Immunity
Context
This semester-long project was created for my Design Studio course during my Fall semester. For this project, I collaborated with the Museum of Science in Boston. I was challenged with taking content from an existing exhibit, and adapting it to follow the Productive Struggle framework. The Museum of Science defines Productive Struggle as "learning challenges that are exhilarating, challenging, intensive, and fruitful."
For this project, I created tangible pieces for museum guests to learn about immunity and the flu virus. Guests will play as the immune system as it is trying to fight off a virus, and observe how the body builds immunity to a particular virus.
I chose to create a new exhibit component about immunity because the Museum of Science's current exhibit on immunity is only accessible to learners with previous background in biology. I think it is important for all learners, especially families with young children, to learn about immunity. This connects to my personal interests, as I am interested in helping young people to engage with STEM. Although immunity is a complicated topic, it can be made accessible for a variety of learners. I am hoping that this activity will help young learners to become interested in STEM topics.
Productive Struggle
Productive struggle is experienced when a learner engages with emotional disequilibrium in order to navigate a challenging task and achieve a satisfying resolution. Emotional disequilibrium is a sense of imbalance (which can be experienced as confusion, frustration, surprise, or unease) brought on by a challenge.
One approach to productive struggle is forcing guests to make a decision before they have all of the information. In my "Next Steps" section (at the bottom of this page), I discuss how I could implement this approach. In this section, I describe having the learning make a prediction at the beginning of the activity, and then seeing if their prediction was correct at the end.
Iteration 1: Discovery of the First Vaccine
My initial idea was to have an activity that follows the story of the discovery of the first vaccine. Edward Jenner created a vaccine for smallpox, by discovering that cowpox has cross-immunity.
This idea was abandoned because it was more of story to be read, rather than an activity to engage in. Since guests would not be able to change a story that was already set, there would be no consequentiality or agency. Agency means that the learner is able to make choices within an environment. Consequentiality means that the learner is able to make choices that have "consequences"—meaning they can take an action that will change how the activity plays out.
Iteration 2: Virus-Antibody Puzzle Pieces
In my second iteration, I created physical antibody and virus pieces to foster embodied learning. Embodied learning means that learning is enhanced by physical movement of the body.
During the primary infection, guests will need to find the correct antibody that matches with the virus. Here, the yellow antibody matches with the virus, while the other antibodies are not a perfect fit.
After they make a correct match, sensors in the pieces will detect this match, and guests will be told that the body is now building immunity to the virus, and the pieces will reset.
Next, guests will be told that it is now months later, and the body is being exposed to the same virus a second time. Now that the body has built up immunity to this virus, there will be a larger quantity of the matching antibody.
For the secondary infection, it will be easier for the guest to match the correct antibody to the virus. Just as the guest will remember which antibody matches, the body builds "memory" to the virus.
Embodied Learning
While working on this project, I went back and forth about which parts should be physical pieces, and which parts should be on a screen. Part of my reasoning for having the virus and antibody pieces be physical pieces is that this supports embodied learning. When learners are physically manipulating the pieces, they are learning through this physicality. Manipulating the pieces will help strengthen their mental models of how viruses and antibodies interact.
In addition, having physical pieces (rather than pieces on a screen) is more accessible. Learners who are blind or low-vision would still be able to interact with physical pieces. In addition, younger learners would be able to interact with these pieces as well—young children have familiarity with fitting pieces together from playing with puzzles or other toys.
Flu Virus
As an extension activity, I designed a station for learners to interact with the flu virus. Unlike other viruses, the flu virus rapidly mutates and changes its shape. This means that antibodies that match with the flu virus one year will not necessarily match with the flu virus the following year (this is why you need to get a new flu shot every year!).
In this activity, guests will find the matching antibody during the primary infection of the flu virus. They will then be exposed to a flu virus the following year, and will be surprised to find that the antibody from the previous year no longer works. Learners will experience an "emotional disequilibrium," since they will be surprised and confused by this finding, and will need to make sense of this experience.
What I Learned
I learned about designing for a museum context, where you only have a few minutes of guest engagement. For this type of design, you need to make sure your learning objectives are achievable in a short period of time.
This project taught me about designing a standalone learning experience, where there is no facilitator. In a standalone experience, everything must be extremely clear, since the learner is not able to ask questions.
From this project, I learned about designing for variation among learners. In a museum setting, some learners will have more background knowledge about a topic than others. When designing for this type of setting, you need to ensure that your design is accessible enough to learners with less background knowledge, but goes deep enough to engage learners with more background knowledge.
I learned that Productive Struggle is very difficult to design for! At first, this concept felt vague and ill-defined for me. Throughout the design process, I learned different strategies to elicit Productive Struggle.
What I Did Well
My design supports mental model building. In my design, I "give learners 'malleable representations' that allow them to directly manipulate representations” (Quintana et al, 2004). By allowing learners to manipulate the virus and antibody pieces, they strengthen their mental model about virus-antibody interaction. They are able to learn about how these pieces fit together in an embodied way.
My design also supports mental model building by "making the invisible visible" (Collins et al, 1991). Viruses and antibodies are too small to see, so representing them with a model helps to make things more tangible and understandable for guests. Without knowing what viruses and antibodies look like, it is difficult to form a mental model of how these elements interact. By making this invisible process visible, visitors are better able to understand the system.
My design supports a variety of "invitations" for various learners. I chose a topic that everyone has some prior knowledge about: getting sick and trying to get better. Since guests already know a little about this topic, they can apply what they already know, and add to their existing mental model. In addition, learners get to take on the role of the immune system to find the matching antibodies. This “role-playing” as the immune system is fun and inviting to learners. A good way to invite learners in is to give them an opportunity to do something compelling, like role-playing.
My design includes consequentiality and agency. This means that the learner is provided with choices, and these choices affect the outcome in the activity. By allowing the learner to play as the immune system, they are able to see how different choices play out.
I supported variation among learners by ensuring that a variety of learners would be able to engage with the design. The content is simple enough that a younger learner would be able to understand that viruses and antibodies fit together like puzzle pieces. But the "ceilings are high" in my design, as a learner with more background knowledge would be able to engage deeper, via the flu virus extension activity.
Next Steps
If I were to continue with this project, I would modify my 2nd iteration to better elicit Productive Struggle. I would create a single cohesive activity that teaches about immunity and the flu. The activity will follow an individual over a period of two years, after they receive a flu shot. At the start, the guest will need to make a guess about which viruses the individual will be protected against. The guest will then play the role of the immune system, finding matching antibodies to keep the individual healthy. They will observe different strains of flu, and see that the antibodies that worked for last year’s flu no longer work in the following year. In the end, they will see if their prediction was correct!