood by
appreciating that the problem space of Human-Centred Design is often not known until
a contextual analysis of the situation is undertaken; it is through this contextual analysis
that users of a solution can be identified and held at the forefront of the design effort. A
27
research participant who is not defined as a user is still potentially very important to
incorporate into the research, since they may provide contextual information.
The architecture of Human-Centred Design differs from the linear, milestone-based

processes typical of academic research; this can feel chaotic to those experiencing it
for the first time (Brown, 2008). Human-Centred Design is necessarily iterative and is so in
a way that cannot be prescribed from the outset of a project. The iterative nature of this
approach reflects a focus on rapid prototyping, which requires the need to engage with
customers, revisit research findings, identify new areas of need and test the proposed
solutions quickly and informally.
Human-Centred Design offers the potential to address different aspects of the same
problem, ranging from physical interactions through to metaphysical questions about
meaning ascribed to a product or service. Giacomin (2014) conceptualises this potential
as a system of inquiry spanning the physical-metaphysical continuum, show in Figure 3.
Design solutions that respond to concerns higher up the pyramid offer a wider range of
affordances and the potential to create a deeper impact.
Meaning
(Why)
Semiotics, Communication
and Discourse
(How)
Interactivity
(When)
Activities, Tasks and Functions

(What)
Human Factors
(Who)
Figure 3. The Human-Centred Design pyramid (adapted from Giacomin, 2014)
Alternative problem-solving approaches to Human-Centred Design may provide a

better fit for solving particular problems or achieving a solution that fits better with the a
project’s goals. Alternatives include Citizen-centric approach, Science-based design,
Environmentally sustainable design and Technology-driven design. For a detailed
discussion of these approaches, please refer to Appendix B.
28
Conclusion
Human-Centred Design is a problem-solving approach that can be used in the field of
education. This paper has outlined a process and provided examples which
demonstrate some of the potential of Human-Centred Design.
Not all issues can be addressed with Human-Centred Design; it should be considered
one tool in the problem-solving toolkit. Founded on empathic methods and offering a
connection between theory and practice, Human Centred Design has an affinity with
the values of education and the field of human services more broadly, which aims to
serve users, customers and stakeholders in ways that focus primarily on human needs.
29
Appendix A. Related concepts

There are related concepts which intersect or are sometimes used with the same intent
as Human-Centred Design. These provide alternative frameworks from which to apply
this approach.
Frameworks
Human-Centred Design has been presented as a framework of methodological
approaches, each of which may be more or less suited to the particular characteristics
of the project and problem space (the area between the current and ideal situation). In
the examples, below, the actors involved in Human-Centred Design, the role they play in
the process and the nature of their interactions inform the framework for determining the
particular approach to be adopted.
Tensions
Steen (2011) bounds Human-Centred Design approaches between the dimensions of
discipline (between research and design) and actor (users and Human-Centred Design
practitioners). The appropriate approach needs to be matched to the particular needs
of the project. Figure 4 represents this methodological space.
Participatory design and co-design are intended to reflect a wide range of methods –
the former in which users of the product help to design it and the latter reflects the
collaboration between ranges of stakeholders in designing a product.
The lead user approach focuses on a select group of innovative users who currently use
the product or similar products but in ways that express insights into the potential needs
of a larger use group, in the future.
Empathic design typically involves observing users, role-playing, visual diaries and other
probes that encourage others to record their experiences and thoughts.
Contextual design is primarily concerned with the observation of people in their natural
environment to understand what people actually do, how they communicate, the
exercise of power and the role of culture, the artefacts that people use, and people’s
physical environment. A challenge here is being able to separate what Human-Centred
Designers know about users to what they know from users.
Ethnography is characterised by field studies that aim at a holistic picture of how people
and their actions are embedded in social and cultural contexts and how this relates to
their creation of meaning.
30
Figure 4. Different Human-Centred Design approaches, with different starting points and emphases (Steen, 2011).
Design Contribution Square

