October 1, 2014
Our last IQP meeting of the term brought more revelations. In summary, we discussed the matrix we created, but the real focus was on funneling all of our findings and background information into justifiable recommendations.
Life is an enigma.This project is for the New England Aquarium, and we need to make sure that we can gain the approval of their research department while giving the MQP team the tools they need to ensure the game is factually accurate, engaging, enlightening about our connection to right whales.
Here is my colorful justification of how the game will address our goal:
- The game is a communication tool. That's all--conveying our central message. But what message is that? And how do we convey it?
- Our central message: the public should know how they affect the ocean--this is the overarching theme of the NEAq's messages. In other words, this is the seed to all other messages we will convey. So, how do we convey that?
- To convey the message: we will illustrate the problem in an engaging way. The audience can figure out the message themselves. Or we can state it explicitly. But how do we illustrate the problem engagingly?
- To illustrate the problem engagingly, we will illustrate the life of the right whale and their human threats. The first priority in our illustration is factual accuracy. The other priorities (or "criteria") are fun, engaging-ness, motivation-for-action, and others we have not decided yet. Ideally, the audience will complete the game feeling hopeful and wanting to help.
There are a few general questions about the project that may be good for me to answer:
"What an interesting perspective on the project. How are you going to do it?"
Engaging the audience requires two teams. Our team has spent the past month trying to come up with the materials and recommendations needed by the NEAq and the MQP. The MQP team will convert our recommendations into an engaging game that conveys our message.
"What materials and recommendations?"
Our materials consist of a matrix and a content table, so far.
First, we have a matrix to allow the NEAq to come to a decision on platform for the MQP group. However, this matrix contains so much detail that it is difficult to communicate its meaning, among other problems with it.
Secondly, we have a content table that is currently a work-in-progress which features the appearances, roles in the environment and to right whales, and behaviors of right whales, various other sea creatures, human role-players, and their various vessels and equipment. Ideally, this table will be the only resource the MQP group will need for factual information.
These two charts are supplemented with recommendations targeted at the NEAq and MQP groups. We have findings and background research which we use to justify various decisions about what platform, audience, genre, tone (maybe), storyline, and content should make it into the game.
"Wow, are the recommendations really so important? What does it matter if they are not properly supported by your findings, and are ignored?"
Our recommendations are a communication tool between us and the NEAq/MQP groups, so they can understand the rock-solid research we conducted over the course of at least three months.
So, our goal is to help the NEAq and the MQP group reach their goals. If we fail to support our recommendations, our project will simply become hollow credit-hours. None of us want that--we want to see the game reach its goal.
Our smiles here indicate our willingness to address the inherent complexities of our project, and to cross this street.
As our team will be repeating many times, the end of the road is in sight.
Yours,
Alex
