2018/2019 KAN-CBUSV2025U Designing Business IT (T)
English Title | |
Designing Business IT (T) |
Course information |
|
Language | English |
Course ECTS | 7.5 ECTS |
Type | Elective |
Level | Full Degree Master |
Duration | One Semester |
Start time of the course | Spring |
Timetable | Course schedule will be posted at calendar.cbs.dk |
Study board |
BUS Study Board for BSc/MSc in Business Administration and
Information Systems, MSc
|
Course coordinator | |
|
|
Administrativ ansvarlig er Jeanette Hansen (jha.itm@cbs.dk) | |
Main academic disciplines | |
|
|
Teaching methods | |
|
|
Last updated on 15-11-2018 |
Relevant links |
Learning objectives | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prerequisites for registering for the exam (activities during the teaching period) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Number of compulsory
activities which must be approved: 2
Compulsory home
assignments
Group activity: Finding 2 peer reviewed articles relevant to the specific project and writing a 1 page summary for each. If a student cannot hand in due to documented illness, or if a student fails the activity in spite of making a real attempt to pass the activity, then the student will be given an extra attempt before the ordinary exam date. Hereafter there will be no further attempts before the re exam.
Oral presentations
etc.
Hand in a summary/slides of 3 presentations of ongoing design work. The presentations are given in class by the exam groups (min 2 people) and is about ongoing work. If a student cannot participate in the compulsory activity due to documented illness, or if a student fails the activity in spite of making a real attempt to pass the activity, then the student will be given an extra attempt before the ordinary exam date If a student has not passed the two mandatory activities before the re exam in spite of making a real attempt to pass, or the student has not participated due to documented illness, there will be one extra attempt before the re exam. This extra attempt is a 10 page home assignment which will cover the 2 mandatory activities, as well as reflections on the project domain, theories, methods, and approaches. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Examination | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Course content and structure | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The course will feature practical design activities and visualization work as core disciplines for development of digital services and products, and it will equip students to think, visualize, critique, facilitate and present design concepts. It will further focus on a critical, reflective understanding of design methods and their judicious application.
Design teams and project work
Note that for any area chosen, the students must identify and use a minimum of 2 peer reviewed research papers, e.g. found using the ACM database (dl.acm.org) (note that you have to go through CBS Library or be on the CSB network to access the ACM database)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description of the teaching methods | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Forelæsninger
Workshops Præsentationer |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Feedback during the teaching period | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The teacher will give continous feedback. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Student workload | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expected literature | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Research articles and perspective
Albrechtsen et al. (2001), Affordances in Activity Theory and Cognitive Systems Engineering, Risø National Laboratory, Technical report, Risø R-1287 (English) available http://orbit.dtu.dk/fedora/objects/orbit:88142/datastreams/file_7726876/content
Bødker, S. (2000). Scenarios in user-centred design-setting the stage for reflection and action. Interacting with computers, 13(1), 61-75.
Brandt, E. (2007). How tangible mock-ups support design collaboration. Knowledge, Technology, and Policy, 20(3), 179-192.
Buchenau, M. & Fulton-Suri, J (2000). Experience Prototyping, in Proceedings of ACM DIS, 2000.
Buur, J., & Sitorus, L. (2007). Ethnography as Design Provocation. Proceedings from Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference, Keystone, CO, USA.
Buur, J., Binder, T., & Brandt, E. (2000). Taking Video Beyond “Hard Data” in User Centred Design. the Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, New York, CPSR, December.
Erickson, T. (1995). Notes on Design Practice: Stories and Prototypes as Catalysts for Communication. In Scenario-based design: envisioning work and technology in system development (pp. 37–58). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY, USA.
Fallman, D. (2003). Design-oriented human-computer interaction. Proceedings from Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.
Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Cultural Probes. Interactions, Volume 6.
Hertzum, M. (2003). Making use of scenarios: a field study of conceptual design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(2), 215-239.
Kaptelinen, V. (no date). Affordances (entry 44 in Interaction Design Encyclopedia): https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/book/the-encyclopedia-of-human-computer-interaction-2nd-ed/affordances#heading_Introduction:_Why_affordances?_html_pages_128643
Kimbell, L (2009). Beyond design thinking: Design-as-practice and designs-in-practice, paper presented at CRESC Conference, Manchester, September 2009.
Kolko, J (2010) Abductive Thinking and Sensemaking: The Drivers of Design Synthesis, Design Issues: Volume 26, Number 1 Winter 2010
Latour, Bruno: “Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts”, findes her:
Messeter, J. (2009). Place-specific computing: A place-centric perspective for digital designs. International Journal of Design, 3(1), 29-41.
Millen, D.R. 2000: Rapid ethnography: time deepening strategies for HCI field research, Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques
Mogensen, P (1992): Towards a provotyping approach in systems development. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 4(1), 5.
Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38-43.
Peyton, T. & Poole, E. 2014. The Videographic Requirements Gathering Method for Adolescent-Focused Interaction Design, Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.20, 2014, pp. 57-69
Salvador, Bell, Anderson, 1999. Design Ethnography, Design Management Journal, Fall, 1999
Stolterman, E. & Janlert, P (2015). Faceless Interaction - A Conceptual Examination of the Notion of Interface: Past, Present, and Future. Human-Computer Interaction, 30, 6.
Zimmerman, J, Forlizzi, J. and Evenson, J. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘07)
Liteature (non-research)
Buxton, Bill (2007) (BUXTON 1): “Sketching User Experiences - Getting the Design Right and the Right Design”, Morgan Kaufmann, 2007 (COURSE BOOK)
Greenberg, Carpendale, Marquardt, & Buxton 2012 (BUXTON2): Sketching User Experiences: The Workbook, Morgan Kaufmann, 2012 (COURSE BOOK)
Fraser, H. M. A. (2009). Designing Business: New Models for Success. Design Management Review, 20(2), 56-65, available at: http://www.dmi.org/dmi/html/publications/news/viewpoints/09202FRA56.pdf
Martin, R (2009): What is Design Thinking Anyway? Online article accessed Mar. 1, 2011, at http://observatory.designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=11097
Nielsen, L. 2007 (ONLINE), 10 Steps to Personas, available at http://www.hceye.org/HCInsight-Nielsen.htm
|