Students’ use of social media in collaborative design: a case study of an advanced interior design studio

Co-designing Digital Platforms for Volunteer-led Migrant Community Welfare Support

“…However, in our eforts to use these platforms as organizational tools, we found several subtle consequences. These include concerns related to data security, infexibility of privacy confguration, and lack of boundaries between personal and work activities, which are limitations that refect the fndings of previous case studies [1,18,20,53,59,65]. However, what we found diferently in our case study is the utility of these platforms in the design process.…”

“…Our co-design workshops, interviews, and discussions were conducted in Filipino and English, facilitated by the frst author who is a native speaker of both languages, and were all performed using a combination of online tools that are familiar to all participants. At the beginning of our engagement, we invited Filo XYZ members who consented to participate in our study to join a private Facebook group where they were to be instructed to accomplish asynchronous activities and engage in group discussions similar to other qualitative studies conducted on Facebook [20,51,56]. For activities that require real-time discussions, we used Zoom as our video conferencing tool and, together with it, Google Slides for activities involving screen interaction.…”

“…The use of Facebook to organize and facilitate communal activities was also found to have specifc challenges. For instance, participants of a co-design study conducted in a Facebook group reported their difculties in using the platform to categorize information and locate fles as they would have to do additional manual work such as adding hashtags or relevant annotations [20]. In a similar vein, hosts of Hofce, a self-organized co-working network, also found it restrictive to rely on Facebook to manage co-working sessions due to their inability to customize user capabilities in accordance with the program's specifc structure and rules (e.g.…”

Empirical study of Team Usability Testing: a laboratory experiment

“…Understanding the collaborative practices of people in real-life working environments and how they (could) use groupware in the context of work is the background of groupware evaluation. The research field has various publications from the investigation of the role of space in collaboration (Spinelli et al 2005) and common information spaces in an airport (Fields et al 2005) through the relationship between organizational culture and the use of technology in different user groups (Chisalita et al 2005) and the use of social media in their collaborative design tasks (Cho and Cho 2019) to collaborative design practices of product design studios (Vyas et al 2013), Yet, the goal of all of the abovementioned studies is the same: to define the real need of users in their working context and how technology could support their work.…”

Structuring knowledge-building in online design education

“…Today, online design learning research covers a range of issues concerning distance collaboration (Akar et al, 2004 ; Bohemia et al, 2009a , 2009b ; Rodriguez et al, 2018 ), blended learning solutions (Hill, 2017 ; Masdeu & Fuses, 2017 ; Pektas, 2012 , 2015 ), comparison with physical studios (Gogu & Kumar, 2021 ; Saghafi et al, 2012 ), online sense of presence (Lotz et al, 2015 ; Jones et al, 2021 ), virtual worlds (Dadakoglu & Ozsoy, 2020; Grove & Steventon, 2008 ), social media (Fleischmann, 2014 ; Guler, 2015 ; Schadewitz & Zamenopoulos, 2009 ), to utilizing virtual reality and augmented reality (Maher et al, 2012 ; Nisha, 2019 ). Nevertheless, the existing literature is limited in number and scope, falling short of covering the breadth of problems that online design education faces (Cho & Cho, 2019 ; Fleischmann, 2020a ; Jones et al, 2021 ; Lotz et al, 2018).…”