design
due 2022/10/05
Your card is Based on this card, you need to complete a mind map of the design and three solutions.
Source Type: radio show
Source Name: GBH NEWS
https://www.wgbh.org/news/national-news/2020/11/30/boston-public-radio-full-show-11-30-20
Title:Live Radio Show Discussing The Vaccine And Impact Of The Pandemic On Mental Health
Single Line Description of Content: Dr. Ken Duckworth, CMO at NAMI talked about the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on mental health during the holiday season, fielding questions and comments from listeners.
Abstract / description / findings (100 words):
The connection between people can support people’s mental health, some restaurants developed into outdoor restaurants, but outdoor environment safety will also become a mental health problem. Telemedicine is being used during the pandemic, but the loss of face-to-face interviews makes it impossible to recognize body language, affecting the development of original treatments on some levels. During the passage and the pandemic, people’s working environment has been affected, and theyre suffering lonely, anxious and depressed.
Step 1 – Themes and Consequences
Surround the card with sticky notes detailing the themes and consequences of the issues from the article. Note as many of these as possible.
From each of these cards, see if there are sub-themes or related consequences, and add notes for these.
try to generate 20+ notes.
Your map should look like this:
Do not need make map just list clearly
Stage 2 – What Ifs
generate as many What-if? statements as you can from these consequences and themes.
If your What Ifs relate to specific Consequence notes you can link them with a line
If you do not make MAP, please list the definition:
Examp
Stage 3 – Scenarios
Scenarios are short stories that describe alternative ways that things might develop in the future. They describe events or circumstances that take place at a proposed time and place, along with the people (protagonists) involved.
Select at least three What ifs? you find most compelling and generate a series of scenarios from them – if possible try to do scenarios for all of them – 3 is the minimum. Give these scenarios notes a new color. They can be from a couple of sentences to a paragraph in length.
Guidance on generating scenarios:
Take your What Ifs and ask yourself If this came true, what would that look like?
What would need to change for the What if? to come true?
What would need to be put in place?
The answer to all of these is likely to be either:
Global / National / Regional / local policy change or change in the law
A shift in the attitudes of some / all people towards how things are done.
The introduction of a new method / process / service / product.
But it may be something else depending on your topic.
What scenarios can you imagine happening?
Who would be involved?
Where would this change take place?
How could the change come about?
Can you imagine a campaign / process / service / product that could contribute to the change?
Scenarios can be positive or negative thinking through what you DONT want to happen can be just as valuable as thinking through that you DO want to happen. These negative scenarios are useful when engaging in speculative design work that offers cautionary tales of scenarios we want to avoid.
Try to think of scenarios for each What if? statement.
They can be similar but think about different ways the What if? could come about and write different scenarios for as many of your What Ifs? as you can.
Be critical If you are not compelled by any of the scenarios you have come up with, select a different What-If? statement and generate scenarios for that one. Your aim is to think up at least one compelling scenario that can be translated into a design opportunity.
Example
Stage 4 – Design ideas
When you have created a set of scenarios from your What if? statements, ask yourself:
How can design play a role in this scenario (if at all).
Even if your What if? concerns a global policy change or change in public attitudes, think about how a campaign or movement could help contribute to that change and how design might play a role in that. (Every political campaign or social movement relies upon design to effectively convey its message.)
Where you can see a role for design in your scenarios, describe it as a project. E.G. design a home-schooling kit for parents. / design communications material for an awareness campaign on the dangers of surveillance / design a better interface for online meetings that prioritizes gestures and eye contact for an improved user experience.
Example
image1.png
image2.png
image3.png
image4.png
image5.png
SHOW MORE…
Curriculum Implementation Philosophy
Leaders who have defined their personal philosophy on how curriculum should be implemented will be better prepared to make curriculum-related decisions for their school. Such a philosophy should guide the leader in implementing coherent systems of curriculum, instruction, and assessment that promote the mission, vision, and core values of the school, embody high expectations for student learning, align with academic standards, and are culturally inclusive.
