|
|
The participation of children in the design of new technology: a discussion paper
By Ben Williamson, Learning Researcher, Futurelab
Page 2 of 7 |
time to work with children in the development process must often seem slim. In the US, for instance, a recent Just Kid Inc (2002) report suggests that only 5% of organisations developing interactive media products for children involve their user group within a research and development process at all. Furthermore, Landauer (1995) reports that due to the range of practices in user involvement in the professional industries, there is little uniform agreement on the benefits of these approaches, with gains in performance varying widely, from 0% at NASA, to 720% at IBM, for example.
This guide provides an overview of best practices in the involvement of children in the design of new technology. It attempts to indicate how multimedia producers, working with children and teachers, can optimise the partnership to design better resources with and for children. From an academic perspective, these are approaches often marked by subtle differences in method. From a practical perspective, these are approaches often marked by subtly different jargon. This article clarifies what user-centred design, participant design, informant design, learner-centred design, child-centred design, design-centred learning and cooperative inquiry mean, and their practical implications for teachers and developers of educational resources. Given, also, that the focus here is on how children and adults can innovate together, the term 'best practice' is used with some caution, wishing not to replicate what Moldaschl and Brodner (2002) describe as an 'expertocracy' of either design or research practices.
Before proceeding to describe the methods, however, this paper first provides a rationale for children's involvement in design, based on both theories of learning, and theories of social participation in technological cultures that suggest children's involvement in the design process is important for a number of reasons. The final section makes some practical recommendations for designers and teachers who are, or wish to be, involved in designing new technology with children, for children.
1. RATIONALE FOR CHILDREN'S INVOLVEMENT IN DESIGNING NEW TECHNOLOGY
1.1 Theories of learning that suggest children's involvement in design processes is important
1.1.1 Designing authentic learning activities
Many researchers (Lave and Wenger 1991; Rogoff 1990; Brown and Palincsar 1989) claim that learners are motivated and most engaged when they are working on authentic tasks, that is, tasks that take place in everyday contexts and put into practice the knowledge learnt rather than simply working on abstract, conceptual tasks. In authentic tasks the activities and tools appropriately scaffold the learners (Wood et al 1976), enabling them to work independently at their own pace but also challenging them to develop to the next level of understanding and performance. Of course, this does not mean confining learning to the type of tasks children are already familiar with, but utilising the skills and experiences of children as explorers of the world, and emphasising the ways in which they construct knowledge and develop new skills.
Digital technologies arguably have the capability to support this type of learning. The challenge in designing new technology for children therefore is to create technologies and design interfaces that can best support this type of learning through performing the activity. If we are to design digital resources that enable children to participate in authentic activities, then we need to work with children in the design process in order to understand what activities are likely to be authentic to them.
1.1.2 Designing tools to enable children to construct their own knowledge
Seymour Papert's influential research group at MIT (1980) has generated significant interest over the last 20 years in 'constructivist' theories of learning. Constructivism conceives of learning as a process of knowledge construction, with children utilising their existing knowledge and skills to accomplish something they previously would not have been able to do. Researchers in this field have begun to suggest that children's learning with new technology should be less about the 'consumption' of resources designed by adults, and more about their 'construction' by children. Eisenberg et al (2003), for instance, re-conceive the traditional children's landscape of 'kits and toys' as a landscape of 'empowering tools and techniques with which children can create their own personalized, high-quality artifacts' (37). This model envisages the process of learning inside school as less about the assimilation of data and more about active inquiry and investigation. While there have been some significant critiques of this approach, 3 nevertheless a model of learning as a process of drawing on previous skills and knowledge to construct new understandings would imply the need to involve young people in the design process at an early stage, emphasising, as it does, that the end users of digital resources are not simply a 'blank canvas' into which information can be poured. Unsurprisingly, then, a great deal of constructivist theory has come to underpin learner-centred design approaches.
1.1.3 Designing engaging resources for self-motivated learning
Much attention has also recently been given to the learning potential exhibited through children's engagement with video games, most notably in Prensky's (2001) and Gee's (2003) book-length studies of video games as learning media. Not only are the aesthetics of video games motivating and engaging. These studies, amongst others, suggest that young people playing them are often involved in forms of learning within the context of gameplay itself. Gee, for instance, points out that most players do not read the instruction manual that accompanies newly purchased games; instead they 'learn' the rules and the controls through active engagement with the game. At a more complex level, Gee goes on to argue, players are engaged in the active construction of character identities, mediated both by the player's personal values and beliefs, and the context of the game world.
The drive to 'tap into' what motivates children about some new technology is, arguably, one of the central projects of child-focused participative design approaches. As adult designers, teachers, parents, and researchers, we wish to understand more fully what tasks children find authentic to their everyday experiences and, working together with children, to mobilise authentic and engaging activities within the context of learning. A child-focused design approach may help design teams to reflect not what adult educators, parents, academics and designers consider appropriate for children (Kafai 2003; Druin 2002), but what children themselves identify as motivational, engaging, challenging and fun about new technology. Creating tools and resources that are authentic to children's
(CONTINUE...)
3 Simon (1987), De Corte (1990), Clements and Gullo (1984), and Hughes (1990) (all cited in Wegerif 2002) have criticised Papert's belief that children using the programming application LOGO would develop general problem solving skills. Rather, they see LOGO, and the constructivist principles it exemplifies, as a useful tool for teaching practices that might stimulate transfer - not as leading inevitably to the development of skills that can be utilised in other contexts. back to report
|
|
