|
|
The participation of children in the design of new technology: a discussion paper
By Ben Williamson, Learning Researcher, Futurelab
Page 7 of 7 |
- advertise willingness to be involved as a school site through public electronic mailing lists available on the Becta website
- plan activities with design partner, based on joint understandings of what each group can contribute to the design process, eg teacher defines problem area and existing solutions; students define problems with existing solutions; teachers, students and designers work together on low-tech solutions; designers develop as high-tech prototypes for subsequent usability testing with children and teachers
- contribute the pedagogical 'wrapping' into which the new technology fits, allowing it to be re-used by other staff within a curricular framework.
Conclusions
This document has outlined a variety of participative design processes, and described the practicalities of implementing an iterative informant design methodology. This approach, we suggest, is open enough to allow for creativity, appropriate for exploring specific subject-related issues, employs children in ways which accord with their skills, and recruits teachers as active participants. Clearly, any child-centred or learner-centred design approach, employed in a variety of ways and in accordance with a selection of the methods described, must be organised to meet with the needs of learners, and with the staff who will include the resulting technology in their pedagogical practices, rather than to meet commercial development requirements.
Some caution must be advised, however. Working with children in the design process, whether they are employed as beta testers, informants, or active partners, should not be regarded as a simple way of informing a design project. Adult participation can easily lead to adult domination of discussions. Some adults feel uncomfortable working on low-tech prototypes with materials that are more commonly associated with children's activities, and some children feel uncomfortable with practices more commonly associated with adult methods. Macauley (1996) states that whilst co-operation between design participants can enrich the process, the interactions between them and their different motivations and expertise can lead to chaos unless appropriately managed.
The core virtues of such approaches are, however, manifold. Widening children's participation in a democratic process of product development is not only empowering, and nor does it only contribute to better, more appropriate design. It also highlights and harnesses children's perceptiveness and creativity, and, through iteration, fosters forms of reflection on design and content. These are usually absent when children are simply provided with tools, materials and resources designed for them by commercially-motivated adult groups.
In many of the methods described, children are also engaged in authentic tasks. Working at the beginning within the parameters of their past experiences, they are gradually introduced to, and discover for themselves, other potentialities for the design of new technology. This can lead to forms of learning within the context of the design activities themselves. Though children cannot be expected to contribute their expertise at all stages or during all activities in a learner-centred design process, their participation and dialogue with each other and with the adult team members enables them to reflect on experienced practices with content in many shapes and delivered on different platforms, and to tackle problems in new and fresh ways. Utilising these practices, therefore, allows the adult design group to reflect on their own assumptions and make design alterations that reflect the input of the children and the adult participants as a working group of co-creators.
The crucial component for successful learner-centred design practice is ensuring that the adult participants, as well as the children, perceive themselves as learners in the process of designing new technology. By breaking down the distinction between adult 'expert' and child 'user', learner-centred design can provide innovative solutions to educational problems, and in the process engage all parties in the active construction of knowledge.
