Storyboarding is also a personal favorite of mine! While visualizing the problem and ideal future, it becomes easier to understand which solutions would help address the issue. Additionally, it is a great way to ensure that we are actually coming up with solutions that address the root causes. During EDUC 789, my teammates and I had different visions for how to address our wicked problem (or thought we did). When I felt we were getting stuck, I suggested that we all storyboarded our understandings and what we thought would address the issue. Doing this exercise helped us understand how to build on each other's ideas, while also realigning with our problem statement. After all, "a picture is worth a thousand words."

​On a slightly different note, I love journey/process mapping. While it is commonly used in the initial 'Empathy' phase (although not limited to this), I think it is also a valuable tool for identifying areas for ideation. In fact, I once showed a stakeholder the process map I created about students' experiences before and during in-school therapy, and it was a valuable exercise. Not only did it help with identifying potential solutions, but it also clarified my understanding of the wicked problem's causes.

"Yes, and..." is a lot more uplifting and productive than "yes, but..."

Yes, I love using analogies because it encourages me to think outside the box and draw inspiration from other successful models! For example, when I was researching how to encourage more diverse students to enroll in AP classes, I thought about how looking at options on Amazon and reviews help people make informed buying decisions. Taking inspiration from this, I came up with a database which shared syllabi of AP classes, prerequisites, and student reviews, to help students choose the best AP classes for themselves.

I hear what they are saying about constraints stifling our creativity. However, personally, when someone gives me so much freedom, I go blank. Therefore, maybe it would be helpful to remove one constraint at a time. For example, in the first ideation round, we may decide not to constrain ourselves financially; in the next, we may ease the constraints of the political environment around us. I feel like this more focused approach would help me generate a greater number of ideas.

What an innovative idea! :) This might be the convergent-thinker in me, but I feel like I would need to have a few guidelines of what "worst" means in order to be productive. Also, maybe we should rename it "improbable/outlandish ideas" instead of "worst." The term "worst" suggests that it exacerbates the issue. However, design thinkers, I think we have the duty to propose solutions that at least doesn't make systemic equity worse.

Wow, an hour long?? I think I would have to be in a group to sustain the ideation process.

Interestingly, I find that I criticize my own ideas more than others' ideas. When talking to others, I think my pursue to create a positive, encouraging environment results in my building on ideas and asking follow-up questions. On the other hand, when I brainstorm alone, my mind automatically filters ideas and determine which ones make it to the paper. I am excited to continue reading and hopefully find solutions to alleviate this issue.