We began by looking at various examples of interaction design on both physical and digital interfaces. We compared them in efficacy in guiding the user through the information and actions that were available. For example, we compared the interface of a set of stove top burners with that of a online shopping site’s promotion pop-up screen. Analyses of these examples were designed to generate more questions like why certain design choices were made, or whether they were really user oriented.
The next step was breaking off into groups to generate ideas on why someone would want to track plant health and different aspect of plant health to track so that we could also think about who the users of the app would be. Later we also broke into groups to discuss different aspect of the app like numeric data that it could collect, what motivational factors behind the app would persuade users to follow through with using it, whether more functions could come from geotagging and photo input. After we generated ideas on one of these areas of thought in our groups, we went around the room to see what ideas we would want to incorporate in our own app designs.
In my opinion, the idea of having to take all the considerations of what the app would do, why people would use it, how it would be used etc. at the same time was rather daunting to me so I found it particularly helpful that there was a group in charge of each of those trains of thought so that there were new ideas in respect to all of them. I also thought that having one group member stay behind was an effective plan because understanding the ideas jotted on the whiteboard was much more efficient with a person there to help explain the diagrams and notes.
I assume that the process we went through in this sprint is not too dissimilar from the process of ideation and solution that happens in actual app design (in concept at least; I’m sure there is much more time and detail devoted to designing apps intended for the market).