What I Did on my Summer Vacation Online

What I Did on my Summer Vacation: Online Kidsteam Greg Walsh (@gxwalsh) HCIL Symposium May 22 nd, 2012 @gxwalsh

Children • Important Demographic • Interesting Demographic @gxwalsh

Children • Important Demographic – “Children are the world’s most valuable resource and its best hope for the future” (Kennedy, 1963) – Children are often overlooked in design (Druin, 2002) – Children (<12) see the world differently (Nardini et al, 2010) – Academic interest (IDC, SIGCHI) @gxwalsh

Children • Interesting Demographic – Developmentally • 7 -11 Think logically but very concrete • Visual vs verbal – Financially • Children (4 -12) spent $2 B in 1960 • Children (4 -12) spent (est) $40 B+ in 2005 • In 2005, children under 14 influenced 47% of household spending = $700 B (Taylor 1999, Economist 2006) @gxwalsh

Fun! @gxwalsh

Participatory Design Research @gxwalsh

Participatory Design Co-Design Cooperative Inquiry (Druin, 1997) @gxwalsh

Kidsteam @gxwalsh

Kidsteam @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh (Guha, 2004)

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

Distributed Design @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh (Walsh, Brown, Druin, 2011)

@gxwalsh ICDL

Limitations of Current Methods Asynchronous Limitations (Druin, et al. , 2009) Time delays between iterations Travel expenses Limited co-design techniques Existing On-line Systems (Walsh, 2010) Synchronous only (Whiteboards) Adult-focused (Google Docs) Management of iterations (e-mail) @gxwalsh

Online Kidsteam @gxwalsh

Research Goals [Q 1] How can co-located cooperative design with children be translated to an online distributed environment? [Q 2] What are the experiences of children who participate in Online Kidsteam? [Q 3] What are the tools and technologies necessary to successfully support distributed co -design with children? @gxwalsh

Research Approach Descriptive study to understand the phenomenon and identify a process. Research by Design Mixed Methods @gxwalsh

Research by Design Researchers design and build prototypes as a contribution (Zimmerman, et al, 2007) Create the right thing. Include children as partners in the design @gxwalsh

Participants • 12 Children • 7 -11 Years Old • All members of Kidsteam or siblings of members • Geographically distributed (residence or vacation) • 8 Adults • All members of Kidsteam • Geographically distributed (work or vacation) @gxwalsh

Environment • Online Kidsteam • Mimics In-person Kidsteam • • Snack Time Circle Time Design Time Big Ideas • Drupal-based tool • Authentication • Communication • Existing tools modified to work within Drupal • Iteratively developed throughout @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

Iterative Development • Avatars throughout environment • Audio Recording • Flash -> HTML 5 • Co-located multiuser logon • i. OS browser based @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

Co-Located vs Online Kidsteam Segment Co-located Online Snack Time Snacks at a table Persistent asynchronous chat Circle Time On floor, in circle Message Board w/avatars Design Time Bags of Stuff, Layered Elab, etc Dis. Co Big Ideas White Board Web page @gxwalsh

Success @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

High-level Results • [Q 1] Segments of Cooperative Inquiry sessions focus the design parameters • [Q 1] Similarly, online tools need to focus but not in the same structured way • [Q 2] The child participants didn’t feel like they were part of a team • [Q 2] Ad hoc intergenerational design teams – Distributed co-design environments need to support the addition of family members @gxwalsh

High-level Results • [Q 2] Children had higher expectations of their own ability to draw with a computer than w/ paper • [Q 3] Direct communication with designers • [Q 3] Distributed co-design requires an ecology – Mobile devices for media gathering – Desktop computers for typing – Blend of synchronous and asynchronous @gxwalsh

Take Aways • Plan design activities in a way that earlier tasks build to later tasks. • When designing for children at home, plan to incorporate parents/siblings/caregivers in the process. • Create multiple entry points into your activities to include the most participation as possible. @gxwalsh

Thank You! Questions? @gxwalsh gwalsh@umd. edu @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

Why UB? @gxwalsh

“Information Arts and Technologies” @gxwalsh

Faculty mix @gxwalsh

Departmental Interest in increasing research @gxwalsh

Admiration of graduates @gxwalsh

Coursework @gxwalsh

University’s Strategic Plan @gxwalsh

Summary @gxwalsh

References Bodker, S. , Ehn, P. , Sjögren, D. , & Sundblad, Y. (2000). Co-operative Design—perspectives on 20 years with `the Scandinavian IT Design Model’. Proceedings of Nordi. CHI (Vol. 2000, p. 22– 24). Druin, A. , Stewart, J. , Proft, D. , Bederson, B. B. , & Hollan, J. (1997). Kid. Pad: a design collaboration between children, technologists, and educators. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, CHI ’ 97 (p. 463– 470). New York, NY, USA: ACM. Doi: 10. 1145/258549. 258866 Druin, A. , Bederson, B. B. , Rose, A. , & Weeks, A. (2009). From New Zealand to Mongolia: Co-Designing and Deploying a Digital Library for the World’s Children*. Children, Youth and Environments, 19, 1. Guha, M. L. , Druin, A. , Chipman, G. , Fails, J. A. , Simms, S. , & Farber, A. (2004). Mixing ideas: a new technique for working with young children as design partners. Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community (p. 35– 42). Kensing, F. , & Blomberg, J. (1998). Participatory design: Issues and concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 7(3), 167– 185. Walsh, G. , Druin, A. , Guha, M. L. , Foss, E. , Golub, E. , Hatley, L. , Bonsignore, E. , et al. (2010). Layered elaboration: a new technique for co-design with children. Proceedings of the 28 th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, CHI ’ 10 (p. 1237– 1240). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi: 10. 1145/1753326. 1753512 Walsh, G. (2010). Developing Dis. Co: A distributed co-design, on-line tool (Technical Report No. HCIL-2010 -18). Human-Computer Interaction Lab: University of Maryland. Walsh, G. , Brown, Q. , Druin, A. (2011). Social Networking as a Vehicle to Foster Cross-Culture Awareness. In press. @gxwalsh

@gxwalsh

Research by Design Add’l Notes • Process • Novelty • Relevance • Generality @gxwalsh

Frequency of results for “Participatory Design” or “Cooperative Design” 1990 -2010 @gxwalsh

Academic contributions [C 1] The first version of a geographically distributed, asynchronous, intergenerational design guidelines will be available for future design research projects. [C 2] The experiences of an online, intergenerational design team will be identified. [C 3] New co-located co-design techniques will be possible. [C 4] Support for high-tech prototyping in the traditional low-tech prototype realm of participatory design. [C 5] New techniques for working and designing with children will be identified. Global contributions [C 5] Underserved and hard-to-serve populations will be able to participate in the codesign process giving a voice to those who, frequently, cannot participate in co-design sessions. [C 6] True international co-design projects will be possible. @gxwalsh

Agenda • Background • Participatory Design Research • Design of Energy House • Development of Dis. Co • Future Work & UB @gxwalsh

Background @gxwalsh