Bodies in Translation Meeting - Sept 14, 2017

Alan, Colin, Dana, Sepideh, Tracy and Andrea

Andrea: PhD student at Guelph, knowledge mobilization officer for the grant, works with Carla Rice
- best ways to make the knowledge platform interesting / accessible
Colin: Lead software architect at IDRC, I co-lead the "accessing" stream with David Bovier
Tracy Tidgewell: project manager for BiT
Alan: developer at IDRC, also worked in library for many years
Dana: designer at IDRC, worked on Project Revision briefly back in 2014
Sepideh: designer at IDRC

First co-design session to be held on October 19^th 10-2:30pm at the IDRC (@ OCAD University)

What happens in a co-design session?:

Recognizing that we have ideas about the knowledge platform but people will have different needs and desires
we want to come up with different models of the knowledge platform

- a simple one that fits within existing funding constraints
- a more complex one with augmentation from other grants / BiT

We've had e.g. teachers and learners engaged in thinking around different design challenges
Bringing out ideas through a set of creative activities, workshop style e.g. createathons, hackathons,

Size of session?

Spectrum from formal workshop to small scale, more intimate co-design
If you get too many people you cut off the sense that there is group collaboration
Talk about process and then things to get people creating
More formal tends to be focused on a specific design tool; here we would want to explore something new, likely à less formal, more fun, pushing the edges of what has been done
Keeping it small: less than 15

Mix the audiences instead of dividing them up à gets people from different domains bouncing ideas off of one another

Don’t want to over populate with researchers (digital storytelling learning)
No observation, more participation

Who will be there?

Artists
Designers
Educators
People who might not otherwise be thinking about non normative models of embodiment in their teaching à with the material in the knowledge platform could stretch their thinking about what needs to be fixed, corrected, etc.
want the platform to provide educational materials for those who are outside the circle, so it’s good to have their perspective in the beginning - those who will be using this platform
Real mix of artists, educators, activists, designers (those more involved with the project or its aims) and then also those who aren’t from all of the sectors
Getting people who might not be interested → recruit through networks
Designers and artists might be interested but maybe haven’t been thinking in that way → general OCAD community
Could draw on people attending DEEP
Identify key stakeholders first, then open it up to the DEEP/OCAD community
Providing educational resources for people doing first year seminars etc. who would not already have this perspective → who do we want to have a stake in the platform?
Limit the list of people we know to be sure to involve others

Assume we’re doing 3 discrete sessions, that diversity within a group is better than separate; 10-15 people per group, put together a list of invites

Remote co-design → if you’re going to have a lot of remote sessions you could design around it

Interesting things you can do with remote
Challenge Toronto-centric nature
Changes group dynamics that exist in co-located spaces
Possibility of one of the 3 sessions being remote

Not progressive sessions – different people in each one, each would be quite similar OR people as threads woven through; discrete sessions likely easier to bring together a composite picture

Half day session best – less overwhelming (4, 4.5 hours)- Include lunch

Tracy and Lindsay - developed accessibility guide for big BIT meeting - we will want to have something similar for folks attending these sessions

Lindsay might be able to work on accessibility around co-design
Photographed spaces met in ahead of time
Understandings of crip time

Continuing conversations after the sessions?

Wiki could be an option
Hard to have a thread in wiki
Slack group - we could try this, as they claim to have improved accessibility

resources about different createathons etc that we’ve done - we (IDRC) can pull those together and send to everyone
Tracy et all know lots of people to invite
who do we at IDRC really want to see coming in from our networks? need to think on this

Visual or audio documentation during the co-design → ask people if they are ok with it

Immediate concrete archive of what we did - to add to platform!

Logistically people spread to different locations during the co-design session - so we'd need to ensure that there is someone to record in multiple places

Can record directly through Vidyo as well

What needs to happen before the next meeting:

Get invitation list together
Start to plan activities
Next meeting 27^th or 28^{th -}to be confirmed by email

What is the goal of the co-design session?: knowledge platform is a little fuzzy

What would people find useful and useable in terms of what people want to see in a knowledge platform, how they want to engage with knowledge
provide resources for people to think about disabilities in the classroom, how do they want to engage with it?
from our conversation yesterday: we want the platform to be a place where people can go to learn about the project, learn about non-normative visions of embodiment, the Canadian disability art community

Start of co-design session: briefly frame what the aims are but you do want it to go in unexpected directions

We don’t know what the shape of it is but these are the questions we are aiming to explore
By email – write up a blurb
It is a kind of jam session: not super directive, but outline very broad goals, provide structure for the day, but allow it to be loose

Tracy and Andrea to work with Carla to generate a blurb

Examples of previous co-design invites - IDRC will find and share