SUN JIAYUE (0376224)
PRJ62204 / Minor Project / Bachelor of Design ( Hons) in Creative Media
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.MIB
2.PROGRESS
3.FINAL SUBMISSION
4.FEEDBACK
5.REFLECTION
MIB
PROGRESS
Week 1:
The first week, as Dr. Wong was absent, a substitute lecturer took the class.
During that session, we formed groups for our project. The substitute lecturer
informed us that the available project options would be announced at a later
date. Jycee, Gaby, Lilin, Jennifer, Zhou Yi, Yaoping, and I formed a team and
created a WhatsApp group for easy communication. No more than two people from
each major are allowed in the group.
Week 2:
During the Week 2 session on September 29, our group seized the opportunity to choose our own project topic. After deliberation, we unanimously agreed that the theme of "period poverty" was meaningful, as it addresses a social concern and meets the requirements of the EPIL course, thus making it the focus of our research.
Week 3:
Following our meeting with Dr. Chong in the third week, our group held an
immediate discussion after class to promptly organize information and advance
our work, brainstorming several project ideas. To ensure efficient
decision-making and consensus among members, we subsequently adopted an online
voting method, democratically deciding on the final selected topic within our
WhatsApp group.
After finalizing the topic, we immediately commenced work on the presentation
slides by quickly breaking down the tasks and assigning specific sections to
each member. Following this, we efficiently held a short meeting aimed at
clarifying the scope and direction of questions needed for the forthcoming
interviews.
Week 4:
IIn the fourth week, we began to finalize the questions for our research
interviews. We collectively drafted 10 questions and planned to refine them
later. Afterwards, we collected feedback and suggestions through the Figjam
platform. Dr. Wang suggested replacing some academic terms with
easier-to-understand ones, such as replacing "stigma" with "shame." We held
a brief meeting after class to assign interview tasks and readjust the
overall work schedule.
The revised interview questions were then sent to Dr. Wong for further
review. Dr. Wong provided feedback indicating that the age ranges of the
interview participants slightly overlapped. In addition, Question 7 needed
to be revised as it was closely related to Question 6. After making the
necessary adjustments based on the feedback, we proceeded to complete the
interviews.
Based on the interview recordings and content from other members of the
group, Yaoping and I made a summary.
Week 5:
I completed all the interviews within the scheduled timeframe and uploaded
both the audio recordings and the transcript files to Google Drive. In
addition, I placed a screenshot of the interview transcript in FigJam and
wrote a summary based on the interview content. The completed consent forms
were also uploaded to Google Drive.
This Thursday, we held an online meeting and categorized the collected
interview content in FigJam. First, each member extracted key information
from their own interviews. Then, we integrated the key findings of all
members to identify commonalities.
Week 6:
After reviewing the consultation video and reflecting on Jenni’s feedback, I
recognized that user personas should be fictional representations grounded
in research findings. As a result, I proposed developing two separate
personas to reflect different gender perspectives. Using insights from the
interview data, I developed two user personas along with their respective
empathy maps.
Week 7:
This week, we had an in-person class. Dr. Huang asked us to put away all
electronic devices and refrain from searching for information. We were
instructed to fold a piece of paper into eight sections and participate in
a “Crazy 8s” activity. During this process, we quickly developed prototype
ideas related to our research topic and shared our concepts in the
WhatsApp group.
Through the discussion, we found that many ideas were similar, such as
creating a website about menstruation or organizing an educational
lecture. However, there were also some unique ideas, including designing a
board game, producing a short video, or developing a device that provides
sanitary pads.
Week 8:
In the next stage, each team member selected a specific section to present
and began preparing for the presentation. After consolidating all proposed
ideas, we conducted a voting process to prioritize them. The three
concepts that emerged as the most favored were the development of a
menstrual education website, the design of a board game, and a packaging
concept focused on period awareness.
Week 9:
During Monday’s class session, we delivered our presentation to the
client Dr. Chong and the lecturer Dr. Wong. Dr. Chong responded very
positively to the board game concept, which led us to further commit
to developing a menstruation-related prototype.
Later on Friday, we held an online meeting to plan the workflow for
the prototype development. The team was divided into two groups, with
three members focusing on the digital version of the game and four
members working on the physical board game.
