This week’s homework contains a team portion that you will need to do in class and an individual portion outside of class.
In class:
Work in teams of 2 (or 3 in the case we have an odd number of attendees today) and take one box of LEGOs. Please keep everything together and do your best not to lose any pieces.
Together, spread the bricks and elements out and discuss different ways of categorizing them. Think: How are they alike and different? Are some alike and different in multiple ways? Keep notes on what you discuss to report back aloud during class and to use in your individual homework assignment later.
Together, choose a two-dimensional classification system for at least 10 bricks or elements. For example, shape (round, square, rectangle, triangle, etc.) and color. Or, size (length: one stud, two studs, three studs, etc.) and shape. Or, something else that involves two ways of categorizing a selection of your LEGOs. In your notebook, draw a chart with one axis being one category and the other axis being the other. For your selected LEGOs, count how many bricks or elements match the criteria and enter it into your chart.
At home:
Individually, write a memo in your word processor of choice addressed to Prof. Ellis with the subject, “IA for LEGOs.” It should be at least 250 words long all inclusive. Your memo should include an introduction explaining the purpose of the memo (demonstrating your LEGO categorizing work in a small team) followed by a longer discussion of what criteria your team considered using before settling on the two for your chart. You may type up any of your relevant notes to include as a part of your discuss as well as new thoughts that you might have had after class. Finally, you should introduce and recreate your chart using tabs as discussed in class (do not use your word processor’s table feature).
Save your work and then copy-and-paste your memo into a comment made to this post. Tweak your tab-created table so that it looks as good as possible (I’m not expecting perfection, but I am wanting to give you some practice making things work when the tools are ill-fitted to the task). Post your comment before our class next week for full credit.
TO: Prof. Ellis
FROM: Jaida Clouden
DATE: 2/9/23
SUBJECT: IA FOR LEGOs
During class, my partner Kahini and I were assigned a task to choose a two-dimensional classification system for ten pieces of LEGOs. The purpose of this task was to define the characteristics and merit of the pieces that we chose. We discussed the different ways of categorizing LEGOs, for example, how the pieces are alike and different, their sizes, and usage.
The two-dimensional classification system we came up with was Currency. We sorted out the LEGOs that consisted of bills and coins and categorized them by their value. The number of bills we had was a total of two, and the number of coins we had was a total of eight. The value of the two bills was $100 each. As for the coins, two coins had a value of $1, two coins had a value of $2, one coin had a value of $5, and three coins had a value of $10.
The ability to work as a team allowed us to use critical thinking and organizational skills. I was able to demonstrate and analyze various techniques of classifying. I found this LEGO activity fun to do as I was able to use my creative side to think of the different ways I could categorize LEGOs. I most definitely want to do an activity like this again.
Currency Value $1 Value $2 Value $5 Value $10 Value $100
Bills 0 0 0 0 2
Coins 2 2 1 3 0
TO: Prof. Ellis
FROM: Khaled Akam
DATE: February 10, 2023
SUBJECT: IA for LEGOs
In class we were split into groups of two and given a box of LEGOs to categorize. With a limited amount of time my partner Nikka and I had to discuss the criteria of how to sort the LEGOs.
At first, we thought of using the stud count to separate the LEGOs but there were some that had no studs, so it wasn’t the best setup for us. As a team we settled on using size and colors to categorize the LEGOs because we felt it was an easier fit. Along side the size we had a rubric with tiny being equal to or less than 1 by 1 LEGO stud. Small was greater than a 1 by 1 stud and less than a 1 by 4 stud. Medium is greater then 1 by 4 stud and less than 1 by 8 stud. Finally large is everything bigger than a 1 by 8 stud.
It took a while but we moved the LEGOs into correlated piles of color and size by holding a rubric stud, so we knew what pile it went too. As a result, we had piles ready to be counted and inputted into a chart. As we counted each pile with the corresponding color and size, Nikka completed chart in her laptop.
COLORS Black White Red Blue Green Yellow Gray Brown Two or more Metallic Other
Total 25 9 9 19 17 12 25 7 15 12 2
Tiny 5 0 1 1 2 2 5 0 2 11 0
Small 6 4 3 8 2 2 10 0 4 1 1
Medium 2 1 1 5 6 3 1 3 5 0 1
Large 11 4 4 5 7 6 9 4 4 0 0
TO: Professor Jason Ellis
FROM: Ronald C. Hinds
DATE: February 13, 2023
SUBJECT: IA for LEGOs
This memo provides information detailing the arrangement of a collection of LEGO bricks into different ordered categories. We will use the art of Information Architecture, as a tool, to help us make it understandable. The brightly colored bricks were differentiated by color, shape, height and the size and number of the small studs.
As expected of budding architects, Sandy and I ascertained the way to communicate our message to our audience, i.e. our fellow students. The following three (3) questions were considered:
We decided on communicating our findings via a rubric shown below. Once we made a determination it did not take too long to complete and our success was measured by the findings at the end of the task. We considered arranging the jumble of LEGOs in order of colors using the rainbow as a template. Next we considered arranging them by shape; circular, triangular, thickness and style. I loved the DUPLOs and compared them by size to the LEGOs; the latter ones were smaller bricks. The wheels were intricately designed and caught our eyes. We went through different iterations before making a final decision. We settled for a rubric which shows the various colors and number of studs on the bricks. The number of studs was reflected by the length of the bricks.
Color Height (1 Stud) Two (2) studs Six (6) studs
Blue 1 3 0
Tan 1 0 4
Yellow 1 0 0
White 1 1 0
To complete our task we tidied up and replaced the items, which we did not use, neatly into the little basket. We snapped it shut to prevent spillage.
It was a fun exercise and we sat back and enjoyed our findings.
TO: Professor Ellis
FROM: Naila Butt
DATE: 13 Feburary 2023
Subject: IA for LEGOs
My partner, Khemraj, and I worked on categorizing legos in last week’s class. We found that there were a lot of typical lego pieces that were easier to categorize, but also some very atypical lego pieces that didn’t exactly look like your ordinary lego brick.
We categorized these pieces by separating them into colors and then into subcategories of long, short, flexible, and curved pieces. We thought that color was a pretty standard way to categorize. Our next thought was to break them into categories of properties and shapes, such as flexibility and length, because it was the next thing we physically noticed about the lego pieces after color.
In the chart we created below, our findings show that the lego pieces fall into the subcategories we created and found that it was effective. However, further testing through usability tests would be required to collect more data and confirm our categorization method.
This activity allowed my partner and I to think outside the box to find what we thought might be the most effective way to categorize these atypical lego pieces. In the process, I also learned that my partner was colorblind, and it was a crucial aspect of the study of information architecture that would shape my thought process in future projects.
Overall, this exercise was a great start to introducing me to the world of information architecture and allowed me to continue improving and building strong teamwork skills. I hope to continue improving my skills as an information architect throughout my academic career.
Color Long, Short Flexible Curved
Blue 4 0 4 0 4
White 4 3 1 1 0
Black 4 2 2 1 2
Red 2 2 0 2 1
Yellow 3 1 2 1 0
To: Professor Ellis
From: Sandy Fougeres
Date: 2/13/23
Subject: IA for LEGOS
This memo is to describe the process my teammate, Ronald, and I used to organize the LEGOS given to us in class. The purpose of this assignment is to explore the different ways we could gather information through categorizing the LEGO bricks. We were given a box full of various LEGO and as a team we sorted through each LEGO to see what we can pair or group together.
During class, Ronald and I placed some of the larger blocks on the desk to get a better visual of what we had to work with. Immediately, we decided to start with organizing them by color. Disregarding their size and shape, we focused mainly on grouping them together by this category, the result was: green, brown, white, gray, black, blue, tan, and yellow.