The Design Contribution Square has similarly been used to map different Human-Centred
Design approaches by representing each according to the degree of proactive
initiative required on the part of users and designers during design collaboration
(Keinonen, 2009). The five identified approaches are do-it-yourself design – using similar
principles to those described for Lead User approach (Steen, 2011), co-design, user-
centred design, reflective design (similar to empathic and contextual design) and silent
design (where design knowledge is mediated by design proposals without the active
participation of users or designers). Keinonen (2009) argues that the selection of
approach should depend on the proactive, reactive or inactive roles of the user and
designer engaging in Human-Centred Design, with a preference for guiding design
interactions towards proactive contributions from both types of actors. The Design
Contribution Square is intended to be an instrument which focuses on users and
designers’ engagement styles as a way to plan Human-Centred Design activities; shown
in Figure 5.
31
Figure 5. Human-Centred Design approaches positioned on Design Contribution Square (Keinonen, 2009).
32
Appendix B. Other problem-solving

approaches
Citizen-centric approach
A recent report by the McKinsey Center for Government, Singapore, presents the citizen-
centric method for delivering government services (Dudley, Lin, Mancini, & Ng, 2015).
The authors present four elements of implementing transformation efforts aimed at
increasing citizen satisfaction and reducing costs.
1. Measuring citizen satisfaction. The authors recommend using indirect survey

methods that analyse break points (at what point service satisfaction drops) and
combining this with internal metrics and employee insights to indicate
weaknesses in current service delivery.
2. Getting a detailed understanding of the entire citizen journey. This is described as
the entire journey that a person has when seeking a government service. The
authors recommend focusing on the journeys that matter most to citizens,
mapping out in detail what is involved in each of these journeys, identifying the
internal processes that shape these journeys
3. Translating improvement opportunities into front- and back-end solutions. Provide
notifications and status updates so that citizens have a more transparent
understanding of operations and increase the ability for self-servicing. Also ensure
that communication is polite, consistent and professional.
4. Thinking long term. This is done by increasing the capability to manage and
measure performance at points along the journey that are not currently available
and building a governance system that is accountable and that models policy
and operations separately.
This method is based on listening to citizens to improve services yet it is based on a

distasteful target of mediocrity; the underlying message of the report is that government
should aim to meet customer expectations without seeking innovative improvements to
deliver a service that is beyond these expectations. This message is commensurate with
the focus on cost-reduction and with avoiding disappointment as opposed to
stimulating innovation and achieving satisfaction. This corporate vision conveys an
antipathy towards government reflected in the suggestions provided to reduce its reach
and impact.
An alternative approach would instead view the customer as a source of inspiration, not
a burden to be endured and a potential risk to be minimised. This valuing also extends to
the design team, who are tasked with imagining new futures through the detailed
analysis of research data and the subsequent generation of concepts beyond the
imagination or current reality of any one user.
This requires a deeply empathic approach to understanding how the daily experience
of navigating our institutional structures connects and interplays with the customer’s
broader experiences and societal context.
33
Human-Centred Design offers the conditions to operate in such a problem-solving

environment by providing a natural home for this contextual and empathic inquiry
combined with optimism and imagination.
Science-based design
The abductive and experimental nature of Human-Centred Design is at odds with the
inductive and deductive practices of science-based design, although the two
approaches have been shown to be combined effectively (Pascal et al., 2013).
Science-based design uses the approach of grounding design propositions in research

and testing them systematically in practice. Science-based design has a strong interest
in developing explanatory and prescriptive knowledge that serves to improve
professional practice. Users need a thorough understanding, both of the rule and the
particulars of the specific case and they need the skills to translate general into specific.
The main differences between the methods arise from the degree to which users are
able to influence the design process.
An integrated design approach is proposed, practical and scientific knowledge are

combined. This iterative methodology involves the activities of creating problem
awareness, developing design propositions, creating scenarios of use, design and
developing artefacts, experimentation with prototypes and organisational
transformation.
Environmentally sustainable design

Giacomin (2014) considers that environmentally sustainable design is one of three major
design paradigms that frame the work of contemporary designers. This type of design
prefaces planetary impact over and above human meaning, as with Human-Centred
Design, and above technical novelty, which is characteristic of technology-driven
design.
The environmentally sustainable design paradigm highlights one of the limitations of

Human-Centred Design: its anthropocentrism. If the emancipatory potential of design is
conceived as a manifestation of our moral obligations, Human-Centred Design implicitly
accords humans beings the source of value judgments about how best to live; how best
to interpret need and respond to it.
Value can more broadly be understood as deriving from life including and beyond the
human realm. Stevens (2015) argues that life has value because life has intrinsic purpose.
Human-Centred Design stops short of being able to engage with this purpose because it
focuses on the needs of human beings. An evolution of this paradigm would
conceptualise how life more broadly may participate in this problem-solving approach
by extending empathy to non-human life.
Technology-driven design
Human-Centred Design is considered to be particularly effective at incremental
innovation which builds and improves on what already exists (Norman & Verganti, 2012).
In contrast, radical innovation, characterised by complete departure from the current
34
state of affairs and accepted practices is considered to be ill-suited for the Human-
Centred Design problem solving approach.
Radical innovation comes from changes in either technology, as driven by inventors, or

through research that addresses fundamental questions of new meanings and their
interpretation. Radical innovation occurs without any design research or formal analysis
of needs. However, once radical innovation had been developed then Human-Centred
Design is invaluable as a way of improving the outcome, especially to transform the
radical idea into a form that is acceptable to those beyond early adopters (Norman &
Verganti, 2012).
Economist Brian Arthur suggests that some of the most revolutionary devices of the 20 th
Century were not driven by user needs but by the evolution of earlier technologies,
driven by science, advances in engineering and tinkerers; user need is a notably absent
driver (Norman, 2010).
According to Norman and Verganti (2012), the reason that Human-Centred Design is
not considered to be amenable to the production of radical innovation is related to the
nature of the process. The process starts with an analysis of user needs, a search for
technologies or methods that can better satisfy them and then an iterative process of
rapid prototyping and testing, each cycle developing a more refined, more complete
prototype. Since users are predisposed to reflecting on what they already know and
their current meanings, reflection can lead to improvements but not necessarily radical
innovation. The authors consider this predisposition to be a fundamental limiting
characteristic of Human-Centred Design.
Three problems exist with this view. First, the version of Human-Centred Design presented
by Norman and Verganti (2012) is narrow in its view of the role of the user in the research
process and in its understanding of potential solutions. There is no emphasis placed on
the participatory nature of data collection – instead, research is “done” to the user.
Data analysis is similarly limited to an identification of existing “better” solutions, rather
than the creation of new solutions; and interactions are limited to existing semantic and
cognitive frameworks (Giacomin, 2014). This narrow view of the user and of potential
solutions is more closely aligned with user-centred system development design, outlined
by international standards such as ISO 9241-210 “Ergonomics of human-centred system
interaction”. ISO 9241-210 describes Human-Centred Design as “an approach to systems
design and development that aims to make interactive systems more usable by focusing
on the use of the system and applying human factors/ergonomics and usability
knowledge and techniques”. Since designing for a “user” usually involves optimising the
existing characteristics of the product, system or service based on a set of fixed
preconceived plans, this is characterised by limited degrees of interactivity, exploration
and learning (Giacomin, 2014). Yet there are plenty of human-centred research
methods which overcome these limitations resulting from being too close to the problem
such as the study of analogous contexts. The use of inclusive and empathic methods,
which treat the user as a participant rather than an object of study can lead to more
creative and meaningful solutions.
The second problem with this view is the failure to value the role of the Human-Centred
Designer as the ideator, as discussed earlier in relation to the report by Dudley et al.
35
(2015). It is the role of Human-Centred Design practitioners to bridge the gap between
researchers and designers on one side, and users on the other side, so that knowledge
and ideas of all participants can be brought together constructively. This ideation
process is critically collaborative and relies on design teams with diverse disciplinary
backgrounds.
Rather than treating this as a de facto limitation of Human-Centred Design, other

