arjun's itp-blog

ga_ima_physical-computing_class_log:

written on .

log to keep track of things during the ima physical-computing class that i’m a g.a. for in spring 2026.

class 1:

  • realized that a lot of the times, showing aspirational projects can inspire students — show them the sky, even if their skill cannot reach there. the job of a teacher is to open eyes.
  • i think a class needs interim participation from the class.

260217:

it’s interesting to see differences between ima and itp students.

ima students are very instruction-driven — i’ll do what i’m told. some itp students also come that way (especially ones straight from undergrad).

the use of ai is also astounding. somehow, making art is not about the process anymore — it’s a job, a chore — and about the final outcome.

260223:

there is a real-time clock on the arduino. can be used to automate certain tasks (such as send an email every morning or something).

260302 soldering workshop plan:

  • why solder?

    • preserve a circuit
    • make a component usable (headers, components to components)

  • tools:

    • protoboards
    • soldering stations
      • wand
      • control
      • fume extractor
      • rubber mat
    • wire clippers
    • flush cutter
    • tweezers
    • solid wire
    • solder
    • solder sucker
    • copper wire

  • good soldering practices + safety + terms:

    • always touch by the handle, never by the tip
    • tinning the tip, keeping it clean (look for shiny things)
    • how solder flows

  • example + activity: solder a throughhole component nicely.

  • final activity: solder a circuit

260329: workshop:

what:

the ambiguous goal for a final-project in physical-computing is to make something ‘good’. but — what is ‘good’? who defines it? whom must it be good for? therefore, how can undergraduate-students strive towards something that they don’t even know yet?

this workshop pushes students to define concrete-aspirations for their physical-computing-final. instructors use that checklist during the multi-week project to evaluate, give pointed feedback & critique students’ work.

structure (~ 60m):

  • acknowledging the blue-sky brief. (5m)

  • then: what makes a ‘good’ physical-computing project? (10m)

    • we brainstorm; arjun challenges popular notions (examples: easy to use versus friction (lift push vs pull button, deleting something important confirmation), should be about the electronics (show kissing booth)).
    • acknowledge the ambiguity with which we’re dealing with.
    • so, then, what makes a ‘good’ project?

  • spread: (10m)

    • we collect as many examples as we can think of for the following:
      • good physical-computing / interactive projects.
      • good interaction (more common, everyday).

  • analyze: (10m + 10m)

    • what about them makes it good for you?
    • share with a partner (verbalizing helps)

  • see sections of inventing on principle (point being: figure out things that you care about). (10m)

  • homework: make your own checklist — the instructor will use this to give you feedback, and to critique your work later.

  • arjun shows examples of his physical-computing checklist evolution: (5m)

    • midterm goals → reflection → final.

  • post class:

    • arjun & jesse do one round of comments. every feedback from then on (and the final critique) takes the goals into account.

project-list:

connections: