Tuesday 23 February 2016

Reflection 23.02.16

I am going to use Schön’s (1991) concept of ‘reflection in action’ and ‘reflection on action’ to structure my reflective account.

Reflection in action is experiencing, thinking on your feet, thinking about what to do next and acting straight away. Reflection on action is thinking about something that has happened, thinking what you would do differently next time and taking your time. (http://mycourse.solent.ac.uk/mod/book/view.php?id=2732&chapterid=1113)

We conducted our first set of experiments today. We arranged to meet at uni at 9 to get started setting up all the equipment. We knew it would be a lengthy process installing, linking and organising all the technical equipment. This turned out to be relatively straight forward as Carlos was a great help. We had to re-format the MP3 players after unsuccessfully trying to load the new sounds and delete the previous test sounds. (As delightful as Spanish guitar is, it would have ruin the mood of our pleasant and unpleasant sounds.) We were able to easily sync our phones to the Go Pro cameras. All of the MP3 players were fine until the first participant entered the unit, when one of them stopped working. We decided as a group to proceed with 5 sounds as it would still get the desired effect. After the first two participants, we realised that something as subtle as the way we had placed the paint in the unit was subconsciously influencing the colour choices the participants were making. We had green and yellow together on the left hand side and red and blue together on the right. Each participant chose the colours based on the side they were positioned (e.g green and yellow for participant one, and blue and red for participant two) In order to make sure that we were not influencing the colours choices we moved the paint so all the colours were together. It seemed like a small change but it did effect the choices made after that.

We struggled to get participants initially and under estimated the amount of time it would take for each participant to complete the experiment. We were able to organize a process to minimize waiting time, by getting individuals to fill out the consent form and read the instructions whilst another participant was inside the pod. Perhaps if we had arranged a quicker experiment then more people would have taken part. Also the fact that participants were asked to stand in wet paint definitely put a number of people off. It could be argued that our instructions were not clear enough, some of the participants had to ask repeatedly what they were expected to do. The difficulty is to not over control the output of individual participants whilst maintaining a comparable element for the purposes of correlation and quantitative data. For instances, one of the participants used all 4 colours, whilst another only completed the ‘pleasant’ sound tests.

Unfortunately there was not a lot of space for individuals to wait, and the longer the waited the more of the sounds they could hear. It is difficult to know at this stage whether the participants could anticipate the sounds from outside the unit and in turn whether this effected their movements, colour selections or sound choices.

After the first 4 tests, we only had male participants. We had not considered previously that we would have a bias in any particular gender or age group. (Perhaps mainly 18-29 year olds based on the average age of university students.) A group decision was made to continue to let anyone participate, instead of making a conscious effort to select specific ages and genders. This would then become an interesting unexpected finding within our data.

The paint consistency was a success, although a little slippery initially, and participants were able to easily refill their footwear throughout the experiment. The paper sheets worked well, although the size was not quite right, however we were unable to save any of the large sheets as samples because they were too wet and awkward to manoeuvre in and out of the unit. We were, however able to capture a shot of the final test sheets using the Go Pro cameras. The downside was that the effort put in to constructing the large sheets of paper seemed a waste with how quickly they were disposed of.

After completing 12 tests we had to stop because all of the cameras ran out of battery at the same time. We were also completely exhausted from actively gathering participants, organising people, capturing data, filming, interviewing and photographing. Although we only had 12 participants, we were able to successfully record 3 interviews, covered a range of ages, including two under 18’s, which gave great results and amass a wealth of footage. We also received positive interest from passers by and nice comments from participants. I was surprised by the level of interest from individual participants. They wanted to know more about the ideas behind the installation, any information about the publication and were keen to ask questions about our individual practice. Overall it was a success.

No comments:

Post a Comment