Changes for page Tim - Self Reflection

Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -14,31 +14,38 @@
14	14
15	15	From the lecture slides I learned that age is an important factor for changes in cognitive abilities. Also, your lifestyle can have a huge effect. This can be explained by the term 'cognitive reserve'. This essentially means that with good life choices (much exercise for mind and body, healthy food etc.), the brain is more resistant to illness. When a person does get ill, for example with dementia, music can help with regulating mood and emotions.
16	16
17		-The second lecture talks about the Socio-Cognitive Engineering Method. The inclusive design also gets explained by what it should address. After that, the stakeholder gets explained which can be direct but also indirect.
	17	+The second lecture talks about the Socio-Cognitive Engineering Method. The inclusive design also gets explained by what it should address. After that, the stakeholder gets explained which can be direct but also indirect. Lastly, scenarios were discussed. Why they are important and how they should be constructed.
18	18
19	19
20	20	== Week 3: PAL ==
21	21
22		-What did I learn?: I learned about the details of the project and what our solution was. I read and learned everything on WikiX. I learned about how storytelling could help people with dementia.
	22	+This week I joined the team and they brought me up to speed. I was introduced to the subject and how it would improve lives of people with dementia.
23	23
24		-How did I do?: Since I joined later it was a bit hard to catch up within a week. But I do think I did everything I could do to get up to speed within a week.
	24	+In this week's lecture, I learned about how the PAL project used the SCE design cycle to build a diabetes management robot for children with Type 1 diabetes. The lecture emphasized the significance of stakeholder analysis and building value stories to inform our design, which we applied in finalizing our personas, stakeholders, environment, design, and problem scenario for the project presentation in Week 4.
25	25
26	26
27	27	== Week 4: First Presentation ==
28	28
29		-What did I do?: Gave feedback on presentation.
	29	+This week we had the first presentation which are teammates gave. We worked together on the slides and did a test-presentation after which I gave feedback. In this first presentation we talked about our problem scenario, personas, stakeholders and presented our solution. I think the presentation went well and our story was clear.
30	30
31		-What did I learn?: How to give good feedback and good present what we found and designed. Also learned a lot from other presentations which I think was very interesting. Also learned a lot from the feedback.
32	32
33		-How did I do?: I think I did good with giving feedback, but could have helped with designing the slides.
	32	+== Week 5: Design Specifications ==
34	34
	34	+In the lecture I learned about emotional expression with eye colour but also body language with the robot. After that I learned about the evaluation and different methods of evaluation. We learned about ethical issues and that we needed to have consent of the participant. Lastly, we talked about ontologies.
35	35
36		-== Week 5: Design Specifications ==
	36	+In our group we discussed what kind of evaluation we wanted to do. We agreed we wanted to do interactive storytelling vs non-interactive storytelling. The evaluation would be a summative assessment with a questionnaire. And, of course, we are going to ask consent.
37	37
	38	+
38	38	== Week 6: Implementation and Initial Testings ==
39	39
	41	+This week we worked on the robot First, we tried to understand the software used for controlling the robot. Second, we tried to use the robot and looked how the robot react to different inputs. Once we understood the software and the robot, we got to work. We programmed two stories for the robot: one about thanksgiving and one about a picnic. We tested the stories and found that some things did not really work. For example, the audio input did not always work. We decided that if talking to the robot did not work, we should be able to make the choice on our tablet/computer. This way we cycled through the design and came to a good working design.
	42	+
	43	+
40	40	== Week 7: Evaluation ==
41	41
	46	+This week we did the evaluation. We did our own evaluation together with two other groups so we could help each other. Ou
	47	+
	48	+
42	42	== Week 8: Final Presentation ==
43	43
44	44	At the start of this week, on Monday, we had our final presentation. We worked on the slides and discussed what was important to include and also what could be left out. A test-presentation in our own group was done to make sure everything we told was clear.