authors present this tension as the very challenge of Human-Centred Design which can
produce such effective results. Steen identifies two tensions: the need to combine and
balance users’ knowledge and ideas with the human-centred practitioner’s own
knowledge and ideas; and need to combine and balance a concern for understanding
current or past practices with a concern for envisioning alternative or future practices
(Steen, 2011). These can be conceptualised as sources of irreconcilable yet productive
creative tension rather than limitations.
Thirdly, this discussion and the examples provided by the authors are limited to the realm
of technology and product development; they are less applicable to system or social
design.
Regardless of these points of contention, this discussion highlights the reason for
adopting technology-driven design over Human-Centred Design as the degree to which
an intended solution should relate to normative expectations. Human-Centred Design
should be adopted in instances where an incremental innovation is being sought,
whereas the dramatic breakthroughs that constitute radical innovation are considered
best achieved by technology-driven design.
36
References
Australian Public Service Commission. (2007). Tackling Wicked Problems: A Public Policy Perspective.
Retrieved from Canberra:
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2008). Towards Research-based Innovation Innovating to Learn,
Learning to Innovate (pp. 67-91). Paris: OECD.
Brest, P., Roumani, N., & Bade, J. (2015). Problem Solving, Human-Centered Design, and Strategic
Processes. Stanford PACS, May.
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review, June, 84-92.
Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design Thinking for Social Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation
Review, Winter, 30-35.
Drake, C., Cerminaro, D., & Drenttel, W. (2011). Design and the Social Sector: An Annotated
Bibliography. Retrieved from Hamden, CT:
Dudley, E., Lin, D.-Y., Mancini, M., & Ng, J. (2015). Implementing a citizen-centric approach to
delivering government services. Retrieved from Singapore:
Foundation for Young Australians. (2015). The new work order: Ensuring young Australians have
skills and experience for jobs of the future, not the past. Retrieved from Melbourne, VIC:
http://www.fya.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/fya-future-of-work-report-final-lr.pdf
Gerber, E., & Carroll, M. (2011). The Psychological Experience of Prototyping. Design Studies, June
2011.
Giacomin, J. (2014). What is Human Centred Design? Paper presented at the 10º Congresso
Brasileiro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Design, São Luís, Brazil.
Head, B. (2008). Wicked Problems in Public Policy. Public Policy, 3(2), 101-118.
IDEO.org. (2012). Design Thinking for Educators. Retrieved from
http://www.designthinkingforeducators.com/
IDEO.org. (2015). The Field Guide to Human-Centered Design Retrieved from
http://www.designkit.org/resources/1 Retrieved from
http://www.designkit.org/resources/1
Keinonen, T. (2009). Design Contribution Square. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 23(2), 142-148.
doi:10.1016/j.aei.2008.10.002
Lee, J.-J. (2011). The True Benefits of Designing Design Methods. Artifact, III(2), 5.1-5.12.
Leinonen, T., & Durall-Gazulla, E. (2014). Design Thinking and Collaborative Learning. Comunicar,
21(42), 107-116. doi:10.3916/c42-2014-10
Lin, M. C., Hughes, B. L., Katica, M. K., Dining-Zuber, C., & Plsek, P. E. (2011). Service Design and
Change of Systems: Human-Centered Approaches to Implementing and Spreading Service
Design. International Journal of Design, 5(2), 73-86.
Moore, M. H. (1997). Creating Public Value – Strategic Management in Government. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Norman, D. A. (2010). Technology first, needs last: the research-product gulf. Interactions, 17(2), 38-
42. Retrieved from http://jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.html
Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2012). Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research Versus
Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues, March.
Oviatt, S. (2013). The design of future educational interfaces. New York: Routledge.
Pascal, A., Thomas, C., & Romme, A. G. L. (2013). Developing a Human-centred and Science-based
Approach to Design: The Knowledge Management Platform Project. British Journal of
Management, 24(2), 264-280. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00802.x
Roschuni, C., Goodman, E., & Agogino, A. M. (2013). Communicating actionable user research for
human-centered design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and
Manufacturing, 27, 143-154.
Sherringham, S., & Serle, S. (2011). Using Visual Action Methods in the Research Process. The
International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 5(10), 370-385.
37
Sklar, A., & Madsen, S. (2010). Design for Social Impact. Ergonomics in Design, 18(2), 4-5.
Steen, M. (2011). Tensions in human-centred design. CoDesign, 7(1), 45-60.
doi:10.1080/15710882.2011.563314
Stevens, R. (2015). Eco Ethics. Sydney.
Stoker, G., & John, P. (2009). Design Experiments: Engaging Policy Makers in the Search for Evidence
about What Works. Political Studies, 57(2), 356-373. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00756.x
Thomas, J., & McDonagh, D. (2013). Empathic design: Research strategies. Australas Med J, 6(1), 1-6.
doi:10.4066/AMJ.2013.1575
van den Broek, G. S. E. (2012). Innovative Reserach Based Approaches to Learning and Teaching.
(EDU Working paper 79).
38

