Augmented Reality Mobile Application Co-Design Experience: Delineating the Nuances from the Lens of a System Developer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
With the rapid development of educational tools, co-design has been on the rise. Co-design is instrumental in successful product development as it merges two key perspectives, namely consumers’ insights and professionals’ knowledge. The roles of users, designers, and developers are now blurred as educators have begun to construct their own tools for teaching based on problems and ideas conceived in their classrooms, thereby assuming roles as designers and to some extent, as developers. A more common practice in recent days is educators’ co-designing of tools with system developers to achieve their targeted goal. This study attempted to explore the process of co-designing an augmented reality (AR) mobile application and the role of a system developer in mediating the design process with non-designers, namely academic members of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia. This study further aimed to delineate the nuances of the AR mobile application co-design experience from the perspective of the system developer. Semi-structured interviews, observations, and document analyses were conducted to examine the detailed process of co-designing and developing the AR application as well as to understand the developer’s interaction with the consumers. The main findings of this study suggest that the waterfall model of the Software Development Life Cycle was in use during the co-design process. This cycle generally involves five stages, namely (i) planning, (ii) analysis, (iii) design, (iv) implementation, and (v) maintenance, which are iterative in nature. The designer’s role in mediating the co-design process encompassed balancing their knowledge and experience with the needs of consumers that do not necessarily match the designer’s expectations. This was achieved through (i) precise communication, (ii) commitment to the delivery and quality of the AR mobile application, as well as to building cohesive working relationships, and (iii) motivation to work with co-designers during the development process. The findings shed light on the value of co-design and the complex role of designers in mediating the design process with non-designers, which when accounted for, can lead to more feasible project development.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».