An official website of the United States government
AI-based design tools are proliferating in professional software to assist engineering and industrial designers in complex manufacturing and design tasks. These tools take on more agentic roles than traditional computer-aided design tools and are often portrayed as “co-creators.” Yet, working effectively with such systems requires different skills than working with complex CAD tools alone. To date, we know little about how engineering designers learn to work with AI-based design tools. In this study, we observed trained designers as they learned to work with two AI-based tools on a realistic design task. We find that designers face many challenges in learning to effectively co-create with current systems, including challenges in understanding and adjusting AI outputs and in communicating their design goals. Based on our findings, we highlight several design opportunities to better support designer-AI co-creation.
more »
« less
How Experienced Designers of Enterprise Applications Engage AI as a Design Material
HCI research has explored AI as a design material, suggesting that designers can envision AI’s design opportunities to improve UX. Recent research claimed that enterprise applications offer an opportunity for AI innovation at the user experience level. We conducted design workshops to explore the practices of experienced designers who work on cross-functional AI teams in the enterprise. We discussed how designers successfully work with and struggle with AI. Our findings revealed that designers can innovate at the system and service levels. We also discovered that making a case for an AI feature’s return on investment is a barrier for designers when they propose AI concepts and ideas. Our discussions produced novel insights on designers’ role on AI teams, and the boundary objects they used for collaborating with data scientists. We discuss the implications of these findings as opportunities for future research aiming to empower designers in working with data and AI.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2007501
- PAR ID:
- 10331776
- Author(s) / Creator(s):
- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; more »
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- CHI '22: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 13
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
As artificial intelligence (AI) profoundly reshapes our personal and professional lives, there are growing calls to support pre-college aged youth as they develop capacity to engage critically and productively with AI. While efforts to introduce AI concepts to pre-college aged youth have largely focused on older teens, there is growing recognition of the importance of developing AI literacy among younger children. Today’s youth already encounter and use AI regularly, but they might not yet be aware of its role, limitations, risks, or purpose in a particular encounter, and may not be positioned to question whether it should be doing what it’s doing. In response to this critical moment to develop AI learning experiences that can support children at this age, researchers and learning designers at the University of California’s Lawrence Hall of Science, in collaboration with AI developers at the University of Southern California’s Institute for Creative Technologies, have been iteratively developing and studying a series of interactive learning experiences for public science centers and similar out-of-school settings. The project is funded through a grant by the National Science Foundation and the resulting exhibit, The Virtually Human Experience (VHX), represents one of the first interactive museum exhibits in the United States designed explicitly to support young children and their families in developing understanding of AI. The coordinated experiences in VHX include both digital (computer-based) and non-digital (“unplugged”) activities designed to engage children (ages 7-12) and their families in learning about AI. In this paper, we describe emerging insights from a series of case studies that track small groups of museum visitors (e.g. a parent and two children) as they interact with the exhibit. The case studies reveal opportunities and challenges associated with designing AI learning experiences for young children in a free-choice environment like a public science center. In particular, we focus on three themes emerging from our analyses of case data: 1) relationships between design elements and collaborative discourse within intergenerational groups (i.e., families and other adult-child pairings); 2) relationships between design elements and impromptu visitor experimentation within the exhibit space; and 3) challenges in designing activities with a low threshold for initial engagement such that even the youngest visitors can engage meaningfully with the activity. Findings from this study are directly relevant to support researchers and learning designers engaged in rapidly expanding efforts to develop AI learning opportunities for youth, and are likely to be of interest to a broad range of researchers, designers, and practitioners as society encounters this transformative technology and its applications become increasingly integral to how we live and work.more » « less
-
Abstract Designers often gather information, for instance through stakeholder or domain expert meetings, to understand their design problems and develop effective solutions. However, few previous studies have provided in-depth descriptions of novice engineering designers’ approaches to conducting information gathering meetings. In this preliminary study, we analyzed data from six capstone mechanical engineering design teams to identify the types of individuals from whom teams gathered information, when these meetings occurred, and how teams solicited information during meetings. Teams in our study exhibited a range of information gathering behaviors that aligned with recommended practices, particularly in their early meetings. We also observed relatively few instances of teams exhibiting behaviors that were less similar to recommended practices during their meetings. However, our findings revealed two key trends across teams that represented specific opportunities for improvement and that may reflect characteristic novice approaches to conducting information gathering meetings. First, teams explored domain experts’ perspectives in depth during meetings and met with additional domain experts to inform their projects. Teams' meetings with project partners contained few instances of deep exploratory information gathering behaviors in comparison. In addition, teams seemed to finalize design decisions during early design meetings and were less likely to conduct information gathering meetings during later design phases. The comprehensive descriptions of novice mechanical engineering designers’ approaches provided in our preliminary study provide an entry point for further investigations that can inform engineering training, tools, and pedagogy for conducting effective meetings.more » « less
-
Despite the potential of generative AI (GenAI) design tools to enhance design processes, professionals often struggle to integrate AI into their workflows. Fundamental cognitive challenges include the need to specify all design criteria as distinct parameters upfront (intent formulation) and designers' reduced cognitive involvement in the design process due to cognitive offloading, which can lead to insufficient problem exploration, underspecification, and limited ability to evaluate outcomes. Motivated by these challenges, we envision novel metacognitive support agents that assist designers in working more reflectively with GenAI. To explore this vision, we conducted exploratory prototyping through a Wizard of Oz elicitation study with 20 mechanical designers probing multiple metacognitive support strategies. We found that agent-supported users created more feasible designs than non-supported users, with differing impacts between support strategies. Based on these findings, we discuss opportunities and tradeoffs of metacognitive support agents and considerations for future AI-based design tools.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)At the start of their work for the National Science Foundation’s Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) Program (IUSE/Professional Formation of Engineers, NSF 19-614), RED teams face a variety of challenges. Not only must they craft a shared vision for their projects and create strategic partnerships across their campuses to move the project forward, they must also form a new team and communicate effectively within the team. Our work with RED teams over the past 5 years has highlighted the common challenges these teams face at the start, and for that reason, we have developed the RED Start Up Session, a ½ day workshop that establishes best practices for RED teams’ work and allows for early successes in these five year projects. As the RED Participatory Action Research team (REDPAR)--comprised of individuals from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and the University of Washington--we have taken the research data collected as we work with RED teams and translated it into practical strategies that can benefit RED teams as they embark on their projects. This presentation will focus on the content and organization of the Start Up Session and how these lessons learned can contribute to the furthering of the goals of the RED program: to design “revolutionary new approaches to engineering education,” focusing on “organizational and cultural change within the departments, involving students, faculty, staff, and industry in rethinking what it means to provide an engineering program.” We see the Start Up Session as an important first step in the RED team establishing an identity as a team and learning how to work effectively together. We also encourage new RED teams to learn from the past, through a panel discussion with current RED team members who fill various roles on the teams: engineering education researcher, project manager, project PI, disciplinary faculty, social scientist, and others. By presenting our findings from the Start Up Session at ASEE, we believe we can contribute to the national conversation regarding change in engineering education as it is evidenced in the RED team’s work.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517491
