I entered Exploratory Making with experience in technical drawing, electronics, motors, and programming, but with limited experience using cardboard and foamboard as exploratory design materials. My technical background initially encouraged me to plan projects carefully and aim for precise results before beginning construction. Throughout the course, I gradually learned to work in a more direct, iterative, and hands-on way.

During the first weeks, I struggled with confidence when using the cutting tools. I initially worked with a blunt X-Acto knife rather than a proper scalpel, which made cutting unnecessarily difficult. After switching to a scalpel, I had to learn not to apply excessive pressure. Although my technical drawing experience allowed me to measure and outline parts quickly, I regularly fell behind during the cutting and assembly stages.

Cutting clean circles remained particularly challenging, even after repeated practice. I also found separating the outer paper layer from foamboard frustrating, as mistakes sometimes damaged the material and created waste. These difficulties taught me that understanding a material involves more than knowing its dimensions. It requires sensitivity to the direction of a cut, blade condition, pressure, surface layers, and the way the material responds during construction.

Adhesive methods also influenced my process. I disliked working with conventional glue because it irritated my nose and could make the models messy. I therefore tried to minimise its use. Learning to create slotted connections later in the course was especially useful because it provided a cleaner and more reversible construction method. It also showed me that the way parts are joined can become part of the design rather than merely a production necessity.

Constructing the marble machine was one of the highlights of the course. I enjoyed the focused and practical atmosphere of working together in the classroom. The structured sessions, attendance, access to teaching assistants, and regular presentations created a productive environment. Presenting work in class also gave us opportunities to receive feedback and learn from the solutions developed by other students.

The integration of electronics into foamboard models was challenging but rewarding. At first, embedding motors, wires, and other components within the material felt slow and complicated. As I gained experience, I became more efficient and started developing less conventional construction methods. This progress became particularly visible while creating the hot-beverage machine.

Although I was already familiar with motors and programming, the course expanded my understanding of how they could be integrated into quick physical prototypes. I learned that making an electronic system function is only one part of the task. Its placement, movement, mechanical connections, physical support, and relationship with the surrounding form must also be considered.

An unexpected illness interrupted my progress during the course. Catching up transformed part of what had initially been an enjoyable process into a stressful experience. Nevertheless, completing the work under these conditions also showed me the value of documenting progress and constructing prototypes in manageable stages. A clearer record of decisions and earlier iterations can make it easier to return to a project after an interruption.

The most important development was a change in my design mindset. Initially, I wanted to resolve most details through planning and technical drawings before making anything. Over time, I became more comfortable starting with the material, creating a rough version, testing it, and allowing the physical result to influence the next decision.

This approach helped me understand that making is not simply the execution of a predetermined plan. It is a way of generating knowledge. A prototype can reveal issues with dimensions, movement, stability, accessibility, and interaction that may not be visible in a drawing. By building quickly, I could identify these issues earlier and respond through another iteration.

The course changed my perception of foamboard and cardboard. I previously considered them mainly presentation materials used to represent the appearance of a design. I now see them as dynamic tools for exploring form, mechanisms, interaction, and function. They are inexpensive and easy to modify, which makes them especially valuable during early design stages.

Most of my foamboard prototypes were eventually discarded during cleanup, but I preserved several examples and documented the process carefully. This documentation retained the decisions, mistakes, and insights generated by the models, even when the physical objects no longer existed. I learned that documenting an exploratory process is as important as presenting its final outcome.

I have already started applying these skills in collaborative projects. Quick physical models help team members establish a shared understanding of an idea and discuss concrete details that may remain ambiguous in sketches or verbal explanations. They also allow the group to compare alternatives and test a shared vision before committing to a refined prototype.

Overall, Exploratory Making gave me practical skills in cutting, joining, constructing mechanisms, integrating electronics, and controlling movement through Arduino. More importantly, it taught me to use physical making as a way of thinking. I became less dependent on resolving everything in advance and more willing to explore through materials, tests, mistakes, and iteration.

The course strengthened my ability to develop interactive industrial design concepts in which form, interaction, and function are considered together. These skills will remain useful throughout my development as a designer because they enable me to turn ideas into tangible experiences that can be tested, communicated, and improved.

(In reflection some time later, I think I suffered the most during this course, out of all the courses I've taken)