Using AI tools with students to support their design inquiries

Over the past year I have been exploring how to use AI in the planning and delivery of design inquiries. These tools have opened up new opportunities and workflows, both for me and my students. I started by using AI tools to support the delivery of content to learners by providing differentiated background text and resources.

Recently my students and I have been exploring ways of using AI as a research assistant, critical friend, or colleague. This has lots of potential in the design inquiry process. Students can use chat bots such as ChatGTP, Poe, or Perplexity to inquire into, jumpstart, or scaffold various steps of a design inquiry. This might look like:

The links above link to chats with ChatGTP and Perplexity, where you can see how a conversation develops.

Below is an example of a scaffold we are using with students to guide them in the creation of a persona in an Large Language Model AI such as ChatGTP.

As we have navigated this, we are coming to see the importance of user research to help frame and guide the AI. This powerful technology can swiftly offer generic persona templates, but creating a meaningful persona demands a foundation rooted in research. As such its important to guide students through a process that includes face-to-face interactions, observations, and interviews. These steps are vital for developing a nuanced understanding of user needs and fostering empathy, a cornerstone of human-centered design. The AI offers a way to consolidate, summarize, or present different perspectives - but it is not a substitute.

Below is an example of the kind of resource that we are working through with students.

I’ve shared more of these explorations and strategies on my Design and Inquiry site for design educators and students.

It is crucial for educators to recognize that the outputs of AI models represent nuanced interpretations influenced by the underlying training data. Therefore, critical thinking plays a pivotal role in equipping students with the capacity to formulate insightful inquiries during the design phase. This intellectual rigor prompts students, under the guidance of educators, to question assumptions, discern potential biases, and scrutinize the model's operations. Through emphasizing these analytical skills, students are empowered to move beyond surface-level acceptance of AI-generated results, fostering a mindset oriented towards depth, precision, and nuanced understanding.

Unpacking Key and Related Concepts in MYP Design

Concepts are what drive our MYP Design curriculum. They establish the conceptual framework in which the teaching and learning takes place. MYP Design units of inquiry must be organized around one of four Key Concepts (KC): Communication, Communities, Development, and Systems; and one or two related concepts. Using this combination, MYP design educators explore and develop some of the conceptual understandings for the unit.

We’ve been looking deeply at the key and related concepts in MYP design and considering how they are connected, and how we might unpack them for students. As part of this process, we identified connections between the concept and the MYP Design Cycle objectives. For example, the concept “communication” has direct connections to how designers communicate with clients and themselves.

Mapping the key concept communication to the MYP Design Cycle criterion.

To be honest, this was the first time we looked for connections between the key concept and the design cycle and it was hugely informative. We were able to make several strong connections and also generate some guiding questions about the role of these concepts in different parts of the design cycle. This has given us a different perspective on how these key concepts relate to the cycle, and also ways in which we can incorporate them into the teaching and learning experiences.

We took a similar approach in looking at the related concepts. These are the key drivers of the inquiry questions, so we looked at how they might connect with the three categories: Factual, Conceptual, and Debatable.

Many of the connections between these concepts and the inquiry questions were informed by conceptual understandings from the DP Design curriculum.

Below is the whole set. They can be downloaded as a PDF and used under a Creative Commons license.

Revisiting GRASPS: a model for project based learning

A while ago we started using GRASPS models to develop our units in MYP and DP design. I wrote about our initial work with this model a few years ago. Since then, we have used it to develop all our units in design and have noticed some meaningful results and benefits for both students and teachers.

What is GRASPS?

GRASPS is a model for demonstrating performance of understanding using authentic assessments. It is one of many performance of understanding models, but is ideally suited to the kind of project-based inquiries we do in design. GRASPS represent a framework for organizing, delivering, and assessing a project-based assessment. The assessment associated with the inquiry is structured around the following expectations and goals.

