Participatory Design A2

7/25/2019 Participatory Design A2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/participatory-design-a2 1/55

1

HONE TUWHARETRUST

405 Participatory DesignRebecca & Mikey

A participatory design project in collaboration with the Hone Tuwhare Trust



2

ExecutiveSummaryThe Hone Tuwhare Trust is currently trying to structure and design a residency that is going, “to inspirepeople through the preservation, promotion and celebration of Hone’s legacy”. To identify the users,alternatives and possibilities of the residency the trust members took part in a participatory designworkshop. This was a way the entire trust could share their ideas and they could then be synthesizesto come closer to achieving a residency structure that they were all pleased with. The group tookpart in the workshop that was designed specify for them, it focused on addressing the issues aroundhow the residency was going tobe formed. From the three stageswith in the participatory designworkshop (exploration, discovery andprototyping) it was identi ed that thetrust member wants a residency aimedat either educational (emerging artist),international (established artist) or acombination of both (collaborative). Itwas also identi ed that the residencywould have a number of differentdurations over that year that relateto the different type of creatives that

will use the residency. Other factorsthat were recognized are identi ed inthe document. Overall the workshopwas successful and more workshops,such as a community and a secondsremote trust workshop have takenplace or have been planned to re nethe structure of the residency andde ne the needs of the stakeholderand users.



3

Document

Contents

Executive Summary 2

Document Contents 3

Introduction 4

Participatory Design 5

User Map 10

Workshop Purpose Statements 11

Workshop One Re ection 12

Design Strategy 14

Workshop Summaries 17



5

ParticipatoryDesignLiterature Review

Participatory design is known as acollaborative process that involvesstakeholders and customers/users to gaindesign insight. Participation is the mostimportant aspect of participatory designbut the fact that a project includes someform of participation does not always leadto a project’s success or to the outcomeexpected (Carpentier, 2009; Shapiro, 2005).Incorporating participatory design within adesign process is not always straightforward;there are many factor and elements thatneed to be identi ed before the participantscan even be involved. First the role of theparticipants within the participatory designneeds to be known. With participatory designthere are two key players, the facilitators/ coordinators and the participants. Theycan be used in many ways from “solving animmediate practical problem encountered insome participatory design context to wanting

to answer some wide-ranging philosophicalquestions about the nature of human activityin general”. (Miri Segalowitz, 2012)

Within the literature there still needs to bea speci c de nition of what constitutes aParticipatory Design process or programof research. According to Miri Segalowitzthis embarrassment of understandings hascontributed to what can be identi ed as agap in the way the research is conducted.Speci cally, Participatory Design projects

often focus on the speci c challengespresented in real world projects, such asthe speci c role of participation, proposingspeci c project techniques and styles ofproject management, or dealing withparticular individuals and situations thatarise within a given case study (Blomberg etal., 1993; Blomquist & Arvola, 2002; Carmel,Whitaker, & George, 1993; Muller, 1993;Muller, Wildman, & White, 1993; Reich et al.,1996; Thoresen, 1993; Wakkary, 2007; Whyte,Greenwood, & Lazes, 1989).

From the research done there are numerouspoints of view revolving around whatparticipatory design should include. Oneview is the political activist component, forexample social improvement that wouldbene t a whole community. (Cahill, 2007;Carroll & Rosson, 2007; Hanzl, 2007; Luck, 2007;Reich, Konda, Monarch, Levy Eswaran, & N.,

1996; Toker, 2007).



6

“Participatory Design is a eld of research and a style of projectmanagement that focuses on key interactions between people,technology, work organizations, and people’s work experience”.

(Miri Segalowitz, 2012)

Other views involve the stakeholder or useroutput, based on the requirements providedby that stakeholder (Bjerknes, 1993). This typeof design is focused on the nal user and triesto satisfy their needs. This type of participatorydesign is used more commonly as there isa higher chance for a company to gain

nancially. (Wagner & Piccoli, 2007).

Within this Residency project stakeholders,users and community are used as participantsand addressed. This is stepping outside thebasic framework of what participatory designis. Spinuzzi presenting a strong layout of whatthe steps are within a participatory designworkshop, which the current workshops arebased on. Involving his three steps; Initialexploration, discovery and prototyping.

