That’s some serious documentation! I like how you provide the brief overview. It could be nice to get a little more insight into the process. What questions did you ask participants? Not just the nosy what/why questions, but did you bounce any potential solutions off of participants?

You should look up speed dating (the design research method) when we get to usability testing. You don’t have to implement your designs in WCMA itself, speed dating could give you a pinch more of the context. Also, reading the “Motivation” section from this project from last semester seems relevant: https://github.com/sliuu/hciproject/blob/gh-pages/_posts/2018-02-18-project-proposal.md Links to an external site.

“The data can then be represented through artwork created by Art Studio students, interactive wall panels, or something else entirely.” You have a few options here (that I can come up with, off the top of my head) - you could work on designing one of these interactive wall panels, you could work on supporting artists exploring the data for their art exhibits, or you can just get more specific with your use base and only target a subset of what you’re setting out to do.

“he wished he could get visitor questions directly sent to his phone so he could answer them (given he had the time), that way it might eliminate some frustration.”” –> I think it could even be cool just to play with hypothetical-ish qualitative data info viz (i.e., one could possibly get body posture from MS Kinect devices - what could you do with that?)

Play a bit with creativity in your Task Review, I think it could help narrow your focus a bit.

“most of the feedback U2 receives is positive, which made him worry that people who are confused or frustrated aren’t expressing this information to him.” –> this is very likely the case.

“What are the time constraints on the tasks?” –> what are the time constraints on the tasks that you’re going to focus on? An entire 4 months? That task is too broad!