  • Goal: A definition of the problem or goal

  • Role: Define the role of the student

  • Audience: Identify the target audience

  • Situation: This is the context or scenario of the goal

  • Product: What is created and why it will be created

  • Standards: Rubrics or success criteria

Benefits of GRASPS

Over the years of organizing and implementing our units this way, we have noticed some benefits for students and teachers. Many of these observations are from the perspective of an MYP or DP classroom, but the underlying ideas would benefit any project-based learning experience.

From the teacher’s perspective, we have noticed:

  • Develop authentic learning experiences: The overall GRASPS structure allows us to identify more authentic learning experiences that drive our units of inquiry.

  • Clearer presentation of the purpose and content of a project-based inquiry: Because of the way a GRASPS inquiry is framed, communication of the goals, content, and purpose of the inquiry is clearer. During planning it is easier for teachers to plan and develop more authentic units. This has become particularly important for collaboration between teachers, as most our units are planned to be taught by several people.

  • Clarify the roles, perspectives, and responsibilities of students: The GRASPS model clarifies these aspects of the inquiry. Teachers can choose resources, learning experiences, and content to support the students’ development in these areas. In particular, the Role has become an important part of how we frame units to students (see below)

  • Communicate the expectations of the inquiry: The structure allows for clear communication of the rubric, assessment expectations, as well as the approaches to learning that students need to utilize to be successful. This has been particularly important in recent times when some of our teaching and learning has shifted to remote

  • Guide the selection of learning experiences, content and skills necessary for success: Through planning a unit around the GRASPS framework, teachers can think critically and creatively about the type of learning experiences that are needed to support the inquiry. We have started to look more broadly at the skills that re needed, with a particular focus on the Approaches to Learning (ATLs).

New understandings about GRASPS

Since employing GRASPS to guide our unit development, we have come to some understandings about aspects of the model that helping us strengthen the delivery of our units.

Role

In the past, we often defined the role of the student in a very brief way - almost like a job title. You will be a a designer, engineer, marketer, etc. However we found that this often relied on student’s assumptions of what the role is. The role is very important as it defines the perspective from which the student approaches the task.

Now, we spend some time considering the role of the student in this inquiry, the skills they need, and how this role is closely connected to the Goal, Audience, and Product. For example, in a unit that defines the role as a design researcher, we spend time in class unpacking what this role entails, and how it connected to the goal, audience, and product. We discuss and highlight the skills, perspectives, and approaches that a person in this role might need to draw upon in order to be successful.

Some questions we ask in the planning stages to help us better identify and describe the role include:

  • What are some authentic roles that are related to the goal or discipline?

  • How will students understand the scope and expectations of the role?

  • What prior knowledge about the role will students have?

  • What skills and knowledge will students need to be successful in this role?

  • Is there a role model that students can refer to or meet in person?

Audience

The audience provides much context to the inquiry. To this end, the audience helps teachers identify, organize, and prioritize the content and skills that students need in order to meet the needs of the audience. This goes beyond just satisfying the immediate needs of the audience, but also includes understanding the audience from a user-centered design perspective and empathizing with their needs in order to develop a more successful design solution. We’ve started to use User-Task-Environment analysis as part of the research approach. In Design, this approach also supports our research goals, and helps students think more broadly about the problem.

Some guiding questions we ask include:

  • What is the relationship between the audience and the role?

  • What are the defining characteristics of the audience, and how might these influence the skills and knowledge needed by students to be successful?

Developing stronger GRASPS assessments

To support teachers I’ve created a guide to developing a GRASPS assessment and incorporating into MYP and DP units of inquiry.

Teardown analysis

Inspiration

Source: Things Come Apart, Todd Mclellan

Source: Things Come Apart, Todd Mclellan

A few years ago I came across photographer Todd Mclellan’s book Things Come Apart, a beautiful visual reflection on the objects around us. His photographs of a disassembled computer, bicycle, typewriter, and according show the intricacy and complexity of the objects. This book inspired me to develop a unit of inquiry around disassembly and exploration of objects, which provides an opportunity for students to think critically about how design decisions of materials and processes impact sustainability.



