What did we do?
The Self-Serve Content Alpha team is investigating potential self-serve solutions that can help schools action technology related guidance and recommendations. As our first priorities are focused on understanding our approach to content creation and how we might house content to best meet user needs, we completed our first idea generation workshop to generate some prompts and prototypes of concepts. We completed a number of exercises to generate ideas, these are outlined in more detail below.
The thinking explained in this post are initial concepts and ideas which will be refined as this Alpha continues. We aim to use this early thinking as prompts and provocations for discussion within our team and with wider stakeholders in the STS programme, so that we can explore different Self-Serve options, implications and consequences.
Context Triggers and Assumptions
Using existing evidence that suggests the need for self-serve support and the Support Model problem statement for context, we spent some time documenting the assumed contexts or triggers that would lead to a user needing to access Self-Serve Support content. These were then sorted into reactive or proactive contexts and triggers so that we can start understanding whether there are clear differentiations between the reasons why a proactive user might come to a self-serve support service in comparison to a reactive user.
_Image showing the range of context and trigger assumptions that were mapped out during the workshop. The blue label stands for a context / trigger to be proactive and the red label indicates a context / trigger is reactive. _
As Plan Tech have already indicated a range of requirements for content that could fall within a Self-Serve Support Service, we then took two Plan Tech audit categories - Enhancing Teaching Techniques and Safety and Security - and affinity sorted the context and trigger assumptions to get an initial understanding of whether there was a difference in reactive or proactive triggers for each scenario.
Working with Scenarios
We then mapped assumed user journeys for three different scenarios, that covered both proactive and reactive mindsets, to get an initial understanding of why a user might come to our potential service.
Using these scenarios as prompts, we outlined types and formats of content that a user might need to help them in the three specific scenarios. We also captured that a user might want to print or download content that is relevant to them.
_ Image showing different types and formats of content that we believe users might need in a self-serve support context. _
Content and Information Architecture
We started to capture how a potential Self-Serve content service might sit alongside other existing services within the Schools Technology Services programme. Our thinking focused on how self-serve content could be both standalone and also available within other services where appropriate. We also discussed how the same self-serve content could be used for different services, depending on the scenario.
Idea generation
We then brought all of this thinking together and completed some initial idea generation around what self-serve content could look like for a user who has completed the Plan Tech service.
_ Image showing an example of one of the proposed ideas for what self-serve content could look like for a specific Plan Tech scenario. Sticky notes show thoughts and considerations from other team members. _
There were a range of ideas that were generated and we aim to use these for future discussions and build on these early ideas as we gain more insights from users during our Alpha.