Vision and identity as a designer
‍As this M22 project is a continuation of the M21 project, this project still inherently relates to my vision and identity as a designer because this project was constructed as a product of this vision and identity. However, this M22 project 'closes the circle', as I write in my vision on design that I aspire to design products that unify the benefits of the digital world with the richness of the physical works by implying physical interaction and captivating on all human abilities (cognitive, motor/perceptual, social and emotional). Even though these types of products are generally not aspired to be - nor suitable for - retail purposes, I intend to change this course of action, as I think that this "third approach" [2] should be the direction that we are heading towards. The only way in which I can have even the slightest amount of influence on this quest, is by pursuing this vision in my own work. The goal of the M22 project was to translate the theoretically infused product proposal that was the result of the M21 project into a viable product, suitable for retail purposes. As I write in the conclusion of my report, I think that this M22 project provides significant 'proof' that these type of academically infused explorations could and should be the foundation of industry-oriented products, systems or services, as they result in relevant, meaningful and novel implementations. This project has given me the confirmation that I can pursue my vision on design successfully, so that's exactly what I intend to presume when entering my industry-oriented career.

Integration of AEs and reflection of learning goals
User & Society
For US, I wrote in my PDP that I intended to involve the user as the main stakeholder in the design process, by adopting a user-centered approach. I planned on doing this by empathizing with the user and collecting insights by validating and evaluating each consolidated design iteration by means of a qualitative research approach. What gave me a lot of rest and reassurance this semester is that I've managed to recruit participants who were willing to grant their involvement form start to finish. For each user study, I didn't have to go through the uncertainty of receiving a signed ERB form in time and the turmoil of recruiting enough willing participants. I was simply able to contact each participant and plan the upcoming user study, because everything was arranged from the beginning of the semester.

Moreover, it is astonishing to me how much rich insights one could collect from these qualitative user studies, as I have found so many interesting and valuable results that I couldn't even touch upon in this project: time was limited and choices had to be made. Nevertheless, I did also experience a downside to acquiring this huge collection of meaningful findings, as it was sometimes overwhelming and therefore very hard to see the bigger picture in order to do something useful with it. A user-centered approach as opposed to a user-driven approach - that was adopted in the first phase of this project (M21) - gives the user a voice. This is often very valuable, but it also resulted in me diverging from my path and vision by feeling the obligation to satisfy all these, somewhat irrelevant, functional needs, which was way less prevalent - or even non-existing - when applying the user-driven approach. In conclusion, it has made me realize that yes, users should have a voice and be embedded in the design process, but one must be very aware that users are not the designers. And that is for a reason.

Creativity & Aesthetics
A few different goals were formulated in the PDP for this AE. First, I wanted to challenge myself to use a variety of creative techniques for design, as I felt that I hadn't shown a great variety in the first phase of this project. Reflecting on this goal, I can carefully say that I haven't gone outside of my comfort zone concerning the application of creative techniques. When I try to think about why I have diminished this goal, it may have something to do with this semester having less room for this AE than the previous semester, as a general goal of this semester was to show a broader integration of all AEs. The 'design' phases of this project needed to be qualitative and efficient, and that naturally made use the creative techniques that I know work for me. Nevertheless, I do think that I would be open towards trying new techniques and learning new ways to generate ideas, whenever the situation asks for it. In addition, I did implement some new techniques to realize an aesthetic fulfillment of the demonstrator, like utilizing a wood milling computer and 3D printing technology.