The Potential of Human-Centred Design (Thinking) For Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Potential of Human-Centred Design (Thinking) For Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Potential of Human-Centred Design (Thinking) For Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Potential of Human-Centred

Design (Thinking) for Education

AARE 2015 | Fremantle, WA

Human-Centred Design is based on the philosophy that developing useful products,

Human-Centred Design requires critical and creative thinking. It is also underpinned by

The characteristics of Human-Centred Design present a potential divergence from certain

au.linkedin.com/in/lilianaructtinger paper prezi

Encouraging students to adopt positive mindsets ............................................................. 24

Introduction to Human-Centred Design

What is Human-Centred Design?

Human-Centred Design consists of three considerations: mindsets, necessary for being

The people in Human-Centred Design

“Users” and “customers” are interchangeable terms, depending on the context,

Figure 1. Individuals involved in Human-Centred Design

Learning from failure

Method Why to use it How to do it When to use it Collection Further

Use Recruiting Tools to develop a strategy to find the right

During the interview, notice body language, the surroundings

rather than the project team doing

treat communication activities that

Everyone is given post-its and writing material. Record all key

Each person presents their findings in turn by describing what

Ideally, this activity occurs several times throughout the data

Sharing then takes place where all team members present

You may also like to ask your customers to reflect on your

Each team member should adopt a mindset in which they

Bundle ideas together as a team to see how turn them into

Remember to keep in mind how you chose to Frame your

In the frames that follow, depict and describe the persona’s

Focus on creating quick work that conveys only essential

Encourage participants to provide honest responses,

Following this activity, conduct a Data sharing and synthesis

How might HCD be used in the field of

A constant feature throughout the process is that it be informed by research derived

Human-Centred Design could be used in work characterised as:

HCD for Government and policymakers

 School communities, teachers, and principals

Expectations placed on government employees vary between activities. Arriving at

It is particularly useful for improving customer service. Human-Centred Design is a way to

Figure 2. Impact potential of Human-Centred Design (IDEO.org, 2015).

Table 2. Human-Centred Design process for Government and policymakers

Revised business process

HCD in the classroom

What does this statement mean?

According to Bereiter and Scardamalia (2008), this form of questioning is historically

What is this idea good for?

Applying Human-Centred Design in the classroom is a way to flow between “belief

Designing digital learning tools

Informing the design of learning spaces

Encouraging students to adopt positive mindsets

HCD for teacher professional development

Designing a knowledge management platform

HCD for research

Developing communication plans for projects that involve

Human-Centred Design problem solving context. Since Human-Centred Design relies on

How is Human-Centred Design different to

The architecture of Human-Centred Design differs from the linear, milestone-based

Activities, Tasks and Functions

Figure 3. The Human-Centred Design pyramid (adapted from Giacomin, 2014)