This type of approach has had promisingfeedback and case studies have provideda better understanding of what techniquesshould be used. Virginia Tech, held aparticipatory design workshop in orderto nalize their laboratory design, they

believed “that participatory end-user designincorporated several tools greatly facilitatedour lab design activity. There seems to be aplace for both low and high-technology toolsthought out the design process”.(M.Snow1996).

From the research it is evident that user basedparticipatory design is taking center stageas the main application of participatorydesign and moving away from communityand interfaced based. Virginia Techrecently completed workspace design andprototyping using participant design focusedon the user. During the process, they had theopportunity to gain rsthand experienceswith the practice of participatory designas well as a variety of design tools. Theyde ned participatory design as “having its

roots in human-computer interface designand is a family of methods, techniques, andphilosophies that leverage direct involvementof end user throughout the design process”.They supported this statement with referencesto Schuler & Namioka, 1993.

Gaining user insight and input within the rightphase of the process (Grudin, 1993) enablesusers to share their needs and in uence thedirection of the designed product (Bødkeret al., 1993; Greenbaum & Madsen, 1993;Muller, 1993). Therefore participatory design

was used as a research method. Whetheruser involvement is a useful tool for facilitatingthe adoption of new technologies within anorganization or for a community (Kappelman& McLean, 1992), there are many ways inwhich users can be included in a processand still be de ned as participatory design.The design process may vary depending onthe needs of the project but ultimately theuser becomes a designer as a result of theframework that outlines participatory design.

The two types of participatory research(community and user) are de ned differentlyby the distinction of goals and outcomes thatare produced, but are they both participatory

design because they design with users ratherthan design for users. Having been involved insetting up both stakeholder and communityworkshop they can both be seen as users.The literature could focus on de ning whata ”user” is in relation to participatory design

and combining community, stakeholder anduser as one, as the same process are used toproduce an outcome.

There is literature surrounding theimplementation for a participatory workshop,this moves way from who the participantsare and looks at how to get them involvedand share their ideas. Communication of theACM put out an article directly related to theTaxonomy of participatory design practices.The information has been broken downinto sections to address the rapid growth ofthe practice and de ne the problems andchallenge them.



7

Taxonomy of Participatory Design Practices

Two Problems

Practitioner may need someguidances in finding techniques that

are appropriate for their particular

circumstances.

Practitioners, software developmentmanagement, and other stakeholder

may believe incorrectly thatparticipatory design has not beenused in commercial products, or ithas not been successful outside of

Scandinavia.

Resolve Problems

Set Guideline

Time During the development lifecycle

Appropriate group size forpractices

Who Participates with whom inwhat?

Some practices appear to bemore appropriate at certain

points within the development lifeCycle or iteration. The horizontalaxis of the figure provides a very

approximate guide to pointwithin the life cycle at which

each practice may be useful.

The concept of participation is

open to multiple interpretations.The vertical axis of the figurespans one way of the organizingthe various approaches, asking:

do the software professionalsparticipate in the users, world

(lower on the axis), or do the userparticipate in the software

professionals’ world (higher onthe axis? It is believed there is

value in both extremes ofparticipation, as well as the

mixture between those two formsof participation that occupy the

middle of the vertical axis

Different practices are designedto work with groups of different

sizes. Appropriate groups sizes areindicated by superscripted letters

for each category of practice:

T (tiny 2-3)S (small 6-8)

M (moderate, up to 40)B ( Big up to 200)

The group size recommendationsare in some cases approximate.

uller, M. J.,Wildman,. M., & White, E. A.993). Taxonomy of

D practices



8

“While the eld called Participatory Design has been around for over 40years, there are still many interpretations – and little consensus – over whatconstitutes a proper participatory design project or what forms a properParticipatory Design program of research. This has created a problem for theeld in which many elements – including de ning what participatory designmight be – are not clear”. (Miri Segalowitz, 2012)

To summarize, there is need for the eld toengage in strategic analysis of projects and toachieve clarity in how research design is to beconsidered, speci cally around the conceptof participation. Clarity, in this context,means stating clearly what the criteria are forachieving participation.



