426
P. J. Wolff, III
The dot-voting activities polled participants on their awareness of campus-based
research, with directions such as “Do you know about this research?” or “What is
the living lab that inspires you most?” Surveys were also made available at each
event, and 67% of respondents indicated that the cards were effective communication tools, while 42% said that the cards were “highly visual,” and 19% asked about
how to “make their own” cards or if they could be automatically printed. Individuals
suggested that the cards would be a preferred option to traditional business cards
and that they make research “inviting.” In addition, 84% of researchers indicated
that the thing they most liked was the link to a database where more information
could be searched. There were also positive responses from attendees at international conferences. For instance, international participants from universities based
in Germany, Canada, Australia, China, and Croatia reached out to learn how they
could participate.
Several ideas have emerged from sharing the cards at these targeted outreach
events. The most frequent inquiries were related to scalability issues. For instance,
one attendee inquired, “Can this adventure card format be used to capture a whole
range of different ways this problem can be addressed—basically, the same research
problem but many different examples (or suggestions) of solutions from many different universities? This then becomes a very useful and accessible resource for people
aiming to tackle this problem themselves. Therefore, it is not all about researching
new solutions but also applying solutions used in one place to somewhere else.”
Another recurring question that surfaced with the development of the LAC had to do
with the issue of comparing outcomes from living lab research. Most seem to agree
that the journal article is the most important outcome for academic research, but how
can one assess the relative impact of a journal article with other outcomes, such as
obtaining new funding, starting a new company, creating new courses, or the implementation of a new administrative policy? One solution that was explored took the
form of a sliding scale (1–100) that was divided into three segments (low, medium,
high). Individual outcomes (awards, research article, new funding, new policies, etc.)
could be stack-ranked, according to the school’s preference. Thus, the total scores
for a given living lab project would all start with a base amount and then the total
score for a given living lab project would be dependent on the number of outcomes
and the associated ranking of each. However, the decision was made to delete the
scoring component from the initial pilot, as it was considered to be subjective and
potentially controversial. Future testing and feedback may result in reconsidering
the scoring based on consensus of the users.
8 A Vision for a Digital Storytelling Machine
A third innovation tool, the Living Lab Web App (i.e. the Living Lab Finder),
8 is
currently in development and manifests the ambition to create a multisensory story8 To view the Living Lab Finder, see https://datapool.mit.edu/living-lab-finder.
P. J. Wolff, III
The dot-voting activities polled participants on their awareness of campus-based
research, with directions such as “Do you know about this research?” or “What is
the living lab that inspires you most?” Surveys were also made available at each
event, and 67% of respondents indicated that the cards were effective communication tools, while 42% said that the cards were “highly visual,” and 19% asked about
how to “make their own” cards or if they could be automatically printed. Individuals
suggested that the cards would be a preferred option to traditional business cards
and that they make research “inviting.” In addition, 84% of researchers indicated
that the thing they most liked was the link to a database where more information
could be searched. There were also positive responses from attendees at international conferences. For instance, international participants from universities based
in Germany, Canada, Australia, China, and Croatia reached out to learn how they
could participate.
Several ideas have emerged from sharing the cards at these targeted outreach
events. The most frequent inquiries were related to scalability issues. For instance,
one attendee inquired, “Can this adventure card format be used to capture a whole
range of different ways this problem can be addressed—basically, the same research
problem but many different examples (or suggestions) of solutions from many different universities? This then becomes a very useful and accessible resource for people
aiming to tackle this problem themselves. Therefore, it is not all about researching
new solutions but also applying solutions used in one place to somewhere else.”
Another recurring question that surfaced with the development of the LAC had to do
with the issue of comparing outcomes from living lab research. Most seem to agree
that the journal article is the most important outcome for academic research, but how
can one assess the relative impact of a journal article with other outcomes, such as
obtaining new funding, starting a new company, creating new courses, or the implementation of a new administrative policy? One solution that was explored took the
form of a sliding scale (1–100) that was divided into three segments (low, medium,
high). Individual outcomes (awards, research article, new funding, new policies, etc.)
could be stack-ranked, according to the school’s preference. Thus, the total scores
for a given living lab project would all start with a base amount and then the total
score for a given living lab project would be dependent on the number of outcomes
and the associated ranking of each. However, the decision was made to delete the
scoring component from the initial pilot, as it was considered to be subjective and
potentially controversial. Future testing and feedback may result in reconsidering
the scoring based on consensus of the users.
8 A Vision for a Digital Storytelling Machine
A third innovation tool, the Living Lab Web App (i.e. the Living Lab Finder),
8 is
currently in development and manifests the ambition to create a multisensory story8 To view the Living Lab Finder, see https://datapool.mit.edu/living-lab-finder.