After categorizing them by color, we decided to move on to their shape. As we worked on organizing the LEGO, we noticed that not only could we organize them by shape but also by their size. Once we completed sorting by shape and size, we decided to organize them by the number of studs on the bricks and then by their style (wheels, etc.). Finally, in creating the chart we agreed to use the categories height, color, and number of studs. We sorted the bricks using this criterion and we were able to count how many fit in each column. The colors used were: white, yellow, blue, and tan; the number of studs decided were: 1, 2, and 6.
Height: 1 Stud 2 Studs 3 Studs
Color
White 0 1 0
Yellow 1 0 0
Blue 1 3 0
Tan 1 0 4
TO: Professor Eliis
FROM: Kahini Chauhan
DATE: 2/10/23
Subject: IA for LEGOs
On February 6, 2023, the ENG 3790 course was assigned to categorize Legos with a partner. Utilizing our knowledge of Information Architecture we considered multiple approaches. The purpose of this task was to choose a two-dimensional classification system and categorize them by using two elements. This memo describes the different techniques and the process of our LEGO categorization.
My partner Jaida and I first decided to approach the given task by organizing the building blocks by the commonality of the pieces. We grouped them according to size, color, shape, structure (round, stick-like, rectangle), gears/wheels, minifigures, and miscellaneous. Our initial approach was broad and did not cover the vast array of the given pieces. The categories consisted of many subcategories such as the number of studs, the monetary value of the currency, the height of the blocks, and use.
After evaluating all the elements we chose to categorize the currency. The LEGO pieces of currency included bills and coins with different values. Once we strategized, we set aside the currency pieces and categorized them into two piles – bills and coins. To further classify the pieces we split them into their monetary value. The criteria we finalized was to distinguish the currency pieces by their monetary value.
This activity allowed teamwork and critical thinking. It enhanced the ability to organize and created a structured chart to analyze our data through the rubric. The opportunity to participate in this activity has expanded my creativity and ability to visualize how Information Architecture can be utilized. I look forward to many similar projects in the future.
Currency Value 1 Value 2 Value 5 Value 10 Value 100
Bills 0 0 0 0 2
Coins 2 2 1 3 0
TO: Professor Ellis
FROM: Khemraj Persaud
DATE: February 17, 2023
SUBJECT: IA for LEGOs
The purpose of this memo is to demonstrate how my partner, Naila, and I separated and categorized Lego pieces during class. Legos come in many different shapes, sizes, and colors, so there were a variety of ways in which we could group them together. We noticed that the pieces came in both typical and atypical shapes, so we decided to break them down into the categories of color and atypical shape.
Once we decided on those two categories, we then separated them into four subcategories: long, short, flexible, and curved pieces. Using colors was an easy decision, as most people can easily identify things this way. It is worth noting that I am colorblind, so even though it is easy for most, it was a bit more difficult for me. Luckily, I had Naila to help separate them this way. Our next step was to then group the pieces based on whether they were long, short, flexible, or curved. We thought that this made the most sense as some of the pieces were unique and couldn’t be defined using basic shapes such as spheres or blocks.
Overall, this exercise gave us the opportunity to think critically when devising categories in a way that would allow us to present the data in an efficient and coherent way. The tab chart below shows the data we collected using these criteria:
Color Long Short Flexible Curved
Blue 4 0 4 0 4
White 4 3 1 1 0
Black 4 2 2 1 2
Red 2 2 0 2 1
Yellow 3 1 2 1 0
To: Professor Ellis
From: Sphear Forde
Date: February 17, 2023
Subject: IA FOR LEGOs
The purpose of this memo is to demonstrate my LEGO categorizing work in a small team. My partner, Tiana, and I were tasked with categorizing the LEGOSs using a two-dimensional classification system for at least ten bricks or elements. Before categorizing the LEGOs, we discussed how the bricks are alike and how they are different. After discussing the similarities and differences, we created a list of six possible general categories. The six general categories we came up with were: tools, size, usability, number of studs, color, and shape. Together, we decided to scrap the tools category. If we used tools as one of the categories, we would not have enough data. The majority of LEGO pieces in our box were bricks of various shapes.
Initially, Tiana and I considered categorizing the bricks based on size and usability, however, we did not have time to test out the usability of each brick. We then considered categorizing them based on color and the number of studs on each brick. While categorizing the LEGOs based on color, we realized the bricks did not come in a variety of colors. Most of the Legos with multiple studs on them were black and blue. Ultimately, we decided to categorize the LEGO’s based on the shape and number of studs on each LEGO piece.
To record our data, we created a data table. The vertical row represents the shape of the LEGO brick, and the horizontal row represents the number of studs. The columns in the middle represent the total number of bricks.
# of Studs Square Rectangle Circle Irregular
1 2 4 0 0
2 0 3 0 0
3 0 0 0 0
4 6 3 0 0
5 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0
8+ 0 11 0 0
9+ 1 4 1 3
To: Professor Ellis
From: Nikka Rosenstein
Date: 2/20/2023
Subject: IA for Legos
For our second class, we were divided into teams and given boxes of assorted LEGO pieces. Our objective was to decide upon criteria with which we could categorize the LEGO pieces and sort them into groups which could be cross-referenced.
It was understood that a goal of this process was to select categories that were at least somewhat useful in sorting the pieces given and describing their variety. As with many such tasks, the difficulty lies in selecting criteria that create groups of comparable sizing without leaving an unbalanced majority.
Color was an obviously useful category, given that the majority of pieces were of a single easily-defined color such as red, blue, or white. Though there were some pieces with two or more colors, this was a significant minority. For the purpose of this exercise we also grouped together pieces of distinctively different shades of a similar color. For example, pieces placed in the “yellow” category included those colored with a bright banana-like yellow as well as those colored in a lighter sand-like yellow.
We briefly considered counting the number of studs on each piece, which may have worked with a different set of pieces, but the set we were given contained too many pieces without studs for this to be a useful method of sorting. Like with any three-dimensional objects, width, length, and height individually could have been used, but lacking a ruler or an objective way to determine orientation for many pieces, we decided to combine these into a broader category we called size. We chose several basic pieces to serve as limits for our size categories, creating a metric using the following tiers:
“Tiny” <= 1×1 LEGO brick < “Small” <= 1×4 LEGO brick < “Medium” <= 1×8 LEGO brick < “Large”
These metrics resulted in the chart reproduced below.
Color Tiny Small Medium Large
Black 5 6 2 11
White 0 4 1 4
Red 1 3 1 4
Blue 1 8 5 5
Green 2 2 6 7
Yellow 2 2 3 6
Gray 5 10 1 9
Brown 0 0 3 4
Metalic 11 1 0 0
Multiple 2 4 5 4
Other 0 1 1 0
To: Professor Ellis
From: Tiana Beatty
Date: 02.20.23
Subject: IA for LEGOs
The purpose of this memo is showcase working in a collaborative team and categorizing the LEGO bricks. With my partner and classmate Sphear, we tried to decide on the best way to find ways to put the LEGO bricks in categories that would benefit and accumulate data so we could put it in our chart. At first, we were about to categorize the bricks based on usability but since that didn’t work. Because we couldn’t figure out the different ways that these bricks could be used. Then we tried to categorize them based on color and size. The bricks that we were using they weren’t a lot of options to choose from to base off size and color. So we came to the conclusion to get this data by how many studs on each block and the kind of shape they form.
For the chart that we formed, we categorized the bricks by how many studs were on each shape of the bricks. The vertical row our chart was the type of shape the bricks and the horizontal were going to be the ranges of numbers that the number of studs would range from. The columns in between are the numerical data that the number of bricks would be represented.
The results of the table we constructed is in the table below.
# of Studs Square Rectangular Irregular/Misshaped
1 2 4 0
2 0 3 0
3 0 0 0
4 6 3 0
5 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
7 0 0 0
8 0 11 0
9+ 1 5 3