As a group what problem did you identify and why?
The problem that we, as a group, identified was that
students are lazy, unhealthy and do very little to maintain a healthy
lifestyle. This lack of enthusiasm to do anything about it could be caused by a
number of different reasons; students are lazy, work, university/college work,
Etc.
What
methods did you use to gather your evidence to prove this was a problem and
what forms did it take?
The methods we used to gather research were
questioning students about their lifestyles. As we are students, gathering this
information was easily accessible. This gave us various statistics and
supported our initial thoughts that students don’t do a lot of exercise unless
they really want to and that students rarely eat healthy meals regularly.
Secondary research again cemented the fact that getting student to do exercise
is a near impossible task if they do not want to do it.
What
methods of research did you find useful and why?
The most useful research was into shock advertising
and what creates the most impact so we could create our own posters. Another
important and useful method of research was observation and experience. This
gave us the most insight into what people actually did and what was required .
What
research could you have carried out that would have proved more useful?
We should have done a more research into the rules
and regulations of putting up posters in college, as this was the cause of
several set-backs though out the project. More research should have also been
done into that actual lifestyle and fitness element, providing more fact, as –
although the concept was very good – the evidence and supporting facts were not
as strong.
How
did you manage the workload as part of a group?
Over the whole three weeks of the brief, I think the
time could have been managed much better. Although we all did separate tasks
and produced different work, it was not always coherent and did not always work
together. Initially we all designed logo and poster ideas which, although it
gave us a wide variety of ideas it meant we wasted a few days doing the same
thing. Due to the problems we found it meant everything was either rushed or
there was nothing to do. Had we planned the work load out evenly and done more
research in the given time – with our concept – I believe we could have taken
it much further so that it potentially could have gone viral. Over all I think
we worked well as a group, however, there were points of confusion and
miscommunication where people did not understand what they were meant to do or
were not there to contribute.
The brief title, to us, suggested that what was
produced had to stir attention, get people talking and raise awareness. And
although very few people got to see our initial campaign, I believe what we
produced and specifically the concept, epitomized how communication can be a
virus. Had we had more time and if our posters had stayed up I think there
would be more evidence to prove how successful it could have been.
To make it more successful, if we were to do it
again, more thorough research would be needed. The research would give us more
statistics and information about who uses the lift and why. Another element
that could have been improved was our planning, had we been more organized and
executed our phases and plans better the whole project would be more thorough
and the outcome would be improved. The final element that we possibly may have
reconsidered, although we were very happy with it and so were most of the
people we spoke to, would be the tone of voice and the language. Looking more
into whether an simple yet boring instruction would prove more effective that
the forceful profanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment