Individual Contribution

GROUP ROLE

In Geriambience group, my group role is the designer of livable bathroom. And in order to achieve the project objective, my responsibility in this project is to design the bathroom space and create sketchup model for our bathrooms.

INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION

In terms of individual contribution, the following timetable demonstrates what I've done so far in this project. Due to the particularity of my task, my design and sketchup model should always be finished first and as soon as possible to help our group members develop and test programs. Thus, my individual task actually ended up at week 10, and I helped finalize ducomentation and wikia wepages since week 11.

Timetable

Week 2:           Write Back Brief
Week 3:           Check Australian Standard
Week 4:           Mood board, Concept, Floor Plan
Easter Break:  Bathroom Plan, Rough Sketch Up Model
Week 6:           Develop Model (See Individual Milestone)
Week 7:           Change Design, Select Caroma Furniture ( See individual Milestone)
Week 8:           Keep Develop Sketchup Model (See individual Milestone)
Week 9:           Detailed material list
Week 10:         Equipment detailed drawings
Week 11:         NON WORKING WEEK
Week 12:         Upload wiki (page 1, page 2), help set up fake bathroom
Week 13:         Group presentation

To avoid overlapping, The images below were well selected final images to sum up indivdual work. Detailed infomation can be checked on the timetable above.

GROUP REFLECTION

Collaboration is the aim of both this project and this course. For our group, the communication between each member is not that much, however we successfully collaborate everyone's skills into our project. By combining my design and rendering skills, Dan and Allen's 3D and software skills, Mathew and Steve's programming skills, we successfully achieve our group objectives although there's a slight difference from back brief. But more importantly, during this collaboration, what I learned is how to explore everyone's unique skill and how to effectively utilize and combine those different abilities. We might have some issues and misunderstanding during the session, but we counquered them, and these experiences is much important than the knowledge I learned.

Week 10 Progress

In this week, my design part nearly meet the end.

So during this week, I made two detailed drawings abou the sensative basin and toilet to help audience understand how the equipment works.

Week 10 Presentation Reflection 2

Group Presentation 4: Conflict (Group Name: Kinecting the Boxes)

Grade: CR

Assessment Criteria

• CLARITY OF THE ORAL PRESENTATION_ Does the oral presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?

Good oral presentation and theoretical research. Audience can easily understand the concept of conflict and how it works among people. Presentation was clear and precise and also easy to follow.

• CLARITY OF THE WRITTEN PRESENTATION_ Does the Written presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?

Written presentation was clear, but text was too small to read. I can see that they want to make it detail, but for presentation, long sentence was not a good idea ti present what they want. Short phrase was always the best way to communicate with audience.

• DISTINCTIVENESS AND SPECIFICITY OF THE EXAMPLES_ Are the examples used to elaborate the particular theme of collaboration distinctive and specific?

Good circumstances graph in conflict escalate. This flow graph is quite impressive to audience. But this is t=quite conceptual. They didn’t present many examples and this made presentation unattractive. We want to hear more about the conflict issues in their group.

• REFERENCING_ Are all sources of content properly referenced?

Yes, they had references.

• THE CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT_ Is it clear that the students have a strong grasp of the conceptual context of their theme of collaboration?

They had a general concept about what conflict is. Again, I still recommend them a link it with their project. Using what they learned might be more convincing.

• THE STILL IMAGE_ Do the still images support and extend our understanding of the Group Theoretical Position the students are presenting?

There was not much images in this presentation and I understand this was not easy to find an image relate to this topic.

Week 10 Presentation Reflection 1

Group Presentation 4: Conflict (Group Name: DCLD)

Grade: CR

Assessment Criteria

• CLARITY OF THE ORAL PRESENTATION_ Does the oral presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?

Generally, it was clear and this group present a good theory of what conflict is. And again, I recommend them to give a brief introduction and clear transfer between each member. This will definitely made the whole presentation clear and impressive.

• CLARITY OF THE WRITTEN PRESENTATION_ Does the Written presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?

The majority of the written presentation was quite good. But some of their group members were reading the powerpoint slides which was not good. Also, their PPT slides were not fluent. During the presentation, their slides changed frequently and that was a little bit annoying for audience.

• DISTINCTIVENESS AND SPECIFICITY OF THE EXAMPLES_ Are the examples used to elaborate the particular theme of collaboration distinctive and specific?

Generally, their examples were good, especially their models of conflict and also the flow graph of how conflict react to others. That helped audience to understand conflict conceptually. The weakness was that images was too small to read, in most cases, I can only hear but not read. However, They didn’t relate those concept into their own group which was the most impressive part we want to hear.

• REFERENCING_ Are all sources of content properly referenced?

Yes, they had references but beware of the reference format.

• THE CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT_ Is it clear that the students have a strong grasp of the conceptual context of their theme of collaboration?

They had a general concept about what conflict is. But during their presentation, I found their collaboration was not good enough. Some group members didn’t do much preparations than others.

• THE STILL IMAGE_ Do the still images support and extend our understanding of the Group Theoretical Position the students are presenting?

