Review of representations - 4Ts and 4SPPIces - H800 Activity Wk8 A2a
Cloud created by:
9 April 2016
4Ts and 4SPPIces Model
4Ts - Task, technology, team and time
The graphical depiction of ‘lanes’ and use of flowchart-type symbols increase readability. It condenses the action a lot. Easier to scan the plan. As the brief notes output is ‘cear and tidy’.
Readable after time spent become familiar with unusual layout of element.
Although able to split lanes limited expressivness due to lack of space to add more detail.
In the example, the design limited by language used... mainly action verbs.
No priority given visually in terms of task timing and importance, eg. circles for tasks of 5 minutes exactly the same size as circles for 15 minute tasks.
Model seems capable of expressiveness when used for suitable learning contexts (as described in the extract).
Useful in conveying a succinct, user-friendly, readable learning plan, but lacks abilty to express finer detail and nuance.
Best used for matching learning context (as described in the extract).
Are the designs adequate for expressing your design?
The 4TS model would be suitable for expressing my design and it could serve as a simplified but very effective representation drawing on the graphical strengths of 4TS. The 4SSPIces model would not be adequate as it would be an unnecessarily convoluted way of expressing my design.
What would the benefits of using these representations for your design? Please explain your views.
The representations would generally help define the key elements in the process – eg. in 4Ts task, technology, team and time – and make it easier to see and manipulate these elements in the designing process.