Embedded Files
Testing Method #1:
In this method, children (ages 2-6) from the TMS lower school tested our chairs by sitting on them and choosing the chair(s) they liked the best by placing a sticker atop the chair.
Observations (From Testing Method #1):
Children tended to lean to the side/sit on the edge of the chair; This indicates that our arm rests being used as a comfort as well as safety feature was a sensible and effective design choice
Chair appeared to stand strong even when children sat on chair (images 2-3)/heavy weights (images 5-7) were placed on the seat of the chair; Indicates that our use of safety supports (within the seat and legs of chair) were very effective
Once sitting in chair, children did not seem amused, nor did they put a sticker on our chair as the one they chose to be their favourite of the chairs presented to them; Generally, they instead chose the smaller-sized chairs (in proportion to their size)
Testing Method #2:
In this testing method, I interviewed a TMS expert in cardboard chair design: The one, the only, Mr.Bank. I asked him the questions below to determine the strengths and weaknesses of my chair's design and overall functionality.
Audio of My Interview with Mr.Bank: Criterion D Link
Questions Asked:
1. On a scale of 1-8, how effective was our final design in terms of aesthetic appeal and functionality? Why is this?
2. What are the next steps to improve the chair’s design/the chair as a whole?
3. How impacted do you feel by my chair design (ie: inspiration, overall impact of the chair's design)?
Evaluation
Critical Evaluation
Our chair was successful in the "Human Factors" section of my Unit 1 Design Specifications, particularly the "Safety (ergonomics)" subsection as well as the appealing to the classroom setting, described in the “Appearance” section. This evaluation comes as a result of data concluded from testing method #1. Under the "Safety (ergonomics)" subsection of "Human Factors", I discuss ensuring that the chair is sturdy enough to hold the weight of the child. My first testing method proves the achievement of such; Under observation 2, I describe how the chair withheld its shape despite significant weights (such as that of two 10th graders and the weight of the lower school children) being placed atop the seat. This comes as a result of supports our group used within the seat of the chair, shown below.
In testing method #2, Mr.Bank states, "It definitely looks like it belongs in a classroom", hence indicating success in the "appearances" section of my design specifications, in which I describe how the chair should best "adhere" to the setting for which it was created. On the contrary, our chair failed in displaying the creativity and boldness of the Montessori curriculum, which were highlighted in the “designer’s style/expression” subsection of the “Appearance” section of my design specifications. This is evidenced by my interview with Mr.Bank, in which he states that our chair is rooted towards a “conventional footprint.” Stepping away from this design style would have allowed us to not only improve our chair’s appearance/aesthetics, but it would have also produced a more innovative and original design, further making our chair “stand out” and appeal to the intended audience.
Needed Improvements
In terms of form and function, using dimensions that better suited our intended audience would have been more effective; In proportion to the chairs the children chose as their favourites, our chair was significantly larger, which may have been a reason why they did not favour our's. This was likely because my seating solution was initially designed as a bench as opposed to a chair, but we altered the product's dimensions prior to constructing it because we deemed it to be too big with its initial dimensions. To expand on this, our seat's dimensions were 30in x 25in, which is quite bigger in comparison to Baran's chair (one of the chairs chosen by the children in testing method #1), whose dimensions were 28in x 21in. Using these more appropriate dimensions would have allowed us to better meet the "Size/Weight" requirements of my design specifications, in which I describe adhering to the 50th percentile of child anthropometric dimensions (shown below):
As well (in terms of form), using more unique design choices, such as adding organic curves/shapes to the chair (instead of prominently using rectangular prisms and cylinders) or further utilizing lamination as a design technique, would have allowed our chair design to step outside of the “conventional footprint”, as mentioned by Mr.Bank in my interview with him when discussing the weaknesses of our chair, and would have also allowed us to better adhere to Karim Rashid's creative design style (as mentioned in "Appearance" section of my design specifications).
Impact on Client or Audience
Our audience was the children from the TMS lower school. The innovative concept of using a household material, like cardboard, to create a useable chair evokes the children to demonstrate their capabilities and talents within the classroom environment. The fact that this is an element of the very same IB-Montessori TMS curriculum in which the children are enrolled may also foster and inspire their sense of involvement within their education. Such sense of inspiration being drawn from our product, in particular, is presented in testing method #2, in which Mr.Bank, in response to question 3, describes how our chair is inspirational to him because of the stylistic design elements we added to our chair (such as the decorative element and reference to the Memphis design group, who work towards creating influential postmodern design). The children were also likely challenged to use their critical thinking skills; Particularly in testing method #1 when all of our chairs were presented to them, and they were tasked with choosing their favourites. This involved, similar to our design specifications, considering which chair(s) they were most drawn to (appearance) and which was the most comfortable (human factors). Our chair's use of decorative elements on the legs and front of the seat likely helped provoke such comparisons.
Page updated
Report abuse