Bibliography
Antle, A (2003) 'Case study: the design of CBC4Kids' StoryBuilder', Proceedings of the Interaction Design and Children 2003 Conference, New York: ACM Press, 59-68
Bannon, LJ (1990) 'A pilgrim's progress: from cognitive science to cooperative design', AI & Society, 4.4, Fall issue, 1990, 259-275
Bjerknes, G, Ehn, P and Kyng, M (1987) Computers and Democracy: a Scandinavian Challenge, Aldershot: Alebury
Bjerkness, G and Bratteteig, T (1995) 'User participation and democracy: a discussion of Scandinavian research on system development', Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, vol 7, no 1, April 1995, 73-98
Bødker, S (2000) 'Scenarios in user-centred design - setting the stage for reflection and action', Interacting with Computers, 13, 61-75
Branton, A (2003) 'Developing a child-centred design process', GuardianUnlimited Online, 13 June 2003. Document URL: education.guardian.co.uk/elearning/story/
0,10577,976205,00.html (viewed 11/08/03)
Brown, AL and Palincsar, AS (1989) 'Guided, co-operative learning and individual knowledge acquisition', in L Resnick (Ed), Knowing, Learning and Instruction (21-34), New York: Lawrence Erlbaum
Buckingham and Scanlon (2003)
DfES (2003) E-learning Strategy
Druin, A (1999) 'Cooperative inquiry: developing new technologies for children with children', Proceedings of ACM CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 223-230
Druin, A (2002) 'The role of children in the design of new technology', Behaviour and Information Technology, vol 21, no 1, 1-25
Druin, A and Fast, K (2002) 'The child as learner, critic, inventor, and technology design partner: an analysis of three years of Swedish student journals', The International Journal for Technology and Design Education, vol 12, no 3, 189-213
Eisenberg, M, Eisenberg, A, Hendrix, S, Blauvelt, G, Butter, D, Garcia, J, Lewis, R and Nielsen, T (2003) 'As we may print: new directions in output devices and computational crafts for children', Small Users - Big Ideas: Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children 2003 conference, New York: ACM Press, 31-39
Feenberg, A (1999) Questioning Technology, London & New York: Routledge
Gee, JP (2003) What Videogames Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy, New York & Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan
Gould, JD and Lewis, C (1985) 'Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think', Communications of the ACM, vol 28, no 3, 300-311
Just Kid Inc (2002) An Environmental Scan of Children's Interactive Media from 2000 to 2002: An Executive Summary prepared for the Markle Foundation, June 2002. Document URL: (viewed 07/08/03)
Kafai, Y (2001) 'The educational potential of electronic games: from games-to-teach to games-to-learn', Playing by the Rules, Cultural Policy Center, University of Chicago
Kafai, Y (2003) 'Children designing software for children: what can we learn?' Small Users - Big Ideas: Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children 2003 conference, New York: ACM Press, 11-12
Knudtzon, K, Druin, A, Kaplan, N, Summers, K, Chisik, Y, Kulkarni, R, Moulthrop, S, Weeks, H and Bederson, B (2003) 'Starting an intergenerational design team: a case study', Proceedings of the Interaction Design and Children 2003 conference, New York: ACM Press, 51-58
Kujala, S (2003) 'User involvement: a review of the benefits and challenges', Behaviour and Information Technology, vol 22, no 1, 1-16
Landauer, TK (1995) The Trouble with Computers, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Lave, J and Wegner, E (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
Macauley, L (1996) 'Requirements for requirements engineering techniques', Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Requirements Engineering (ICRE 96), Silver Spring, MD: IEEE Computer Society Press
Markopoulos, P and Bekker, M (2003) 'On the assessment of usability testing methods for children', Interacting with Computers, 15, 227-243
Moldaschl, MF and Brödner, P (2002) 'A reflexive methodology of intervention', in P Docherty, J Forslin and R Shani (eds) Creating Sustainable Work Systems: Emerging Perspectives and Practices, London et al: Routledge, 180-190. Document URL: www.tu-chemnitz.de/wirtschaft/bwl9/NAR/ (viewed 29/07/03)
Papert, S (1980) Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas, New York: Basic Books
Piaget, J (1951) Play, Dreams, and Imitation in Childhood, New York: WW Norton
Prensky, M (2001) Digital Game-Based Learning, New York: McGraw-Hill
Rogoff, B (1990) Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context, New York: Oxford University Press
Scaife, M, Rogers, Y, Aldrich, F and Davies, M (1997) 'Designing for or designing with? Informant design for interactive learning environments', Proceedings of ACM CHI 97 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 343-350
Schuler, D and Mamioka, A (1993) Participatory Design: Principles and Practices, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum
Soloway, E and Pryor, A (1996) 'The next generation in human-computer interaction', Communications of the ACM, vol 39, no 4, 16-18
Webb, BR (1996) 'The role of users in interactive systems design: when computers are theatre, do we want the audience to write the script?' Behaviour and Information Technology, vol 15, no 2, 76-83
Wiklund, M (1994) 'Usability in practice' (editorial), How Companies Develop User-Friendly Products, London: Academic Press
Wood, D, Bruner, JS and Ross, G (1976). 'The role of tutoring in problem solving', Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17.2, 89-100
|
|
