This week marked a critical transition point for our SoKids project. At the same time, previous weeks focused heavily on prototyping and playtesting, Week 11 pushed us to begin aligning all components of the system: from design, research, and backend, to communication artifacts like posters and presentations—into a cohesive whole.
Preparing for SOFTs:
Structuring the Story of Our Work
A major focus this week was preparing for the upcoming SOFTs session. Rather than treating SOFTs as a traditional presentation, we began to think of it as a spatial and interactive narrative of our project. We divided our work into two main sections: inputs (research, design strategies, and writing) and outputs (UI, backend, and poster), mapping them onto physical walls to externalize our process.
This structure forced us to reflect on how our project flows end-to-end:
- How research informs design decisions
- How design translates into interactive systems
- How those systems generate meaningful data
Rather than presenting isolated artifacts, we are now designing an experience where visitors can trace the logic of the system themselves.
Refining the Product:
From Features to Usability Systems
On the prototyping side, we continued refining both Prototype 1 and Prototype 2, with increasing attention to interaction clarity and system consistency.
Through advisor feedback and internal discussion, we identified several recurring usability challenges:
- Unclear interaction affordances (e.g., dragging behavior, button visibility)
- Weak sequential guidance (children unsure what to do next)
- Inconsistent visual language across scenes
- Lack of clear completion feedback
These issues highlighted an important shift in our thinking:
We are no longer just designing “mini-games,” but rather a coherent interaction system for young children. For example, even small inconsistencies, like how snapping behaves differently across scenes, can break children’s understanding of the system. Similarly, delightful interactions alone are not sufficient if the goal and structure of the interaction are unclear.
This led us to prioritize:
- Consistent visual signals (e.g., what “drop zone” means across all scenes)
- Clearer feedback loops for actions
- Stronger guidance on task progression
Rethinking Experience Flow:
Narrative, Progression, and Completion
One of the most important insights this week was about game structure and narrative framing.
Playtesting revealed that many children:
- Constantly asked “what do I do next?”
- Focused on progressing rather than exploring
- Did not realize when the experience had ended
This exposed a deeper issue: the experience lacks a clear narrative arc and sense of completion.
Rather than relying purely on mechanics, we began exploring how to:
- Introduce lightweight narrative framing
- Add clearer progression indicators (e.g., progress bar or staged flow)
- Design a more meaningful ending moment
This is particularly important because SoKids is not just a game, it is a research tool embedded within play. The structure of the experience directly affects both user engagement and data quality.
Backend & Data:
Designing for Researchers, Not Just Players
Another major milestone this week was the continued development of the data logging system.
The backend is now capable of capturing player decisions through the integrated researcher interface, allowing interactions to be recorded directly from gameplay. However, we also realized that collecting data is only half the challenge, the other half is making it usable for researchers.
Key considerations that emerged:
- Data should remain descriptive, not interpretive
- Variables need to be clearly mapped (e.g., visual attributes → structured labels)
- Researchers should be able to easily understand and manipulate the dataset
This led us to consider building supporting structures like:
- A dictionary for mapping visual elements to data variables
- More structured output formats for analysis
This shift reflects a broader realization:
We are designing not just for children, but also for researchers as secondary users of the system.
Preparing for External Communication:
Poster & Presentation Strategy
In parallel, we also began preparing for the upcoming funder presentation and research poster.
One key takeaway from advisor guidance was that our presentation should:
- Focus on what we built and how it works, not over-explaining the problem
- Highlight prototypes and data collection mechanisms
- Clearly communicate evaluation criteria and learning outcomes
Similarly, for the research poster, we were encouraged to:
- Prioritize visual storytelling over text-heavy explanations
- Use images of prototypes to communicate design principles
- Treat the poster as a conversation starter, not a full paper
This reframed how we think about communication, not as documentation, but as designed experiences for different audiences.
Reflection
Week 11 represents a shift from making things work to making the system make sense.
Previously, we focused on:
- Building features
- Running playtests
- Fixing immediate usability issues
Now, we are thinking more holistically about:
- System consistency across interactions
- Alignment between gameplay and research goals
- Communication of our work to external stakeholders
This transition is challenging, but necessary. It forces us to step back and ask:
As we move toward SOFTs and final presentations, our goal is not just to refine individual components but to ensure that every part of the system, design, data, and narrative, works together as a unified whole.