To be honest, there was nothing much relates to image. But I really appreciate their flow graph that demonstrates conflict between people.

Week 9 Progreess

During week 9, bathroom design almost come up with the end because our team need to save time for our group members to develop programming and test our programs within our bathroom model.

Thus, in this week, my task was to produce a material list for my group mates in order to attach material effects in crysis level. The image below is my material list.

Individual Mile Stone

Group Role (GeriAmbience):

Our group is designing an interactive  bathroom for elders. In our group, our collaboration is slightly different from other groups. We have two sub groups. Steven and Mathew is in charge of Kinnect and programming. Allen, Dan and me are in charge of bathroom design and 3D model making. At the end of Easter Break, our design group finished a first rough model to let programing group to test their programming. In the next 2~3 weeks, design group kept develop design and model and will finalised before week 10. During this period, programming group kept develop their programming and after we pass finalised model to them, they will directly insert their programs into our model. In the last two weeks, whole group will collaborate each other and build kinnect models.

Individual Task:

 In terms of my individual responsibilities in our group, my obligation is to design the bathroom for our group and select all the furnitures and material that needed in our group. To be more specific, I need to build a 3D environment in Google SketchUp and lable all the textures and materials that I used. In order to make sure our group schedule is under control, my task is always the first one that need to be finished.

Individual Mile Stone:

Since my responsibility is to create a 3D environment in sketch up and make everything as real as possible. I made a detailed schedule to finish my task.
What I did so far is check all the required regulations in Australian Standard, and selecting suitable materials and furnitures for our bathroom and also confirm a design style.

The image below is my time line that demonstrate what I did so far. Actually in week 7, Russell pointed out some weakness of our design so in here I'm just gonna upload my latest designs in week 8. Previous works can be checked in my previous blogs.

                        Time Line

                        Week 2:    Write Back Brief

                        Week 3:    Check Australian Standard

                        Week 4:    Mood Board, Concept, Floor Plan

                Easter Break:    Bathroom Plan, Rough Sketch Up Model

                        Week 6:    Develop Model

                        Week 7:    Change Design, Select Caroma Furniture

                        Week 8:    Keep Develop Sketch Up Model

The floor plan is what I found on the internet, and I developed it and change the function of the spaces. I pull it into a small houe in order to create a simple residential space to enrich the enrironment.

After the floor plan was set, I arranged three different bathrooms to meet our group requirement. The image below demonstrate my bathroom plans.

This image demonstrates my three bathrooms and how they are fitted in the residential house.

My next action was to render an image which can illustrate the materials and how the bathroom looks like.

The image below is a simple furniture list that I selected from caroma australia. The majority furnitures in my design and my model are chosed from caroma company since it is our sponsor.

Group Relection:

In our group, each group member's role and responsbility was defined fairly clear since the project start. So far, our group seems like no much collaborations between each members, howeverm everyone did a large amount of work each week to achieve our group goal. After modeling and crysis environment can be finilised, the whole group will gather together and cooperate with our final kinnect construction to make that awesome plan into real project. So personally speaking, our group members contributed to our group a lot and I wish our collaboration can be better in the next few weeks.

Week 8 Presentation Reflection

Group Presentation 1: Planning (Group Name: Interactive Architecture)

Grade: CR

Assessment Criteria

• CLARITY OF THE ORAL PRESENTATION_ Does the oral presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?

Oral presentation can be regarded as clear. But personal recommendation is to give a brief introduction before the whole presentation in order to provide a general sense for the audience. Also, if they can relate the presentation to their project, that would be fantastic. What audience wanna hear is how the concept was used in their project, not purely conceptual knowledge.

• CLARITY OF THE WRITTEN PRESENTATION_ Does the Written presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?

Written presentation was clear, but what I found among their presentation was their prezi slides had a huge difference between each other. Some slides were quite empty and some of them were quite narrow and busy to read. As an audience, I hope everything can be continuous and easy. We don’t really need a beautiful slide but a simple and powerful one.

• DISTINCTIVENESS AND SPECIFICITY OF THE EXAMPLES_ Are the examples used to elaborate the particular theme of collaboration distinctive and specific?

I can see they did a lot of research for this presentation to find examples in real world for example the multi-functional cup rail and that did help us to understand the difference between those types of intellectual property. The large amount of examples they did effectively demonstrate the specific areas of IP.

• REFERENCING_ Are all sources of content properly referenced?

Yes, they had references but their references were hidden by the navigation tool bar.

• THE CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT_ Is it clear that the students have a strong grasp of the conceptual context of their theme of collaboration?

They had a general concept about what intellectual property is. Again, I still recommend them a link IP with their project. Using what they learned might be more convincing. Also, task distribution is not that good. Some of their group members apparently did less preparation than others and I can only see people changes frequently and I have no idea about who did which section.

• THE STILL IMAGE_ Do the still images support and extend our understanding of the Group Theoretical Position the students are presenting?

Yes, their images had a strong sense relating to the topic. By using real cases, audience can understand the meaning and difference of different types of IP easily.