7. LP WK 11 Q 2 Chunks

Cooper (December, 1998), says “Cognitive Science… is an instructional theory… [covering] the mental processes of learning, memory and problem solving”. He quotes some early theorists, “(e.g. Sweller, 1988; 1994)… the fundamental tenet of cognitive load theory is that the quality of instructional design will be raised if greater consideration is given to the role and limitations of working memory.”

Cooper (December, 1998) explains the design process does not rely on any “underlying meaning or logic” and  provides examples where if these “can be identified”  the meaning can be communicated in “chunks” of information.  This plan can be linked to the  “three metaphors of communication: transmission of information; ritual; transformation” (Pea, cited by Wilson & Cole, 1996). Pea says  transmission is “the dominant idea”  in the ritual of communication, where the content of the message is often less important than the medium and style of expression”.

These ideas about ritual, medium and style of delivery in some ways reflect the concept of aesthetic usability, including visual, in design – or, as Donald Norman (2002) says: “aesthetics matter… attractive things work better”. Cooper (December, 1998) explains when designing ‟a large set of elements to remember it is often helpful to combine the elements to form a smaller number of groups“.  In this “chunking” process Cooper (December, 1998) says each interior group becomes ‟a chunk“.

When chunking “sets of information” the consistency concept may be useful to consider, as  Lidwell, Holden and Butler, (20013) say “aesthetic consistency” can sometimes create an individual identity for information which helps it be remembered.So, in using  internal and external consistency (Lidwell, Holden and Butler, 20013) a styled transformation of the message may allow (both “the “sender” and) “receiver” of the information to open themselves up… to [further] inquiry, observation, and reflection” (Wilson & Cole, 1996). By incorporating aesthetic consistency into the information chunking process,  the chance of being “remembered  [in the important long-term memory may] be greatly enhanced”.

 Reference

Cole, P. and Wilson, B. G. (1996). Cognitive Teaching Models. New York, NY, USA: Scholastic Press.

Cooper, G. (December, 1998). Improving traditional instruction: Cognitive Load theory. Research into Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design at UNSW. Retrieved from           http://dwb4.unl.edu/Diss/Cooper/UNSW.htm

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Aesthetic-Usability Effect. Universal principles of design. Massachusetts: Rockport. Retrieved from Learning Portfolio Module 2, S1, 2015.

Norman, D. (2002). Emotion and design: Attractive things work better. Interactions Magazine. [On-line Magazine]. I (4), 36-42. Retrieved from jnd.org.

Wilson, B. G. & Cole, P. (1996). Cognitive teaching models. In D. H. Jonassen (ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. New York: Simon & Schuster MacMillan.

 

 

 

7. LP WK 11 Q 2 Chunks

3. LP W8 Q2: Aesthetic Usablility

In a surreal, human body-inhuman machine, “aesthetic usability“ encounter (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003), Man Ray’s 1924 visual image transforms “Kiki’s body into a musical instrument“ (Image 1).

Image 1
Image 1. Man Ray, 1924, J. Paul Getty Museum, Getty Images, 2015.

A normal, everyday encounter is the human hand playing a violin. Katz calls the human hand “a beautiful tool” (cited by Shaw Wilgis, 2014, p.15) and today, as always ”beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty” (Hume, 1792, davidhume.org). In this cyber/robotics-dominated era hands (image 1) are sublimely beautiful and useful – still.

The human hand fits the aesthetic-usability criteria (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003). Katz says: “there is something poetic about the human hand. The beautiful synergy is of its form and function is indeed the “visible part of the brain”, and Shaw Wilgis (2014) describes the hand as “more sophisticated, more varied, and more productive than any other part of our body”.

My daughter’s fingers are long, elegant and tapered yet her hand is strong, her movements precise and productive. Her hands “interact” with her “environment”, is the “delicate instrument that… makes it possible for… [her] to knead dough” (Shaw Wilgis, 2014) for superb bread, or to play her violin beautifully (image 2.).

daughter & violin
Image 2. My daughter’s hands & violin, S. Harford Personal image, 2015.

My daughter believes her violin (image 2) is beautiful, and creates beautiful music. So her violin is aesthetically usable (Lidwell, Holden & Butler, 2003). Joseph Curtin (February, 2007) describes his personal aesthetic-usability encounter fifteen years ago, when he put a particular 300-year old Stradivarius violin under his chin and played. Curtin’s experience involved two key human senses, sight and touch. Parts of his body, principally his eyes, skin and hands, engaged to produce music with this “Jackson” – its “aesthetic-usability” marker-nickname (Lidwell, Holden, & Butler, 2003).

Like the hand and violin, encounters between my feet and my red thongs (image 3.) create an aesthetic usability relationship. My red thongs demonstrate the aesthetic usability concept; like designer Romero, at the recent Milan Design Week exhibition of ″exclusive 3D-printed shoes”, says, they are

the old and the new, natural and man-made and the              connection between the human body, the earth, and the            universe — working together to become simultaneously             timeless and forward-looking….intersection of architecture,               art, and design (cited by Designboom, April 2015).

Image 3.
Image 3. my red thongs, S. Harford personal image, 2015.

My two year-old red thongs clearly demonstrate aesthetic-usability: I love the way their leather looks and equally love their comfort. So good to wear, “appealing enough for [me] to buy” (Kurosu & Kashimura, 1995). Yet the conclusions of Lidwell, Holden and Butler (2003) fall short. All three items – the hands and violin, my thongs faithfully retain their aesthetic usability appeal:  their colour and shape, even while they tramp, with me, through brambles and bushes, rocky headlands, and wander, with me, through stony, watery coral reefs at low tide. It’s the whole package – looks and performance – that appeals.

Reference

Curtin, J. (February, 2007). Innovation and creation in the violin-making world: a Q & A with Violonetto. http://josephcurtinstudios.com/article/joseph-curtin-innovation-and-creation-in-the-violin-making-world/
Designboom. (14 April, 2015). United nude + 3D systems present re-inventing shoes during milan design week. [On-line Newsletter.] Retrieved from http://www.designboom.com/design/united-nude-3dsystems-re-inventing-shoes-milan-design-week-04-14-2015/?utm_campaign=monthly&utm_medium=email&utm_source=subscribers
Harford, S. (2015). Image 2 and 3.
Hume, D. (1741-41, 1777). Essays, Moral and Political. Davidhume.org. Retrieved from http://davidhume.org/texts/emp.html
Kurosu, M., & Kashimura, K. (1995). Conference Companion. Design Center, Hitachi Limited.
Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Aesthetic-Usability Effect. In universal principals of design. (pp. 18-19). Massachusetts: Rockport.
Man Ray. (1924). Image. J. Paul Getty Museum, Getty Images. Le violon d’Ingres, 1924. Free to use image Retrieved from http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/society_culture/dementia.htm

Man Ray. (1924). Le violon d’Ingres. 1924.J. Paul Getty Museum. Getty Images. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/54733/man-ray-le-violon-d%27ingres-ingres%27s-violin-american-1924/

Merivale, A. and Milligan, P. (2015). David Hume. Essays, Moral and Political (1741-42, 1777).
Shaw Wilgis, E. F. Ed.(2014). The Wonder of the Human Hand: Care and Repair of the body’s most marvelous instrument. Baltimore, Maryland, USA: John Hopkins University Press.
3. LP W8 Q2: Aesthetic Usablility