Second, I set as a goal to consciously change perspectives once in a while, as I tend to easily get lost in tunnel vision, needing the perspective of someone else to pull me out of it and regain focus. I planned on achieving this goal by taking a deliberate moment each week in which I would consciously distance myself from my work and try to see things from a different perspective on my own. I do remember taking such a deliberate moment at the beginning of the semester, where I was caught up with trying to find a specific user case for the newly attained target group, which was fueled by the interpretation of my project by the market-relevant stakeholder. It made me realize that I don't need a specific user case, as my user case was already crystal clear: the user's disengagement from one's digital photo collection due to the paradoxical nature of its spaceless quality [3]. Despite this moment saving me from diverging from my path right from the beginning, it was the only instant throughout the semester where I actually took this deliberate moment. I think that this may be due to having such a rich panel of actively involved stakeholders, who naturally took on the role of pulling me out of my tunnel vision when being popularized with my design processes. I deemed this goal 'achieved' in my PDP when I would have one self-induced 'Eureka'-type of moment during this semester, that were fully produced by (one of) my active attempts to change perspectives. Even though I have had multiple of these 'Eureka'-type moments throughout the semester, they were not inevitably self-induced. Reflecting on this goal, I do not think that it is necessarily a bad thing that I've relied on my stakeholders to provide me with these insights, because, isn't that also part of what involving stakeholders is about? To collect all this different perspectives and use them as input for forming my own perspective on things. I still would like to be capable of consciously changing perspectives myself, so I will still pursue that goal in the future. Nevertheless, this project made me open towards the idea that taking inspiration of other peoples' perspectives is a valuable and effective method as well.

Technology & Realization
TR is integrated in this M22 project by realizing a partially experiential demonstrator of the consolidated concept. I got acquainted with precision modeling, as physical dimensions had to be translated to digital dimensions for the realization of the base plate, the acrylic rings and the 3D-printed control device. Speaking of 3D-printing, this was the first time in my design-focussed career that I've used my freshly acquired 3D modeling skills to realize a product by means of 3D printing. It's amazing how this technology opens up this whole range of new possibilities and I wish that I would have allowed myself to enter this world earlier on in my study career.

I used my surface-level coding skills, my field-specific vocabulary (for finding answers to coding challenges and appeared errors) and my Teensy to realize a small portion of the concept into an experiential ordeal. The result of these efforts is a partially experiential demonstrator that does not only provide the audience with a sense of the product's size; look and feel; and presence in the room, it also allows to user to experience the designed interaction by being able to pick up the control device, place it in one of the trajectories and move it along the trajectory. In addition, the demonstrator allows the user to experience how the display output would react to the user's actions.

It is needless to say that a fully experiential demonstrator would of course have been the best case scenario for evaluating the designed consolidated concept with the user. Nevertheless, I have made the deliberate choice to primarily focus my time and efforts towards design activities in which I excel and which therefore give me the capability to actually make a difference. Even if I would have devoted - say - half the semester towards realizing a fully experiential prototype, there would still be a high chance that I wouldn't have succeeded, as my knowledge and skill within this AE would just not suffice for realizing such a technically complicated concept. Moreover, it would have restricted me from performing two design iterations with grounds of three user studies, resulting in the question whether the design would be regarded as meaningful as it is now. Drawing back to the goal that I've set for this AE in my PDP, I wrote to aim for a mid-fidelity prototype with interactive abilities, but that I should also be cautious on how much time and effort I should be spending on pursuing this goal. I set the requirement for this goal to be deemed 'achieved' when the demonstrator would have one working interactive ability. Therefore, I am opinionated that I've integrated this AE conform my learning goals and my vision and identity as a designer.
 
Business & Entrepreneurship
As the main challenge of this M22 project was to translate a theoretically infused product proposal into a viable product, suitable for retail purposes, an integration of BE was deemed valuable. Because I have had least affiliation with this AE throughout this Master's program, I involved a market-relevant stakeholder that would be able to guide me in gaining relevant business awareness. One of my goals for this AE as written in my PDP was to develop an understanding of value propositions, market trends and competition analyses, and was deemed 'achieved' when I could present a product with a viable business-case. I have learned how to perform a competitor analysis, I can position my work in the market, and I have learned how to draw conclusions from those two exercises. In addition, I can sufficiently complete a Value Proposition Canvas and a Business Model Canvas. Participating in these activities and involving a market-relevant stakeholder who was revenue-driven made me realize that I am not driven by making profit. Rather, I am value-driven, as seeing a product in the light of how it could make the most money makes me uncomfortable. I know that it is the reality that we live in today and I know that I will endow myself into this reality by pursuing an industry-oriented career. Nevertheless, I am devoted towards pursuing my vision in this revenue-driven reality, because a product, system or service that adds significant value will sell itself.