9



10

Use r Ma p

Private

Charity

Community

Government

Trust

Trade Workers Publicists/Promoters

Otago University

Applicants

Sponsorship

Community

Education Institutions

Selection Committee

Planning

Set Up

Indirect Use

Direct Use

Community OutReach

Charity

Education

Hone TuwhareExposure

Trust

InvestmentCompany

ConservationArchitect

Feasibility study

Otago University

Community

Private/Trust/Government

Funding

Trust

Residents

Selection Committee

Maintenances Workers

This stakeholder maps shows the people and groups involved

in the development of the hone tuwhare writers residency. It ismapped out in stages to show time and involvement.

The community outreach is the potential outcomes of theresidence onces it is developed.

This small diagram breaks down the different types of sponsorshipthat could be involved with the trust. It is broken into four maincategories.



11

WorkshopPurposeStatements

Trust Second workshop, Remote

The workshop aims to further develop the key users, using informationfrom the rst workshop. The focus will be on residences itself and whatthey residency can offer. The workshop will involve evaluating insightsgained from workshop one, research into possible opportunities andprototyping the residency in relation to time and duration.

First community workshop, Kaka Point

To initiate community interest in a creative residency in Kaka point andinspire a creative contribution to sustaining a creative community.

Embracing key words 9involvement, participation, in uences,community, creative, imagination, inspiration, sustainability)

The future of a possible writers residency forthe Hone Tuwhare Trust in Kaka Point provides

a dynamic and variety of outcomes.Due toits charachteristics of being a non tangibleproduct such as a tool. A Participatory Designworkshop provides a platform to the keystakeholders to express and establish possibleinsight to what the residency will entail. Posingkey questions of WHY, HOW and WHAT theresidency is gives participatory design anactive role in pulling out these ideas from theparticipants. Using workshops, participantsare prompted to think creatively and putforth their own ideas (Yamauchi 123). Inregards to this context, the participants arethe decision makers for the Trust and providea different perspective of idea from a speci cend user. The workshop lay context intotypes of residencys available nationally andinternationally, consideration of a wide rangeof prospective users and possible insightsgained from stakeholder collaboration.The Participatory Design method as statedbefore consists of three stages EXPLORATION,

DISCOVERY and PROTOTYPE. Applying thismethod to the Hone Tuwhare Trust workshop

and community workshops draws out keydetermining factors that relate to what thekey stakeholders deem to be importantin founding a residency. The exibilty andconstuction of a Participatory Designworkshop allowed a variety of insights gainedfrom individual stages of the work shop inaddition to the structured group work. Theiterative style of a work shop allowed theback and forth exchange of insights gainedfrom the exploration phase of the workshop,through to the prototype stage. Iterations areencouraged throughout the workshops toallow for critical evaluation and co-explorationby designers and stakeholders (Spinuzzi167). The particpatory design workshopwill give a stage through creative activitiesdriving comparible aspects of what makes aresidency and what will give identity to a HoneTuwhare residency.



12

Workshop OneReectionThe table below is a summary of results from the rst workshop (prototyping stage). Theinformation is presented in the four piles that the participants were asked to put the ideas theyhad written. 1 – liked the most, 4 – liked the least. Down the left side are in relation to time,funding and resident. The material shown was the most popular. The information shows that1Month - 5Months and 15mins to 1week we the most popular, fully funded, Maori/paci c andartists/writer were the most prevalent. This information then enforced the next workshop. There ection from workshop one informed the following workshop design and layout.

Insight Gained to Apply to Next Workshops

WORKSHOP ONE

TABLE OF

RESULTS

First Second Third Fourth

5 INDIVIDUAL4 COLLABORATIVE 7 INDIVIDUAL 7 INDIVIDUAL 7 INDIVIDUAL

Theatre/Film

Maori/Pacific

Global

Artists/Writers

Cooking

Teachers/Students

Young

15mins - 1 Week

1 Week - 1 Month

1 Month - 5 Months

5 Months - 8 Months

Fully Funded

10 - 15 K

A Car



13

EVALUATION

WORKSHOP ONE

IMPROVEMENTS

DEVELOPMENTS

Done at thewrong time of

day

Couldn'tcommunicate

prototypes

Needed afinal

Discussion

Understandingwhy each stage

is done

Interactive tasksworked well

Relaxedatmosphere was

beneficial

More planninginto set up and

other eventsgoing on

More time andexamples

A house or bar /familiar place

Keep interaction/interactive

Tasks

Evaluation ofeach stage -refine ideas

Purposesstatements

Send the workshop to them. This allows them to choose the

Atmosphere and the time that they apply to each stage.

Give them aworkbook to mapout their ideas and

make changes (truing them into designers).

Having a writtenexplanation andexample for eachstage will insure that

task provides desiredoutcome.



14

Design

Strategy

Trust Workshop

Participatory design is a exible research method;

there are multiple ways to incorporate theparticipants into the design process such asobservation, questionnaires and interviews. Spinuzzioutcomes are three stages system of establishing aparticipatory design workshop.

By informing Spunizzi’s design within the rstworkshop it created a simple method to identifythe pros and con of the workshop. The co-learningenvironment that was created by the systemworked superbly, the material that was desired wasproduced by the different stages of the system.

The participants themselves provided advice onthe workshop, giving explicit insight into their viewof the participatory design workshop, never havingbeen involved in one before.

Combining the information provided by theparticipants, their feedback and the observationsthat were made by the coordinators, a decisionwas made to experiment with the second workshopmaking it a remote workshop.

Second Turst Workshop and Community Workshop



15

The main factors that contributed to thedecision were time and money, consideringthat the seven participants (Trust members)live all round New Zealand. The bene ts of theremote workshop meant that the participantscould work at their own pace and not haveto travel to a speci c destination. The remoteworkshop was supported by the fact that theparticipants had already been a part of aworkshop. The participants had been throughthe steps before and had an understandingof the value of having suf cient time. Thesocial and co-learning atmosphere would belost as well as the advantage of discussionsand sharing ideas, this was traded for notime restriction and the advantage of havingcompletely individual ideas produced. By notbeing in a social environment is allows the

individuals to review work and change ideas,there isn’t any pressure to present ideas or toquestion others.

The bene ts of sending the workshop to theparticipants is that it can be personalized,adding an aspect of koha.

This remote workshop aims to further developthe key users, using information from the rstworkshop. The focus will be on the residencethemselves and what the residency can offer.The workshop is an adaptation of spunuzzi’soriginal system, still enforcing the three stagesbut opening up the participants to using othertools, such as Internet and the opportunityto review answers. The workshop will involveresearch into possible opportunities andprototyping the residency in relation to timeand duration. The desired outcomes for the remoteworkshop a part from the informationthat will be gained in relation to the trust,it will also established a base for remoteworkshop design and set up how it should be

implement. Not having suf cient informationon remote workshops, due to the gap itliterature other areas had to be reviewedto understand the best way to apply theworkshop.



16

Community Workshop

The outline for participatory design workshopwas focused on addressing the issuesaround how the residency was going to beformed. The participants were the Kaka Pointcommunity. The workshop was not targetedto any speci c type of residency, as it waspredicted that they would have their ownopinion on what they thought would be thebest way for the residency to be run. Theobjective of the workshop was to nd outwhat the community wanted from the trust,educate them on alternatives and creativepossibilities, then synthesize their ideas tocreate residencies scenarios.

The hope was to turn the community intodesigners, asking them to speculate waysof using the crib and any other aspect theythink would be rewarding for the users.The workshop lasted approximately 60minutes. This time was selected to keep theparticipants interested, but long enough todevelop ideas. The facilitators followed theworkshop time plan roughly, allowing extratime when it was need and making sectionsshorter when the goals were achieved.

As this was the rst workshop for thecommunity it was important not deviatelargely from to the plan, but from discussionsand looking over example it was understoodthat if the workshop plan wasn’t follow exactlyparticipants should still yield positive results bythe way the activities were designed.

The purpose of the participatory designworkshop was to interact with the communityand understand how they see the residencybeing used and by whom. The purposestatement was kept broad to allow for thecommunity members to communicate witheach other and share ideas without havingthe pressure to answer an overall question

in the workshop. The participants were alllocals; acknowledging this, there could be arange of expertise keeping the workshop assimple and straight forward as possible to giveeveryone a chance to share their ideas.

This workshop could not be followed outat the set time because of the setting andthe facilitators felt that in oder to gain themost form the workshop they wanted thecommunity to focus on the task at hand. Anew time to hold the workshop is in discussion.



17

Workshop

SummariesTurst Remote Workshop

It was evident that the workshop shouldbe self-contained, making the informationgathered easy to keep together and organizewhen doing the workshop and sending itback. The design of the remote workshop issimilar to that of spunizzi having three stages.The workshop will be sent to the participant’sinvalid addresses, containing instruction,the stages and the equipment needed tocomplete the stages.

The objective of this workshop is to evaluateand priorities the prototypes from the rstworkshop. This would start in the rst stage ofthe remote workshop.

Exploration

Inside this workshop, initial ideas developedin the prototyping stage of the rst workshopare the participants/user points of view. Theprototypes were mock residencies that thetrust members had put forward as potentialideas. The templates were analyzed andthen the most popular were then placed inthe exploration stage to be reviewed andranked. A more speci c view of what eachindividual participant wants for the residenceis identi ed by the ranking system with in therst stage.

The exploration stage routinely is when thedesigner and users meet to establish the ideasof how users work. This phase recognizes allthe initial aspects of the design problem orfocus from the users/stakeholders point ofview. They were aked to explain why they hadchosen them and what you would change ifyou could.

Dicovery

Stage two is the research aspect of theworkshop. Provided are four summarizedresidences from around the world. Theparticipants are asked to read over theresidences and then contribute three more.These can be found via Internet using tagsand key words that will be provided.

In this part of stage two the research ishanded over to the participants. Researchingthree residencies that are found that relate tothe Hone Tuwhare crib.

The key aspects are written down e.g. title,duration, disciplines, where it is, funding andoutcomes. Also the URL form the search bar.

Tags and key words that will be useful are:

• Grant• Scholarship• Residency• Emerging artist• Undergraduate• Post-undergraduate• Developing• Fellowship



18

Prototyping

The prototyping stage is about generatingideas. From the information in the last twostages. Four mock residencies are produced

that would best suit the Hone Tuwhare trust,being as detailed as possible including title,discipline (e.g. writer, photography, sculpture),duration, funding, outcome (what do theyproduce).

The next step will be to plot the mockresidencies that are produced onto a timeline.

The time line is the wooden base to thebox, this is to make the step interactive and

something new. The time line is made up fromtheir work and maps out how they could seeone year with four residencies.

Feedback

Questions in regards to the workshop areanswered. Rated by the following scale.

1. Did you enjoy the workshop?2. Was the workshop well organized and easyto follow?3. Did your prototypes communicate your

ideas effectively?4. Did you feel the workshop encouraged youto be creative?5. Do you see an outcome from this work-shop?6. Did you think the remote workshop workedwell?7. What could have been done to improvethe workshop?8. Additional Comments or suggestions:

Sending

The workbook will be sent back with the timeline to be analyzed. The box and pencil arekept by the participants as koha.



19

Community workshop

The community workshop was based on therst trust workshop. The time of the workshopwas cut down to keep the partiipantsintreseted and taking in ot account they

had given up their time to be apart of theworkshop. To entice community interestin a creative residency in Kaka Point andinspire a creative contribution to sustaining acreative community. Embracing key words( involvement, participation, in uence,community, creative, imagination, inspiration,sustainability )

Exploration

Wall Poster Exercise

Individually, participants will answer 10questions, having two minutes for eachquestion. Each question will be on newsprintspread along the oor.

Questions:What inspires you in Kaka Point and theCatlins?Where are the creative places?What do you like to read and write?What are the Clubs and Societies in Kaka Pointand the Catlins?What can a writer / artist / creative contributeto Kaka Point?What are the events / festivals in Kaka Point?What events / festivals would you like to see inKaka Point?What type of creative person would bene tfrom time inKaka Point?

