Rethinking children’s roles in Participatory Design: The child as a process designer

Schepers, Selina; Dreessen, Katrien; Zaman, Bieke

doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2017.12.001

Cited by 46 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, rather than looking for methods and tools with potential to work in the existing school world and in the current planners' world, it is important to design development work and research aimed at creating learning processes that can change education and planning practice. In this connection, as Hart stressed [20], children can contribute to shaping such research; they can codesign participatory processes instead of merely participating in them, and this would result in "genuine participation of children", as Schepers et al put it [51]. We also agree with Senbel that tool development is not unnecessary, rather it is necessary that civil society take part in developing tools and methods:…”

Section: Conclusion-a Wider Context and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 69%

Making School Children’s Participation in Planning Processes a Routine Practice

Stenberg

Fryk

2021

Societies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children’s participation in planning has been investigated to some extent. There are, however, unexplored topics, particularly concerning what is needed for children’s participation to become a regular process. Based on case studies in Sweden, this article draws some conclusions. It is quite possible to organize ordinary processes where children participate in community building, in collaboration with planners, as part of their schoolwork. The key question is how this can be done. Clearly, it needs to occur in close collaboration with teachers and pupils, however it also needs to be implemented in a system-challenging manner. Thus, rather than looking for tools with potential to work in the existing school and planners’ world, it is important to design research that aims to create learning processes that have the potential to change praxis. Hence, it is not the case that tools are not needed, rather that children need to help to develop them.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion-a Wider Context and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 69%

Making School Children’s Participation in Planning Processes a Routine Practice

Stenberg

Fryk

2021

Societies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the future, we are also interested in inviting children as process designers [87] and protagonists [84,85] to shape and reflect on their own safety education and urge other researchers to do the same. Perhaps the entire design process could be planned so that children would go through the steps of design, and they would be learning at the same time both about online safety, reflection on technology use, and how to design educational packages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children’s design recommendations for online safety education

Hartikainen

Iivari

Kinnula

2019

International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The community has also reflected on the impacts on children of engaging in co-design -these include studies of the empowerment of children [36] and their position as social 'actors' [37], as well as the educational value of such participation [5]. Others look at the roles played by different actors with focus on adult [74] and child roles [60]. The ethics of participation are considered in [55], where the authors critique how children's contributions are considered and included in eventual design briefs.…”

Section: Co-designing With Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enabling children to design for others with expanded proxy design

Metatla

Read

Horton

2020

Proceedings of the Interaction Design and Children Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explore the question of how child designers can provide design ideas for technology that might reduce the marginalisation that can be experienced by some of their peers. To do this, we introduce the idea of Expanded Proxy Design that moves beyond the notion of "proxies as people" in design, to guide methods for engaging children into thinking about design ideas for a group that exists at some distance from their own experience. We outline three case studies where we made use of such methods. First, we consider expanded proxies in the context of technology and newly immigrant children who are unable to speak in English. Second, we consider the case of designing technology for children with and without visual impairments. Finally, we consider designing playful experiences for children with different temperaments. We reflect on the extent to which this expanded notion of proxies can be used as a meaningful vehicle for overcoming marginalisation and exclusion when children with different abilities design for each other. And we suggest ways to characterise, develop and refine expanded proxy design methods in this broader sense.

show abstract

Rethinking children’s roles in Participatory Design: The child as a process designer

Cited by 46 publications

References 25 publications

Making School Children’s Participation in Planning Processes a Routine Practice

Making School Children’s Participation in Planning Processes a Routine Practice

Children’s design recommendations for online safety education

Enabling children to design for others with expanded proxy design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About