Finally, in my PDP I had set the goal to find a comfortable balance between the wishes and aspirations from involved stakeholders and staying true to my vision on design. Even though there was a moment in the design process where I was overwhelmed by expectations from different stakeholders concerning how I should invest my scarce time, I was brought back in control by one of the involved academic stakeholders. She told me that I am the designer and that it is up to me to decide from which aspects I allow myself to be inspired and which aspects I decide to disregard. I am the one that has the overview of the insights form all these different sources and therefore I am the one that pulls the strings.
‍
Math, Data and Computing
As my concept relied substantially on machine learning algorithms and Artificial Intelligence, it is my responsibility as a designer to acquire at least surface-level knowledge on how these processes would be realized and if they are realizable in the first place. I don't have to build it myself, but I need to be capable of efficiently communicating my ideas to someone who can build it. This project allowed me to realize that throughout this Master’s program I have developed surface-level understanding and a sufficient field-specific vocabulary to estimate the feasibility of my designs and communicate the designed underlying data-driven structures to the satisfaction of machine learning and Artificial Intelligence experts. In my PDP, I write that my goal for this AE is to acquire basic understanding of how the data structures and applications of machine learning would work in the final product. Therefore, I can now say that I deem this goal to be 'achieved' and I am quite positively surprised with how 'smooth' the pursuance of this goal went.

Design and research processes
For design and research processes, I didn't set any goals in my PDP, which I only realize now when having resurfaced this PDP near the end of the semester. However, there was one prevalent aspect in which there was room for improvement, as the main point of feedback on my M21 report was to challenge myself to write more concise. Writing too elaborately has been the story of my life throughout my study career. I don't only take a lot of joy in writing, I also feel this self-proclaimed requirement that everything that I did should be documented in the report, which has often resulted in stressful endeavors: trying to remove word by word in order to meet the 'maximum amount of pages' or 'maximum amount of words' requirement.

My coach gave me the advice to try to look at the report as a story that I want to convey to audiences, and to critically ask myself which parts of the process are relevant for telling this story, and which parts are irrelevant or even obstructing me from telling this story. Leaving out these irrelevant parts may 'hurt', as it may feel like my hard work will not be recognized. However, it is precisely the omission of these irrelevant parts that will make my work shine, as the message of my work will be conveyed in a more powerful way.

Having applied this word of advice, I can honestly say that this method for writing was very enlightening. I was able to write the report in a very linear way, and I didn't feel as stressed when leaving out certain parts as I would have before, because this time I had a compelling argument for why that part should be omitted: it doesn't add to the story. Despite this, I have to admit that I had still written about 1500 words too many when I was done writing, which immediately evoked the kind of stress that I was so used to: 'What am I supposed to remove, now that everything that is in here is relevant and adds to the story?'. It took some reflection and a night of sleep to realize that even if everything that's written can be deemed relevant for the story, there are still aspects that could be deemed less relevant than other aspects. This mindset helped me to remove the lesser relevant portions and 'fairly easily' meet the requirement of '12.000 words maximum'.

Moreover, the confirmation that both academic experts that were involved in my M21 and M22 project have expressed in writing that they deem my work 'publishable', is super exciting. Even though there is always room for improvement and I have yet a lot to learn if I were to continue my academic career, I consider this a significant milestone that I am proud of. In addition, one of the academic experts expressed to be impressed by my interviewing skills, as she could conclude that I have managed to bring forward some rich findings that she herself was aware of, but had never heart from the user itself before. Sometimes you need someone to recognize something like that for you to be able to recognize it in yourself as well.

Future
‍For elaboration on how I plan to start my career when graduated, please view the 'Future' portion of the About page.