In a 500-750 word narrative, create a personal philosophy on how you expect curriculum to be implemented at your future school. Grade range (9th-12th) and address cultural inclusiveness, differentiating for learning needs, tiered intervention, incorporating technology to enhance instruction, and how the school’s vision and mission are related to curriculum.
Provide a minimum of three scholarly resources to support your position.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Curriculum Implementation Philosophy – Rubric
Philosophy: Curriculum Implementation and Grade 6 points
Criteria Description
Philosophy: Curriculum Implementation and Grade
5. Target 6 points
Personal philosophy comprehensively describes position regarding expectations of
future schools curriculum implementation. Grade range is provided.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Personal philosophy clearly describes position regarding expectations of curriculum
implementation. Grade range is provided.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Personal philosophy vaguely describes position regarding expectations of
curriculum implementation. Grade range is not provided.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Personal philosophy unrealistically describes position regarding expectations of
curriculum implementation. Grade range is not provided.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Philosophy: Cultural Inclusiveness 12 points
Criteria Description
Philosophy: Cultural Inclusiveness
5. Target 12 points
Personal philosophy thoroughly addresses cultural inclusiveness.
4. Acceptable 10.44 points
Personal philosophy reasonably addresses cultural inclusiveness.
3. Approaching 8.88 points
Collapse All
Personal philosophy unclearly addresses cultural inclusiveness.
2. Insufficient 8.28 points
Personal philosophy poorly addresses cultural inclusiveness.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Philosophy: Dierentiation for Learning Needs and Tiered Intervention 12 points
Criteria Description
Philosophy: Differentiation for Learning Needs and Tiered Intervention
5. Target 12 points
Personal philosophy exceeds standards in addressing differentiating for learning
needs and creatively discusses options for tiered intervention.
4. Acceptable 10.44 points
Personal philosophy appropriately addresses differentiating for learning needs and
logically discusses options for tiered intervention.
3. Approaching 8.88 points
Personal philosophy marginally addresses differentiating for learning needs and
minimally discusses options for tiered intervention.
2. Insufficient 8.28 points
Personal philosophy ineffectively addresses differentiating for learning needs and
options for tiered intervention are irrelevant.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Philosophy: Technology 12 points
Criteria Description
Philosophy: Technology
5. Target 12 points
Personal philosophy substantially describes position regarding incorporating
technology to enhance instruction.
4. Acceptable 10.44 points
Personal philosophy aptly describes position regarding incorporating technology to
enhance instruction.
3. Approaching 8.88 points
Personal philosophy somewhat describes position regarding incorporating
technology to enhance instruction.
2. Insufficient 8.28 points
Personal philosophy ineffectively describes position regarding incorporating
technology to enhance instruction.
Philosophy: Vision and Mission 9 points
Criteria Description
Philosophy: Vision and Mission
5. Target 9 points
Personal philosophy skillfully embeds how the school’s mission and vision are
related to the curriculum.
4. Acceptable 7.83 points
Personal philosophy directly embeds how the school’s mission and vision are
related to the curriculum.
3. Approaching 6.66 points
Personal philosophy inexplicitly embeds how the school’s mission and vision are
related to the curriculum.
2. Insufficient 6.21 points
Personal philosophy unconvincingly embeds how the school’s mission and vision
are related to the curriculum.
Organization 3 points
Criteria Description
Organization
5. Target 3 points
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas
that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides
the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is within the
required word count.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The
content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea. The summary is
within a reasonable range of the required word count.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
The content is not adequately organized even though it provides the audience with
a sense of the main idea. The summary may not be within a reasonable range of the
required word count.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The
ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other; or the
summary is widely outside of the required word count.
Mechanics of Writing 3 points
Criteria Description
includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use
5. Target 3 points
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-
developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are
varied and engaging.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder
comprehension. Variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some
practice and content-related language.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent
language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
1. No Submission 0 points
Documentation of Sources 3 points
Criteria Description
citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and
style
5. Target 3 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment
and style. Format is free of error.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is
mostly correct.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some
key formatting and citation errors are present.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. No Submission 0 points
Total 60 points