Concepts

Prior to the activity, students reviewed and explored DP Design Technology content areas such as:

  1. Resources and Reserves and how these impact the material choice and sustainability

  2. Energy utilization and storage and how a product uses energy impacts design choices and how and why batteries may be used

  3. Waste mitigation strategies and these can guide designers into optimizing the sustainability of a product

  4. Design for manufacturing (DfM) and how various strategies such as Design for Assembly (DfA) and Design for Disassembly (DfD) can be utilized by designers to guide the materials, and processes used in producing a design.

  5. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) as a tool used by designers to assess the impact of a design on sustainability.

  6. Right to Repair principles were examined and discussed.

Taking things apart

By far this was the most engaging part of the inquiry. Over two days students worked in teams to disassemble and document a product. For many, this was the first time disassembling an object. There was a liberating thrill in taking apart an object. These days were filled with lots of “ah-ha” and “wow” moments.

Analyzing and Documenting

Students used the Ecolizer online LCA tool, made available for free by the Belgian government, to analyze their product and determine a score. Using the score, and the concepts covered earlier, they analyzed their products and presented their analysis in the form of a poster.

To aid and guide their analysis, students organized the content of their poster using a Parts-Purposes-Complexities thinking routine. We use this routine frequently and students are familiar with it as a tool for exploring and organizing knowledge. The Take Apart thinking routine from Agency By Design was also used to structure some of the activities, discussion

Presenting

The A2-size poster format was useful in that it allowed students to practice being concise and specific in their analysis, skills that they need for their Internal Assessment (IA). Students experimented with the layout and graphic design to communicate their knowledge and understanding.


Next steps

One of the challenges we faced were with the calculation of electronic materials. Many of the objects had electronic components (circuit boards, motors, power supplies…) in them. Finding an online LCA calculator that could accurately calculate this was a challenge. As we had just watched The Story of Stuff: The story of electronics, students were keen to address this issue head on.

Determining the specific material was also challenging. Unless a component was specifically labelled with its material, it was difficult to go beyond a broad classification of either glass, metal or plastic. Many educated guesses were made, and the discussion about the importance of labels to aid recycling and repair was valuable and eye-opening.

GRASPS and Authenticity

When teaching design, we are asking the student to adopt the role of the designer. But for many, that is an unclear role. Students may be unclear about the aspects of their role and how to be successful in it.

A bigger question is the authenticity of the task-- Are we asking students to do something that would be done in the real world outside of the classroom? McTighe and Wiggins define a performance task as authentic if it "reflects the way in which people in the world outside of school must use knowledge and skill to address various situations where expertise is tested or challenged." This distinction helps frame the significance and relevance of the task for the student. Students can see the value of learning the content and developing a solution.

Having performance tasks that are clear and authentic also allow for better assessment - the expectations are clear and we (the teachers) can see evidence of transfer of knowledge and understanding--the synthesis of knowledge into a design solution.

Our program has been thinking about the authenticity of our tasks and units as we continue to develop the conceptual inquiry nature of our program. We have started to use the G.R.A.S.P.S. model to structure performance tasks to clarify expectations and goals, both for the teachers and the students. The assessment associated with the inquiry is structured around the following expectations and goals.

  • Goal: A definition of the problem or goal
  • Role: Define the role of the student
  • Audience: Identify the target audience
  • Situation: This is the context or scenario of the goal
  • Product: What is created and why it will be created
  • Standards: Rubrics or success criteria

A recent unit title Designing Like You Give A Damn, used this model to develop an open inquiry into issues of sustainability and global importance. On the Unit website, parts of the grasp model are made clear for the students.

Screen Shot 2018-06-21 at 7.54.58 AM.png

We are looking to further develop these as the framework for developing our units and assessment pieces, with the goal of moving towards authentic assessment and authentic tasks.