Introduction
Three of us attended a hardware hackathon called #startathon 2.0 and found it a very enriching experience. Hence, I would like to share with you more about the event and our experience during the event.
I do not have much pictures of the event since we were too busy during the event to take much pictures.
About #startathon 2.0
#startathon 2.0 is a hardware hackathon organised by ideasinc, Nanyang Technological University. It was held on 11 October 2014, 10:00am and lasted until the next day on 12 October 2014, 12.00pm at *SCAPE. Besides being a competition, there were classes conducted and consultations during the event.
Before #startathon 2.0
Even before the competition, there were 2 workshops, #startbuilding and #startideating, held leading up to #startathon 2.0. #startbuilding was a workshop on the Arduino, Sparkcore and MIT App Inventor while #startideating was a workshop on the themes for the competition and tools to understand problem statements and generate ideas for solutions.
#startbuilding was held at the National Design Centre. During #startbuilding, participants were split into 3 groups to learn the various tools(Arduino, Sparkcore and MIT App Inventor). Groups were rotated every 2 hours. I felt that #startbuilding was excellent. Lessons taught were useful and simple enough for anyone to pick up. For example, in the Arduino class, instead of teaching coding which would require a lot of time and would be too difficult for many who do not have any prior experience with programming, the instructors structured the lesson in such a way that it was about hooking up various hardware components and manipulating them with the codes available in the Examples provided with the Arduino IDE. After the event, the organizers sent us links to Github for getting the resources used during #startbuilding.
#startideating was held at HubQuarters@Level 4, *SCAPE. The themes for the competition were introduced to us there. The themes were Sparking Human Connections, Humanitarian Aid Re-imagined and Aging Fabulously. After the introduction of the themes, we were taught some tools to generate solutions from problem statements derived from the theme. One such tool was a table to generate ideas based on the technology available and Target Groups.
After generating solutions, we were taught about the Theory of Change. Theory of Change helps develop a coherent and plausible theory of how a product or service can ultimately result in your desired impact for the target group. It defines long-term goals and then maps backwards to identify necessary preconditions. You can find the slides for the Theory of Change used during #startideating here.
#startathon 2.0
Participants were issued name tags and shirts during registration. There were different shirt colours(red, black and yellow) representing the different expertise(coders, makers and business) of each individual. I can’t recall which colour represents which exactly though. Once everyone had settled down, the organizers orientated us on the area and the proceedings for the event. As some of the participants did not attend the prior workshops, the organizers conducted an ideation session with them while allowing those who did their ideation to proceed with developing their ideas and setting up.
Team CUB3: Flood Simulation Model
Our work area
During the event, the organizers stopped the teams and shared lessons on managing our projects. They shared with us about Scrum. Scrum is an iterative and incremental agile software development framework for managing product development. We broke down our product into Minimum Viable Products(MVP), the minimum prototype to meet the consumer’s expectations, and identified processes to achieve the MVP. We wrote each MVP down on a post it note and placed it on a chart. This chart had sections divided by progress status. We would constantly update each process status throughout. This helped us apply our time effectively and keep track of progress when we got tired. You can find out more about scrum here.
There were consultants during the #startathon 2.0 which we could approach and get help. The consultants were very knowledgable and helpful. We would not have completed our product well if it were not for the consultants advice. Masterclasses on various skills and topics were also conducted by the consultants to equip participants with the knowledge they would require to build their product.
Tools and equipment were set up on the stage for participants to use. Arduino, Grove and Sparkcore Kits were made available for rental for teams. The fee for rental would be returned to participants at the end of the event upon return of the sets. There was also a pop-up store for teams to buy certain specialty item or components they may need to make their product. The organizers also arranged for a shopping trip to Sim Lim Tower for teams to purchase other components that were not offered during the event.
Meals were provided and came in buffet style. Snacks and drinks were available for participants throughout the event too.
As we were closing in on the deadline for the completion of our product, fatigue started to set in. Progress was slow and further deterred by setbacks. One main setback was sealing of the custom acrylic case. It was a time-consuming process to start with and was made worse with occasional cracking in the sealant and poor joints.
At about 7 or 8am, the organisers called for a Counter Proposal session to be held. During this Counter Proposal session, teams will give a 3 min presentation to other teams working on the same theme and have them critique their product. The presenting team cannot answer or rebut any question or critique given. This was done so as to identify points which were lacking in the presentation, which I felt was a very interesting and effective method. The critiques given to us were very constructive. In this session, it was pointed out to our group from the facilitator was that it was important for us to deliver the key function and idea in a fast and concise manner. For example, we would have to emphasize more on how the flood simulation model is a teaching tool in helping people have a hands-on feel on flood protection methods.
Finalists!
Team CUB3
After a bit of tweaking, we managed to complete the product and took a short nap to refresh ourselves for the presentation. Teams had to submit their products for quarantine at 10 am. In the preliminary judging, teams have to present to judges and teams working on the same theme. We felt that our presentation was not very good.
Surprisingly, we managed to make it among the Top 7 finalists for the next round of presentation. We did not feel that we would have made it that far. Unlike the preliminary presentation, the finalist presentation was done on the stage and this made it hard for us to show and demonstrate our product as it was too far from the audience. We did not have much time to adjust or improve our presentation(we did not expect to make it that far!). You can check out our finalist presentation here.
Conclusion
#startathon 2.0 was not only a very fun and challenging and fun competition, it was also a very educational one with the various masterclasses and lessons conducted. Joining #startathon 2.0 was also easy on the wallet and close to free! The organisers were very knowledgable and professional in the execution of the event. I would recommend this event to anyone interested in learning how to make their idea into a product, coders, makers or entrepreneurs. Even if you are unable to find a team to register with, you could always join a team there or form one there.
Keep a look out for similar events and do not feel afraid or discouraged to join in. It opens up to greater learning opportunities.
I will share more about the Flood Simulation Model in another post so do look out for that. You can check out our Flood Protection Educational Model here. I will also try to update this post with examples and charts of the ideation techniques taught.
You can also have a look at the other projects from #startathon 2.0 here.
And as always,
Make. Share. Learn