Difference between revisions of "Team:NYU-AD/Integrated Practices"
| (21 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<html> | <html> | ||
| − | + | <body> | |
<style> | <style> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
#big-container img { | #big-container img { | ||
| Line 30: | Line 19: | ||
#video1 { | #video1 { | ||
| − | width: | + | width: 60%; |
} | } | ||
| Line 48: | Line 37: | ||
<div class="pageTitle000">Practices: Integrated</div> | <div class="pageTitle000">Practices: Integrated</div> | ||
| − | <div id="video" style="padding-top:100px; margin-top:-75px | + | <div id="video" style="padding-top:100px; margin-top:-75px;"><div style="text-align:center;"> |
<video id="video1" controls style="max-height:70vh;"> | <video id="video1" controls style="max-height:70vh;"> | ||
| − | <source id="video1" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2016/ | + | <source id="video1" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2016/7/75/Final_interviews_video_NYU-AD-2016.mp4"/> |
| − | </video></div> | + | </video></div></div> |
| Line 57: | Line 46: | ||
<h3> Best Integrated Human Practices</h3> | <h3> Best Integrated Human Practices</h3> | ||
| − | <p>In the beginning of summer, we decided to create a device that addressed the lack of food safety | + | <p>In the beginning of the summer, we decided to create a device that addressed the lack of food safety regulations in many developing countries. After extensive research and discussion, our initial idea was to create a device that would detect the presence of the Shiga-like toxin outside of a laboratory setting. To direct the development of our project, we interviewed people from a number of countries outside of the UAE, where unregulated food is more prevalent, and received feedback and insight into common food practices there. </p> |
| − | <p>We then applied these suggestions to the project, deciding to fashion a small, portable device that could ideally be available and purchasable on the market for consumers to use and test on food before each meal. After finalizing the process and modeling the design, we conducted a focus group and sent out a survey to local people in the community with questions regarding the use, applicability, and demand for such a device. After getting their responses, we realized the prototype we had designed | + | <p>We then applied these suggestions to the project, deciding to fashion a small, portable device that could ideally be available and purchasable on the market for consumers to use and test on food before each meal. After finalizing the process and modeling the design, we conducted a focus group and sent out a survey to local people in the community with questions regarding the use, applicability, and demand for such a device. After getting their responses, we realized that the prototype we had designed would not be applicable to the intended audience and that the survey responses indicated the public would generally not support the use of this product. </p> |
| − | <p>Using this feedback, we changed the target users to actual food vendors themselves, and not individual consumers. Instead of testing food before each meal, the vendor could affirm the quality of | + | <p>Using this feedback, we changed the target users to actual food vendors themselves, and not individual consumers. Instead of testing the food before each meal, the vendor could affirm the quality of the food through the corroboration of our device. Our human practices were not only informative and engaging, but they were also integral in developing the basic concepts of the project, and they directed and changed the applicability of the device as a whole. </p> |
| Line 71: | Line 60: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| − | + | </body> | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
</html> | </html> | ||
{{:Team:NYU-AD/footer}} | {{:Team:NYU-AD/footer}} | ||
Latest revision as of 21:45, 30 November 2016
Best Integrated Human Practices
In the beginning of the summer, we decided to create a device that addressed the lack of food safety regulations in many developing countries. After extensive research and discussion, our initial idea was to create a device that would detect the presence of the Shiga-like toxin outside of a laboratory setting. To direct the development of our project, we interviewed people from a number of countries outside of the UAE, where unregulated food is more prevalent, and received feedback and insight into common food practices there.
We then applied these suggestions to the project, deciding to fashion a small, portable device that could ideally be available and purchasable on the market for consumers to use and test on food before each meal. After finalizing the process and modeling the design, we conducted a focus group and sent out a survey to local people in the community with questions regarding the use, applicability, and demand for such a device. After getting their responses, we realized that the prototype we had designed would not be applicable to the intended audience and that the survey responses indicated the public would generally not support the use of this product.
Using this feedback, we changed the target users to actual food vendors themselves, and not individual consumers. Instead of testing the food before each meal, the vendor could affirm the quality of the food through the corroboration of our device. Our human practices were not only informative and engaging, but they were also integral in developing the basic concepts of the project, and they directed and changed the applicability of the device as a whole.
