Individual Reflection
Assessment Subcriteria
Criterium
Empathy 1) Show real understanding
of the user and their issue
with an objective eye.
2) Show broad
understanding of the
context of the challenge
area from multiple
perspectives using good
information sources.
3) Complete document (i.e
all team members did
interview, topic list,
empathy canvas, context
map and text).
Define 1) The information from the
empathy phase is
comprehended, divided in
chunks, clustered and
interconnected into
multiple issues for the
challenge area.
2) From all the issues a
relevant issue is chosen
and looked at from
multiple frames.
3) The formulated design
challenge is open and
focused.
Score (0-5)
1) In this block I understood and the only
issue I had was that I procrastinate a lot
and it was hard to keep up with the class.
2) I understood all the contexts from multiple
perspectives using information sources with
my project group, and we all worked
together.
3) My group has done a complete document,
all members interviewed people, had topic
list, empathy canvas, context map and
text.
I’m going to score this 5 out 5, since we all
cooperate together.
1) My and group, we divided tasks,
interconnected ideas and for all the
assignments that we had.
2) The only issue that we had was lack of
communication, because every single of us
has their own life and their own time, so we
really tried to find a suitable time.
3) We looked forward solving the problem.
I’m going to score this 3 out of 5, since we
encounter lack of communication.
Ideate and prototype 1) 2-3 creative techniques
are used to generate
multiple (min of 10) and
diverse ideas (diverging
phase).
2) The choice for the final
idea (converging) is done
in a structured way (using
an analysis method).
3) The prototype needs no
explanation and is clearly
connected to the design
challenge.
Test and end product 1) The prototype is tested
twice per team member in
a well prepared test. Test
preparations are visible.
2) The outcome of the tests
are well explained and
analyzed and show
curiosity for understanding
the respondents.
3) The adjustments to the
prototype are clearly
connected to the test
outcomes. The final end
product is a solution for
the formulated design
challenge.
1) The techniques that we used: we met
together and we did the research together,
each of us wrote their idea and then at the
end we communicate which one fits the
best.
2) After the final choice, one of us would have
written down the answer.
3) The prototype was strongly connected to
the design challenge due to our strong
research.
I’m going to score this 5 out of 5.
1) After finding the right answer, every single
of us studied the whole document at least 3
times so that we get to understand it better.
2) In our group, we talked and explained to
each other the answers, because while
explaining we gained more information and
we were more concerned about what we
had to do.
3) The adjustments to the prototype were
clearly connected to our research, and as a
result we defined the formulated design
challenge.
I’m going to score this 4 out of 5.
Problem analysis 1) Management problem is
correct; the included
context analysis shows
the relevance of the
problem.
2) Research problems are
related to information
needs.
3) Research objectives and
research questions are
clear, connected to the
research problem and
show insights in main and
minor points.
Methodology 1) Correct description of
research method,
sampling, data collection
technique and data
analysis technique.
2) Through substantiation of
fit of chosen research
method and techniques
with research problem
and objective.
3) Research details
(sampling, time , location
etc) described.
Results 1) The topics and open
questions in the interview
guide have clear
connection to the
research questions, and
at least 1 projective
technique is used. The
data collection is
complete, it shows
curiosity for understanding
the respondent and depth
and objectivity.
2) The data analysis is
conducted correctly via
1) Since we identified and found the problem
that cause a breakdown for our group, we
tried our best to manage it well.
2) In our document of proof, we mentioned the
problem and we explained its relevance in
details.
3) The research objectives and research
questions were clear, as long as we came
to a conclusion and solved them.
I score this 5 out 5.
1) In the document of proof, each of us wrote
a big description of the people we
interviewed in detail.
2) During the interviews, we came up with the
problems that people encountered during
their cruise trips.
3) Since we came up with the ideas for our
prototype, it was easier to do the research
and solve the problems with the same
location described.
I score this 5 out of 5.
Our group had the same question for the
interviews, so the answers can connect
clearly, from that we collected all of our
data.
I score this 4 out of 5.
 thematic analysis
methods and transcripts
are available.
3) The results are described
in a structured manner
and answer the research
questions, focus on key
insights based on an
analysis of all interviews
and quotes are used to
support the findings.
Conclusions and 1) The conclusions are well
recommendations formulated, answer the
main research question
and are based on the
results.
2) The recommendations are
relevant and connected to
the conclusions.
3) The infographic visualizes
the key insights.
Individual use and The student can explain or use
understanding of the research terminology in the
research terminology correct context.
Individual The student can mention and
understanding of explain the different steps of
research process in conducting research in both
design research and design and deepening research.
deepening research The roles of the different stages
are clear and the student knows
exactly when she/he should
conduct what.
Individual knowledge The student can mention and
and understanding of explain the different research
the used methods methods, data collection
techniques and knows how to
1) The main research question our group had:
,What can we do to improve the wifi quality
during cruise trips?, Two of the persons we
interviewed had this problem, so we
decided this is the main problem for most of
the people who go on cruise trips.
2)/3)
The recommendations that we had were:
the customers should put multiple wifi
routers in every area of the cruise, so the
signal and the connection will become
stronger.
I score this 4 out of 5.
1) I explained the research terminology.
Everything was clear to me, as we long as
we came up with the research and
incorporated it together.
I score this 5 out of 5
1) Design research for me is understanding
the process of design, developing with
more methods to conduct deepening
research.
2) I conduct that after we had our interviews,
identify the problems and then solve them.
I score this 5 out of 5.
1) As every person is different in its way, the
method each of us had during the
interviews differed, for example I was
asking a lot of question about every single
 conduct a data analysis. The
student knows when to conduct
what.
Individual reflection The student can critically
evaluate the research outcome
and process and the mentioned
tops and points of improvement
are relevant and well
substantiated.
End mark
details, and one of my colleagues she
focused only to find more answers about
one question, so she can have a different
insight and perspective.
I score this 4 out of 5.
1) The research outcome how not how I
expected. I thought the design research is
very hard to do, and it will take a lot of time.
But eventually, if you work in a team it will
become very easy because seeing things
from another point of view. I could say that
the point of improvement we had was that
we connected our research and
communicate strongly.
I’m going to score this 5 out of 5.
4 out of 5