"Learning Through Others" — Can you make your thinking visible to a partner?
Demonstrate that you understood your partner deeply enough to design something they couldn't have asked for themselves — with evidence that it addresses their actual need, not just their stated want. Present it as if a hiring committee asked you to show how you solved a problem for someone.
Concepts: Abstraction — understanding what your partner needs vs. what they say they want. Making assumptions visible.
📅 In-Class (Wednesday, Feb 18)
After meeting your partner in class, set specific goals for solving their problem based on what you actually heard.
Process what you heard in your discovery conversation. Use the Dojo to go deeper than initial impressions — specific quotes, observations, and the real problem underneath.
Surface 5+ assumptions about your partner's problem. The AI challenges each one — what evidence do you have vs. what just feels true?
Assumptions vs. evidence. Confidence vs. proof. Preparation vs. procrastination. Handwritten, photographed.
Concepts: Building with intention — every design decision should connect back to what you discovered about your partner.
📅 In-Class (Wednesday, Feb 25)
Prepare for Wednesday's in-class challenge session. Come ready to have your assumptions tested.
Design how you'll demonstrate your work. How do you show that you understood someone deeply enough to build something they couldn't have asked for?
Plan what you need to learn about your partner's domain — and what you can strategically ignore.
📅 In-Class (Tuesday, Mar 4)
Concepts: Demonstrating value — present as if a hiring committee asked you to show how you solved a problem for someone.
📅 In-Class (Wednesday, Mar 11)
Observe demo pairs through three lenses — notice, interpret, ask. The AI sits quietly beside you and occasionally redirects your attention.
🌉 Sprint Transition
Five foundational claims about this course — with a reflection prompt for each. Connect each claim to your actual Sprint 1-2 work honestly. Do this before the AI-Discussion session. Handwritten, photographed.
After writing your Bridge Reflection, use this structured activity to find specific evidence from your Sprint 1-2 work for each of the five claims. The AI pushes back on vague acknowledgments — you need to name the moment, the decision, the work.
Sprint 3: Complexity — You solved for yourself (Sprint 1) and for someone you know (Sprint 2). Now you're entering a real clinical domain — antimicrobial resistance in Bhutan's healthcare system — where the stakes are not academic. Piranavan Selvanandan, a technical consultant brought in on this problem, will work with you directly across two class sessions. The gap between you and the people you're solving for is wider than anything in Sprint 2, and so is what's possible.