Starting the FTW process in the far future (Box 4) frees participants from present technological limitations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2007 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across pilot studies, the most successful approach was to start with technology and activity in the far future, then ground ideas through sessions relating them to current activity and technology. → Giasemi N. Vavoula and Mike Sharples 2007

Evidence¶

Giasemi N. Vavoula and Mike Sharples 2007¶

Giasemi N. Vavoula and Mike Sharples. (2007). Future Technology Workshop: A Collaborative Method for the Design of New Learning Technologies and Activities. Pre-print, to appear in International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Volume 2, Issue 4, December 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9026-0

q2 · i? · design · r2

Series of pilot studies held during 2001-2 (Vavoula, Sharples, & Rudman, 2002) refining the workshop structure. The authors report that "the most successful approach is to start with technology and activity in the far future", with later sessions grounding ideas in the present and near future.

"As a result of the pilot studies, we found that the most successful approach is to start with technology and activity in the far future (Box 4 in Table #2)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Early FTW pilots produced only general non-functional requirements, prompting method modifications — related
• An innovation foreign to the rest of its system tends to be rejected; lasting change needs a coordinated bundle of innovations. — a broader claim this one bears on
• Students' perceptions of futures broadened and pluralised, and deterministic thought patterns were questioned — related
• Students adopted nondeterministic (SCOT-like) views in which humans influence technological change, supporting agency — related