October 2004
As the "capstone" to the CHIFOO 2004 Speaker Series "Chalk vs. Pixel: Technology and Human Development in the Information Age", Steve Portigal's talk was perhaps the most risky. Several risks were inherent in the topic:
- The relationship of Improvisational Theater to Ethnography is not immediately evident
- The relationship of either to Learning and Technology are not self-evident
- The notion of "technology", a key component of the series, is not immediately apparent from the subject.
In other words, where is the relationship among improv, ethnography and the tools of learning?
Portigal introduced the topics by first defining Improv both from a didactic/academic sense, and through two experiential exercises involving the audience. After almost all attendees had a chance to participate, the attributes of Improv were evident: a dynamically shifting play between participants within a rigorous framework of rules. For example, in the exercise "Storytelling Circle", in which eight participants told a story one word at a time about a theme chosen off-the-cuff by audience members, the participants related the challenge of thinking quickly on their feet, of identifying a beginning, middle and end, and of trying to make the actual story interesting and meaningful. In the second exercise "Broken Telephone, V2.0", each pair of participants (from a total of five pairs) had to mimic the gestures, tones and words of the preceding pair. The challenge reported by the participants included letting their "right brain" capture the gestalt of the preceding pair's efforts, while attempting to catalog the information in a "checklist" that would help them identify "completeness."
To the rest of us in the audience, both exercises were quite funny. Most of the participants couldn't figure out at the time what we were laughing at.
All of which suggests that Improv is a powerful means of engaging with other human beings that is both immersive and "flow-like."
Portigal then went on to define activities associated with ethnography, focusing on the guided interview process in particular.
He concluded his talk by identifying the key "overlaps" between the two disciplines:
- Balancing a "plan" with being in the moment
- "Yes and..." (Using positive reinforcement of the other's statements to keep the conversation going.)
- Make your best contribution by not talking
Portigal was very successful in overcoming the first two risks above. He clearly made the case for Improv's and Ethnography's relationship both to each other and to learning in general. His resolution of these disciplines' relationship to technology was more subtle. He made the suggestion that the actual "technology" in both cases is the context or environment itself. That in both approaches to human interaction, the individual must adapt to and leverage the context in which the interaction occurs.
He also suggested that the individual is the "apparatus" being used to perform the research. The implication is that "technology" in this context is "technique."
In any event, the presentation provided an excellent and thorough discussion around the immersive experience of user research. As the final talk in the 10 month series, it provided an engaging opportunity for reflection about the notions of learning, human development and technology.
|
