2024
Gray, Colin M; Obi, Ike; Chivukula, Shruthi Sai; Li, Ziqing; Carlock, Thomas; Will, Matthew; Pivonka, Anne C; Johns, Janna; Rigsbee, Brookley; Menon, Ambika R; Bharadwaj, Aayushi
Building an Ethics-Focused Action Plan: Roles, Process Moves, and Trajectories Proceedings Article Forthcoming
In: CHI'24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM Press, Forthcoming.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Judgment, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, Design Theory, Ethics and Values, Practice-Led Research
@inproceedings{Gray2024-pt,
title = {Building an Ethics-Focused Action Plan: Roles, Process Moves, and Trajectories},
author = {Colin M Gray and Ike Obi and Shruthi Sai Chivukula and Ziqing Li and Thomas Carlock and Matthew Will and Anne C Pivonka and Janna Johns and Brookley Rigsbee and Ambika R Menon and Aayushi Bharadwaj},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/2024_Grayetal_CHI_EthicsFocusedActionPlan.pdf},
doi = {10.1145/3613904.3642302},
year = {2024},
date = {2024-05-01},
urldate = {2024-05-01},
booktitle = {CHI'24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems},
publisher = {ACM Press},
abstract = {Design and technology practitioners are increasingly aware of
the ethical impact of their work practices, desiring tools to
support their ethical awareness across a range of contexts. In
this paper, we report on findings from a series of co-design
workshops with technology and design practitioners that
supported their creation of a bespoke ethics-focused action
plan. Using a qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis
approach, we identified a range of roles and process moves that
practitioners employed and illustrate the interplay of these
elements of practitioners' instrumental judgment through a
series of three cases, which includes evolution of the action
plan itself, the ethical dilemmas or areas of support the action
plan was intended to support, and how the action plan represents
resonance for the practitioner that created it. We conclude with
implications for supporting ethics in socio-technical practice
and opportunities for the further development of ethics-focused
methods that are resonant with the realities of practice.},
keywords = {Design Judgment, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, Design Theory, Ethics and Values, Practice-Led Research},
pubstate = {forthcoming},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Design and technology practitioners are increasingly aware of
the ethical impact of their work practices, desiring tools to
support their ethical awareness across a range of contexts. In
this paper, we report on findings from a series of co-design
workshops with technology and design practitioners that
supported their creation of a bespoke ethics-focused action
plan. Using a qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis
approach, we identified a range of roles and process moves that
practitioners employed and illustrate the interplay of these
elements of practitioners' instrumental judgment through a
series of three cases, which includes evolution of the action
plan itself, the ethical dilemmas or areas of support the action
plan was intended to support, and how the action plan represents
resonance for the practitioner that created it. We conclude with
implications for supporting ethics in socio-technical practice
and opportunities for the further development of ethics-focused
methods that are resonant with the realities of practice.
the ethical impact of their work practices, desiring tools to
support their ethical awareness across a range of contexts. In
this paper, we report on findings from a series of co-design
workshops with technology and design practitioners that
supported their creation of a bespoke ethics-focused action
plan. Using a qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis
approach, we identified a range of roles and process moves that
practitioners employed and illustrate the interplay of these
elements of practitioners' instrumental judgment through a
series of three cases, which includes evolution of the action
plan itself, the ethical dilemmas or areas of support the action
plan was intended to support, and how the action plan represents
resonance for the practitioner that created it. We conclude with
implications for supporting ethics in socio-technical practice
and opportunities for the further development of ethics-focused
methods that are resonant with the realities of practice.
2023
Parsons, Paul C; Shukla, Prakash; Baigelenov, Ali; Gray, Colin M
Developing Framing Judgment Ability: Student Perceptions from a Graduate UX Design Program Proceedings Article
In: EduCHI 2023: 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education (EduCHI '23), Hamburg, Germany, 2023.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Design Judgment, Design Theory, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@inproceedings{Parsons2023-op,
title = {Developing Framing Judgment Ability: Student Perceptions from a Graduate UX Design Program},
author = {Paul C Parsons and Prakash Shukla and Ali Baigelenov and Colin M Gray},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3587399.3587401
https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023_Parsonsetal_EduCHI_FramingJudgmentAbility.pdf},
doi = {10.1145/3587399.3587401},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-04-28},
urldate = {2023-04-28},
booktitle = {EduCHI 2023: 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education (EduCHI
'23)},
address = {Hamburg, Germany},
abstract = {Making framing judgments is at the heart of design. When faced
with complex, open-ended situations, designers need to exercise
good judgment to identify the core of the problem at hand and
set the boundaries of the conceptual space through which the
design process will unfold. While framing ability is broadly
recognized as important, the factors that contribute to its
development in educational settings are not well understood,
particularly in the context of HCI education. In this study, we
collected data from master's students in a UX design program at
several points in time across their program journey. We
interviewed 11 of these students in their final semester, having
them reflect on how their ability to make framing judgments has
evolved over time. We highlight pedagogical factors relevant for
the development of their framing ability as indicated by the
students. Our findings also highlight the impact of framing
ability on other design activities and personal design
philosophy.},
keywords = {Design Education, Design Judgment, Design Theory, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Making framing judgments is at the heart of design. When faced
with complex, open-ended situations, designers need to exercise
good judgment to identify the core of the problem at hand and
set the boundaries of the conceptual space through which the
design process will unfold. While framing ability is broadly
recognized as important, the factors that contribute to its
development in educational settings are not well understood,
particularly in the context of HCI education. In this study, we
collected data from master's students in a UX design program at
several points in time across their program journey. We
interviewed 11 of these students in their final semester, having
them reflect on how their ability to make framing judgments has
evolved over time. We highlight pedagogical factors relevant for
the development of their framing ability as indicated by the
students. Our findings also highlight the impact of framing
ability on other design activities and personal design
philosophy.
with complex, open-ended situations, designers need to exercise
good judgment to identify the core of the problem at hand and
set the boundaries of the conceptual space through which the
design process will unfold. While framing ability is broadly
recognized as important, the factors that contribute to its
development in educational settings are not well understood,
particularly in the context of HCI education. In this study, we
collected data from master's students in a UX design program at
several points in time across their program journey. We
interviewed 11 of these students in their final semester, having
them reflect on how their ability to make framing judgments has
evolved over time. We highlight pedagogical factors relevant for
the development of their framing ability as indicated by the
students. Our findings also highlight the impact of framing
ability on other design activities and personal design
philosophy.
2015
Gray, Colin M; Dagli, Cesur; Demiral-Uzan, Muruvvet; Ergulec, Funda; Tan, Verily; Altuwaijri, Abdullah A; Gyabak, Khendum; Hilligoss, Megan; Kizilboga, Remzi; Tomita, Kei; Boling, Elizabeth
Judgment and Instructional Design: How ID Practitioners Work In Practice Journal Article
In: Performance Improvement Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 25–49, 2015, ISSN: 0898-5952.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Judgment, Instructional Design, Practice-Led Research
@article{Gray2015-qi,
title = {Judgment and Instructional Design: How ID Practitioners Work In Practice},
author = {Colin M Gray and Cesur Dagli and Muruvvet Demiral-Uzan and Funda Ergulec and Verily Tan and Abdullah A Altuwaijri and Khendum Gyabak and Megan Hilligoss and Remzi Kizilboga and Kei Tomita and Elizabeth Boling},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/2015_Grayetal_PIQ_JudgmentInstructionalDesign.pdf
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/piq.21198},
doi = {10.1002/piq.21198},
issn = {0898-5952},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-10-01},
journal = {Performance Improvement Quarterly},
volume = {28},
number = {3},
pages = {25--49},
publisher = {Wiley Online Library},
abstract = {In this study, we address the relative lack of rigorous research on instructional design (ID) practice via an exploratory study in which pairs of researchers observed design judgments made by eight practicing instructional designers in two consulting environments as they went about their normal work activi- ties. In our analysis, we sought to char- acterize their practice on its own terms, rather than through superimposition of existing ID models or frameworks. A nonprescriptive, philosophical frame- work of design judgment by Nelson and Stolterman (2012) was operationalized and used to frame two phases of analy- sis: identifying and coding design judg- ments and creating holistic summaries of the observed practice. We found that design judgments occur quite frequently throughout design, often in clustered or layered ways, rather than in “pure” forms. These judgments appeared to be shaped by factors unique to the firm, the role or position of the designer, and proj- ect, client, or other external factors.},
keywords = {Design Judgment, Instructional Design, Practice-Led Research},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
In this study, we address the relative lack of rigorous research on instructional design (ID) practice via an exploratory study in which pairs of researchers observed design judgments made by eight practicing instructional designers in two consulting environments as they went about their normal work activi- ties. In our analysis, we sought to char- acterize their practice on its own terms, rather than through superimposition of existing ID models or frameworks. A nonprescriptive, philosophical frame- work of design judgment by Nelson and Stolterman (2012) was operationalized and used to frame two phases of analy- sis: identifying and coding design judg- ments and creating holistic summaries of the observed practice. We found that design judgments occur quite frequently throughout design, often in clustered or layered ways, rather than in “pure” forms. These judgments appeared to be shaped by factors unique to the firm, the role or position of the designer, and proj- ect, client, or other external factors.