Exploring Fieldwork 2015, WS2

Aditya Pawar, Ume Institute of Design

RHETORICAL PRECIS
#1 PROBES, INVENTIVE METHODS

The authors Kirsten Boehner et al. of the chapter Probes from the book
Inventive methods assert that probes provide designers and participants
an explorative and provocative device to think together leading to a
design process with rich exchanges and imaginative outcomes as
compared to traditional social science methods.
They support this argument by demonstrating sample probes from the
project PRESENCE, highlighting the probes as undermining traditional
research roles of researcher vs. subject and data gathering scientific
methods.
Their purpose is to embrace ambiguity (and absurdity) in the design
process by leaving behind the mindset of comprehensiveness, replicability,
accountability and going towards a mindset of playful, intuitive exchanges.
The design of the probes enables these qualities in their form, material
and communication.
The audience for this chapter seems to be designers, social scientist and
other professions interested in design research.

#2 TOOLS AND MOVEMENTS OF ENGAGEMENT, DESIGN

ANTHROPOLOGY

The author Kyle Kilbourn of the chapter Tool and movements of

engagement from the book Design Anthropology argues that design
anthropology posits a way of specific way of knowing that is at the same
time perceiving and intervening, theory and practice and enables the
researcher to explore and guide the possible in the existing.
He supports this argument by arguing for tools such as perceptual
synthesis, experience juxtaposition and potential relationing. Further
describing design anthropology tools as embodied tangible performances.
The purpose of the author is to advocate for a way of knowing (that he
terms moving-out) that is experimental, forward leaning practice where
design as making and anthropology as knowing generate theory
collaboratively.
The chapter has been written for designers, anthropologist and design
anthropologists.

#3 STAYING OPEN TO INTERPRETATION: ENGAGING MULTIPLE

MEANING IN DESIGN AND EVALUATION
In this paper the authors Phoebe Sengers and Bill Gaver argue that
multiple streams of knowledge and their heterogeneous interpretations
can coexist and provide a suitable space from which the complexity,
dynamics and interplay of user, system, designer interpretations can be

Exploring Fieldwork 2015, WS2

Aditya Pawar, Ume Institute of Design

addressed. The paper further criticizes the often-perpetuated belief in the

HCI community of the need for a single authoritative interpretation.
This claim is supported by referring to STS literature and emerging design
practices like participatory design where the authors point out that
technologies lend themselves to many different interpretations besides
those intended by their makers. Thus, their meanings are stabilized only
over time through negotiations, interaction and even conflict between all
actors. In the design of open interpretative systems, the role of design
shifts from deciding on and communicating an interpretation to supporting
and intervening in the processes of designer, system, user, and
community meaning-making through a variety of tactics described in the
paper. Here the authors see evaluation also as a form of interpretation.
The audience for this paper is primarily HCI designers but the general
language implies it is meant for a larger audience of researchers.