WHAT IF... EVALUATION

WHAT PROBLEM DID YOU IDENTIFY?

Initially the problem was that people in Leeds are not happy enough. We soon found a flaw in this. It was very broad, it would be very hard to do something which would make EVERYONE happy. obviously, situations, places change how a person feels and what they need to make them smile. Therefore we decided to break this down to the problem that people at Leeds college of art are not happy enough.

WHAT EVIDENCE DID YOU FIND TO SUPPORT YOUR DECISIONS?

We found that, in fact, 80% of the people we spoke to could be happier. Also established that the most miserable time in a persons day is the morning in most cases. We found out other facts about smiling and laughing and how this actually changes your quality of life and CAN make your day better.

WHAT METHODS DID YOU USE TO GAHER YOUR EVIDENCE AND WHAT FORMS DID IT TAKE?(PRIMARY, SECONDARY, QUALITATIVE, QUANTITATIVE.)

First of all we did primary research by asking students attending the college a series of questions regarding their levels of happiness and what would make them happy. This was solely qualitative research as there was a large range of opinions and answers to each question. We also did some quantitative primary research using a survey, a simple yes or no answer was required to the question 'could you be happier?

The secondary research we collected was mainly from the internet and was actually mainly quantitative. (The effects of being happier on your quality of life, existing campaigns and their effects etc) Some stats were also collected on the suicide rate in leeds which would be classed as quantitative secondary research but this was not specifically useful for our final problem.

WHAT METHODS OF RESEARCH DID YOU FIND USEFUL AND WHY?

The most useful method for this problem was the questionnaire and survey, both of which were primary research but a mixture of qualitative and quantitative. The secondary research was useful but as the problem was about how the students at the college felt then going straight to the source was definitely more beneficial.

HOW DID THESE INFORM YOUR RESPONSE TO YOUR PROBLEM?

We came to understand that a lot of people would benefit from smiling more and there seemed to be various ways we could do this, established through the question 'what little things make you happy?' in the questionnaire. Simply helping people out

WHAT METHODS DID YOU ENCOUNTER AS PROBLEMATIC?

Obviously problems can be found in most methods of research but I would say that, when it came to doing the questionnaire, as the questions were quite open to opinion and response we did get a very large, broad, range of answers which in turn could become quite difficult to break down to something more specific and achievable.

HOW DID YOU OVERCOME THIS?

We decided to make some of the questions more closed to variety such as 'If you were given a bag of sweets, would it make you happy?' This therefore gave us a more specific guide to whether what we wanted to do would in fact work.

WHAT RESEARCH COULD YOU HAVE CARRIED OUT THAT WOULD HAVE PROVED MORE USEFUL?

I think the only other thing we could do would be to gather more of each type of research. Talk to more people, asking more specific questions. Possibly search on the internet for ideas on what to base the questions on. Although, I do feel keeping it simple (achievable) did work quite affectively.

LIST FIVE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE LEARNT ABOUT THE DESGN PROCESS OVER THE PAST TWO WEEKS.

1. Just how important specific methods of research are.
2. A lot of research can be collected between a group of 6 people.
3. It's important to constantly question your initial idea/problem.
4. You will usually realise that with one problem stems quite a few more.
5. You can gain a good knowledge of a subject in two weeks.

LIST FIVE THINGS YOU WOULD DO DIFFERENTLY NEXT TIME.

1. MORE research
2. keep it simple
3. less thinking, more doing(constantly find out more)
4. better time management
5. More ideas