Students execute structured user research: conduct at least three user interviews (with peers, staff, or facility managers), complete observation notes, and synthesize findings into empathy maps and journey maps. Each group compiles interview notes, observation notes, and maps, then shares a concise user-understanding summary highlighting key needs and opportunities to inform greywater system design.

In small teams, students synthesize audit findings into a user-centered problem space. They will conduct brief interviews and field observations with campus users (students, custodial staff, teachers) to understand water use, pain points, and opportunities. They will produce a Point-of-View (POV) statement from the user perspective, develop 3–5 How Might We (HMW) questions, create 2–3 user personas, and build a systems map or problem tree linking root causes to symptoms affecting greywater use. The artifacts will be iteratively revised after a brief feedback session with campus users, and the final problem-definition packet will be ready for the next phase.

Teams generate a rapid set of greywater recycling concepts and compile them into a Concept Sketch Pack. Each team documents brainstorming notes, creates two visual sketches or storyboards for each idea, and develops a Feasibility/Impact matrix. They select and annotate their Top 3 concepts with clear rationales. The pack includes one quick empathy artifact from a short user perspective (student or facilities staff) and records two rapid iterations of the top concepts with noted changes. This deliverable prepares teams for the expert critique session and guides subsequent refinement.

Teams create rapid iterations of their greywater system prototype, starting with a low-fidelity paper or cardboard model and advancing to a functional medium-fidelity mockup. They integrate expert critiques and user feedback, updating an iteration log to capture changes and learning. Outputs include a low-fidelity prototype, a medium-fidelity functional mockup, and an iteration log that records what changed and why, focused on user needs and real-world constraints.

Students plan and conduct user testing sessions with real users (staff, students, or facilities personnel) to evaluate their prototypes. They write a testing protocol, collect feedback, synthesize findings, and list revision decisions with rationale tied to user input. This artifact builds toward future refinements by foregrounding user needs and documenting how feedback informed design choices.