Discovery

Trust Introduction - Residency Cards

Participants are given cards with a briefintroduction to Hone Tuwhare and the Trust.On the bottom half of the card there willbe a potential residency mock up i.e. Art,international, writers. From this informationprovided the participants will be askedquestions. The questions will be on theotherside of the card with a pros and cons list.Relating to the community and Kaka

Point.

Questions:How can this resident be involved in thecommunity?What opportunities can you see a creative

residency providing Kaka Point?

Prototyping

Residency Floor Plan

Floor plan and location in Kaka Point. Thiswas to encourage the participants to drawkaka point as they see it. Depending ontheir interest the drawings would be scaleddifferently. Giving a better understanding ofthe important places to the community.



20

References

Bjerknes, G. (1993). Some PD advice. Communications of the ACM, 36(6), 1.

Blomquist, A., & Arvola, M. (2002). Personas in action: Ethnography in an interaction designteam. Paper presented at the NordiCHI 2002.

Blomberg, J.,Giacomi, J.,Mosher, A., & Swenton-Wall, P. (1993). Ethnographic

Bødker, S.,Grønbæk, K., & Kyng, M. (1993). Cooperative Design: Techniques and Experiencesfrom the Scandinavian Scene. In D.

Schuler &A. Namioka (Eds.), Participatory Design: Principles and Practices (pp. 157-176).Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Bødker, S., & Iversen, O. S. (2002, October 19-23). Staging a professional participatory designpractice: moving PD beyond the initial fascination of 176 user involvement. Paper presented atthe Proceedings of the second Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction.

Carmel, E.,Whitaker, R. D., & George, J. F. (1993). PD and joint application design:a transatlanticcomparison. Commun. ACM, 36(6), 40-48.

Carpentier, N. (2009). Participation Is Not Enough : The Conditions of Possibility of MediatedParticipatory Practices. European Journal of Communication, 24(4), 407-420.

Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2007). Participatory design in community informatics. DesignStudies, 28(3), 243-261.

Ehn, P., & Kyng, M. (1987). The Collective Resources Approach to System Design. In G. Bjerknes,P. Ehn &M. Kyng (Eds.), Computers and Democracy (pp. 59-76). Aldershot: Avebury, GowerPublishing Company Ltd..

Greenbaum, J., & Madsen, K. H. (1993). Small Changes: Starting a Participatory

Grudin, J. (1993). Obstacles to Participatory Design in Large Organizations. In D. Schuler &A.Namioka (Eds.), Participatory Design: Principles and Practices (pp. 99-119). Hillsdale, New Jersy:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers

Hanzl, M. (2007). Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: areview of experiments and potentials. Design Studies, 28(3), 289- 307.

Kappelman, L. A., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Promoting Information System Success: TheRespective Roles of User Participation and User Involvement. Journal of Information TechnologyManagement, III(1), 1-12.

Luck, R. (2007). Learning to talk to users in participatory design situations. Design Studies, 28(3),



22

REMOTEWORKSHOP

HONE TUWHARETRUST

Appendix A Remote Workshop Booklet



23

INTRODUCTION

This remote workshop aims to further develop thekey users, using information from the rst workshop.The focus will be on the residence themselves andwhat the residency can offer. The workshop willentail evaluating insights gained from workshopone, research into possible opportunities andprototyping the residency in relation to time andduration.

There are three stages with in the workshop; theyare clearly labeled. Please do the actives in order,there is no time allocation to this workshop anddoes not have to be nished in one session. Therewill be instructions to guide you through each step,areas will be provided for writing when needed. Forthis workshop you will need access to the Internetand a pen and pencil to write down your answers.

Remote Workshop

“To inspire people through the preservation, promotion and celebration of Hone’s legacy” Kaupap



24

1EXPLORATION STAGE

MAORI / PACIFIC ISLANDERRESIDENCY

This residency is aimed at a promising Maori orPaci c Islander. They can come from any eld ofthe arts: writing, poetry, lm making or song writingetc. They have had to show promise in their eld.This could mean they have won a particular award

or shown obvious poetical. The stay of three monthswould be fully funded. The resident is expected towork on something of their choice, but also providea workshop for the public while they are there.



25

EXPLORATIONStage One

Residency templates have been developed fromthe mock residency stage in workshop one. Theinformation was analyzed and the most popular arepresented in this stage.

