مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد مانیفست برای مشارکت واقعی کودکان در فناوری دیجیتال – الزویر 2021

Highlights

Abstract

Graphical abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Building blocks of the manifesto

3. A framework for the genuine participation of children in digital technology design

4. Conclusion

Declaration of Competing Interest

Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

We articulate in this paper what participation at its best entails in the context of digital technology design with children, forming a theoretical framework for genuine participation of children in digital technology design and making. We integrate in the framework a set of conditions for the meaningful and effective participation of children and the nexus analytic concepts of historical body, interaction order and discourses in place, and complement that with the lenses of empowerment, values and value. In addition to these theoretical lenses, we rely on the insights gained during our empirical work with children for more than a decade. We contribute to research on Child Computer Interaction (CCI) by explaining what ‘participation at its best’ entails in practice and how it can be studied in research. Thus, CCI researchers and practitioners advocating participation, empowerment and inclusion of children can benefit from this framework when planning, analysing and evaluating their projects with children.

1. Introduction

Enabling children’s1 participation in designing digital technology is at the heart of Child–Computer Interaction (CCI) research and practice. There is a long history of developing methods to give children a say in technology design, starting in the 1980s (Druin, 2002). There is also a strong discourse in the CCI literature since the 1990s stating that children are the best experts in what being a child entails (Druin, 2002). Therefore, children have been invited to participate in digital technology design as testers, informants and even design partners (Druin, 2002, Yarosh et al., 2011). Different Participatory Design (PD)-oriented practices (Simonsen & Robertson, 2013) have been developed for this, and PD has strongly affected the thinking of many CCI researchers. In this paper, we use the term ‘digital technology design’ to refer to different design, making and digital fabrication activities aimed at creating a digital product, its prototype, a related service or some output that potentially helps in creating the product or service (such as creating a use case, a 3D design or a service blueprint).

There seems to be a need to further clarify what is meant by children’s participation and what values and goals are associated with it in CCI research (Bekker et al., 2018). Researchers have contemplated the role of children in design projects (e.g. Barendregt et al., 2016, Druin, 2002) and suggest foregrounding the values of researchers and practitioners when working with children (Iivari et al., 2015, Iversen and Smith, 2012, Yarosh et al., 2011). They have considered negotiating values of both adult designers and children (Van Mechelen et al., 2014) and have created models for ethics and transparency when working with children (Read et al., 2014, Read et al., 2017). Recently, researchers have also called for the empowerment of children vis-à-vis digital technology (Iivari and Kinnula, 2016a, Iversen and Smith, 2012, Iversen et al., 2017, Yarosh et al., 2011). Along these lines, researchers have argued that children should adopt a protagonist role as regards digital technology that entails understanding, critically reflecting on and even driving the development of digital technology (Iivari and Kinnula, 2018, Iversen et al., 2017). Recent CCI studies report on inviting children to be protagonists in digital technology development (Iivari and Kinnula, 2018, Iversen et al., 2017), on striving for the genuine participation of children (Cumbo et al., 2019, Iivari et al., 2015, Schepers et al., 2018c, