We must allow the time to think more deeply and
broadly about our [design] . . . Deep inquiry . . . is
critical . . . Broader thinking also helps us break
out of our current mindset. Looking [differently]
can reveal new opportunities, and challenge more
entrenched thinking. [Laurel, Brenda. Design Research, Methods and Perspectives. MIT Press:
Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2003, 148.]
The contemporary school chair is representative of the
conflict between established traditional student behaviour
in the conventional classroom and the ADHDer’s desire
and need for more movement and sensory stimulation.
Classroom furnishings, by their active potential, have the
ability to change the dynamic embodied in existing classroom
environments. New furnishings in the classroom may
positively affect the traditional culture of conventionality
(standardized classroom behaviours) in a positive way by
directly involving students in the interplay between active
learning and sensory stimuli. Ultimately, my design approach
is to provide a furnishing that responds to the ADHDer’s
learning experience in the classroom environment.
Using my individual experience of having ADHD as an investigative
blueprint, my study took on a design process that
overlapped four explorative modes: I examined the context
of traditional classrooms (searched for understanding),
developed contextualisation (searched for ideas), tested
the concepts (searched for solutions), and logically reasoned
(searched for meaning) an optimal design. These explorative
modes were not done entirely sequentially. There
was an ebb and flow throughout my whole design process.
The interrelatedness between the explorative modes, and
iterative process of learning and knowledge generally,
helped generate a reactive design process which was ultimately
represented by my design solution.