Read through the templates and analyze theinformation. Then in the space provide rank yourtop three residency from the residences provided.

Haiku

But, I protest my love for youisn’t minimal :

it is animal

Hone Tuwhare

INTERNATIONAL OVERLAPRESIDENCY

The international overlap residency is acollaborative residency. There will be two

residences involved, they will share the residencyfor one month of each of their 4 month stay (One atthe start one at the end). One will be international

and one will be from New Zealand. They will befrom a writing background both established. The

stay will be fully funded. They are expected to shareideas with each other and hold a workshop foraspiring writers while both of them are there.



26

TEACHING RESIDENCY

This is aimed at a group or one teacher/lecturerthat would like to develop a course or workshopfor a group of people either linked to the universityor schools. The duration can be from a weekend

to two weeks depending the time needed. Thefunding will be $1000 and the workshop,/class/ lesson have to pay tribute to the residency.

PhD RESIDENCY

Aimed at PhD students, it provides a space forthem to nish their thesis over a period of fourmonths. It will be fully funded.



27

PUBLISHING RESIDENCY

The publishing residency is for chefs or cooks thatwant to publish for the rst time. They would begiven $10,000. The residency would be over 4 - 5

months with the out come being a published bookwith references to the residency.

CREATIVE RESIDENCY

Young writers and musicians being the main focus,the residency would provide a place for them towork for one month, it would be fully funded. At

the end of their stay they would have to share theirwork, either as a performance or reading.



28

ART RESIDENCY

This residency is aimed at artists wanting toproducts a piece of work. The duration would be2 months with $5, 000 funding. The artwork that

was produced or another by the artist would go tothe community. They would also have to hold oneworkshop while they are there.

ANALYSIS

From the eight residences templates please rank your top three. Explain why you have chosen them andwhat you would change if you could. There are spaces provided to write the residency heading and thecomment on your choice.

Ranking



30

SECOND CHOICETitle:

Why have you chosen this residency? What would you change about the residency?

2DISCOVERY STAGE



31

THIRD CHOICETitle:

Why have you chosen this residency? What would you change about the residency?

DISCOVERYStage Two

Stage two is the research aspect of the workshop.Provided are four summarized residences fromaround the world. Please read over the residencesand then contribute three more. These can be foundvia Internet using tags and key words that will beprovided.

HAI U

Stop your snivellingcreek-bed:

come rain hailand ood-water

lanugh again

HONE TUWHARE

KK POINT



32

WOODSTOCK A-I-R

The Woodstock Artist-in-Residency Program isdesigned to support artists of color working in thephotographic arts who reside in the United Statesthat would bene t with access to time, facilities,nancial, critical, and technical support.

This activity is created with an emphasis onsupporting artists working in the photographic arts

who are at the brink of their careers and promisingtalent. WOODSTOCK A-I-R encourages participantsto pursue creative risk-taking in an environmentrich in cultural resources. Each year CPW offers 7residencies for artists of color and 1 “critical studiesresidency” for a curator/critic of color.

A-I-R’s receive:• Accommodations at a historic artist residence

located .5 miles from CPW and the center ofWoodstock’s business district.

• 24/7 access to CPW’s workspace facilities(including black-&-white darkroom, digitalimaging stations, and library)

• Critical and technical support

• Stipend for food and travel, and honorarium• Exhibition and related opportunities

http://www.cpw.org/create/artist-residencies/

BOGONG CENTER

The Bogong Centre for Sound Culture Artist inResidence Program (BCSC AiR) provides time,space, and an inspiring environment for emergingand established Australian and International artiststo explore and develop their creative endeavors

BCSC AiR strives to foster connections betweenartists and the local communities. Artists shouldbe able to work independently but also be happyto interact with residing artists and the broadercommunity.

2-4 week stay. Runs 35 weeks a year.

Disciplines

• Sound Art• Music composition

• Creative Writing• New Media• Media Art• Photography• Art Research• Curators• Art Administrators• Land Art• Environmental Art

http://www.resartis.org/en/residencies/list_of_

residencies/?id_content=5731



33

‘ACE

´ACE is an independent and non pro t artist-in-residence center in the visual arts located in the cityof Buenos Aires, capital of Argentina.

Its residencies, exhibitions, international projectsand workshops PROGRAMS act as bridgesconnecting foreign artists with artists from Argentineprovinces and all of them with the urban and social

environment of the city, one of the Latin Americacultural centers.

The main MISSION is to promote contemporaryartistic practices that involve printmaking,photography, design and new media. The programruns for three weeks at a time.

Disciplines and media• Visual Art• Performing Arts• Textile Art• Music• Literature• Educational Programs• New Media

• Animation• Printmaking• Curatorial• Film Making

http://www.resartis.org/en/residencies/list_of_residencies/?id_content=5731

The New Gallery

John Snow House, Calgary Alberta, Canada

Artists-in-residence will have access to the attachedstudio space during their residency. Residents haveaccess to all JSH living facilities including a fullkitchen, private bedroom and bathroom, laundryfacilities, parking space, and a back garden andbarbecue. JSH is within walking distance to grocerystores, restaurants, public transportation, and manyother local amenities.

The John Snow House is open to the programmingof public events including workshops, presentation,

screenings, or other on-site programming.Applicants are encouraged to address thesepossibilities in their proposals.

• Visual Art• Sculpture

• Ceramics• Dance• Theatre• Performing Arts• Music• Literature• Educational Programs• New Media• Animation• Printmaking• Curatorial

• Film Makinghttp://www.resartis.org/en/residencies/list_of_residencies/?id_content=5301



35

EXAMPLETITLE:

Jack Jerouac Writer in Residency

Provides four residencies a year to writers of any stripe or age.

Consists of approximately a three-month stay in the cottage whereJack Kerouac wrote his novel Dharma Bums.

Utilities and a food stipend of $800 are included.

Location Orlando, FL. A

URL: http://kerouacproject.org

TITLE:

URL:

Residence Two



36

TITLE:

URL:

Residence Three

PROTOTYPINGStage Three

The prototyping stage is about generating ideas.From the information in the last two stages. Pleaseproduce four mock residencies that you feel would

best suit the Hone Tuwhare trust, be as detailedas possible and include title, discipline (e.g.writer, photography, sculpture), duration, funding,outcome (what do they produce).

The next step will be to plot the mock residenciesthat you have produced onto a time line.(Moreinstructions to follow)



37

3PROTOTYPING STAGE

TITLE:



39

TITLE:

Mock Residence

3

PROTOTYPINGTimeline

The next step is to link the mock residencies youhave made with a year timeline. A timeline is

provided at the bottom of the box, please take it outfor the next step. This activity is to see potentiallyhow a year would be mocked up.

The timeline is split into the 12 months of the year,write the duration of the four mock residencies andwhere you would put them within a year.



40

J J S O N DJF M MA A

R1

R4

R3

R2

EXAMPLE

Painters Residency

PHD Residency

Writers Residency

Photography Residency

FEEDBACK

Please answer the following questions in regards tothe workshop. Please rate the following on a scalefrom 1 to 5 by circling the appropriate number.

When nished please insure that all the informationis placed back into the box to be analyzed.

Return address:Dr. Noel WaiteDepartment of Applied Sciences | DesignUniversity of Otago89 Union Place EastDunedin 9016NEW ZEALAND

Ph. +64 3 479 7511



41

FEEDBACK

FEEDBACK

1. Did you enjoy the workshop?2. Was the workshop well organized and easy to follow?

3. Did your prototypes communicate your ideas effectively?4. Did you feel the workshop encouraged you to be creative?5. Do you see an outcome from this workshop?6. Did you think the remote workshop worked well?7. What could have been done to improve the workshop?

8. Additional Comments or suggestions:

1 2 3 4 51 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 51 2 3 4 51 2 3 4 51 2 3 4 5

YesNo



42

THANK YOU FOR

YOUR TIME



43

Appendix B Community Workshop Worksheets



44



45



46



47



48

Appendix C Community Workshop Plan



49

Appendix D Community Workshop Sheets



50

Appendix E Remote Boxes



51

Appendix F Consent Forms



53



54

Participatory Design A2

Documents

Transcript of Participatory Design A2