Week 10:
This week in class, we received feedback on the slides and made
revisions based on Dr. Huang's requirements. After class, our group
discussed designing a board game. I designed the card styles and found
style references.
This Thursday, we met in person to assemble a preliminary but complete
version of the board game and carried out a pilot test with male
participants. I contributed by helping to develop the initial draft of
the question card content. All team members then handwrote the
question cards as well as the myths and facts cards.
Week 11 -12：
Over the past two weeks, Yaoping and I designed characters for the board
game. I designed the male characters, Yaoping designed the female
characters, Lilin helped purchase the spinning wheel and inquired about
printing costs, Zhouyi was responsible for designing the question and fact,
myth and truth cards, Jenni revised the questions that needed to be on the
cards and matched them, and she also helped with printing, Jycee and Gaby
designed the board game and purchased the gifts.
Week 13:
On Monday, we started user testing.
During the project phase, our group conducted an on-site research activity
within the university. To attract participants and clearly communicate the
purpose of the study, we set up a designated area by arranging a table,
designing a project title, and creating posters to guide students to
participate in the game and support our data collection process.
For the research design, we developed two questionnaires related to the
game experience. The first questionnaire was administered before the
gameplay, aiming to understand participants’ prior knowledge, attitudes,
and baseline awareness of the topic. The second questionnaire was
conducted after the gameplay to gather feedback on participants’
experiences, changes in understanding, and overall impressions of the
game. By collecting and comparing the pre-game and post-game questionnaire
data, we were able to analyze the impact of the game on participants’
awareness and learning outcomes, providing valuable insights for further
refinement of the design and the final research conclusions.
Week 14:
At this stage of the project, we organized and consolidated the content
from our previously completed work into a comprehensive PowerPoint
presentation. Based on the structure and content of the slides, we then
refined and prepared our presentation scripts to ensure a clear and
coherent flow during the presentation.
In terms of task allocation, Yaoping and I were responsible for
organizing and refining the User Journey Map. We first analyzed the
relevant data and insights presented in the User Journey Map to identify
key user behaviors, touchpoints, and experience changes. Next, we
transformed this information into a structured table using Canvas to
improve clarity and readability.
After creating the table, we summarized the content and adjusted the
typography, including font styles and sizes, to ensure visual
consistency and clear hierarchy. Finally, we reorganized and reviewed
the table to ensure that it effectively supported both the presentation
and the overall project narrative.
Week 15:
On WEEK 15, we gave our final presentation, and Dr. Chong was very
pleased with our work.
FEEDBACK
Interview Questions：
Based on feedback from Dr. Wong, the age ranges of the interviewees were adjusted to avoid overlap. In addition, Question 7 was revised due to its close connection with Question 6. After these revisions, the interviews were conducted.
Presentation slides:
The slide content should be concise and focus on key points rather than detailed explanations. Also, pay attention to the font size to ensure project staff can read it clearly.
Data Analysis：
Different survey results should be presented in different ways, which makes it easier and clearer to display the survey data and related analysis.
Reflection:
Experience
Throughout this project, I was involved in the entire design process, including research preparation, interview design, data collection, concept development, and prototype testing. Based on feedback from Dr. Wong, we revised the interview questions to improve clarity and adjusted the age ranges of participants before conducting the interviews. During the design phase, I contributed to developing user personas, empathy maps, and the user journey map, as well as supporting the creation and testing of a board game prototype. I was also involved in organizing data, preparing presentation slides, and refining the presentation content.
Observation
During the project, I observed that clear research structure and effective team collaboration significantly influenced the quality of outcomes. When interview questions were unclear or overlapping, the collected data was less precise and more difficult to analyze. In contrast, during the prototype testing stage, combining gameplay observation with pre- and post-survey comparisons allowed us to better understand how the design influenced users’ awareness and understanding. I also noticed that presentation slides with excessive text reduced audience engagement and made key messages harder to communicate.
Finding
From this experience, I learned the importance of research-driven design. Well-structured interview questions and appropriate data analysis methods, such as comparing pre- and post-survey results, provide strong support for design decisions. I also realized that how design outcomes are presented is just as important as the outcomes themselves—concise and focused visual communication helps convey insights more effectively. In future projects, I will place greater emphasis on research rigor, clear task distribution within teams, and the prioritization of key information during presentations.
Comments
Post a Comment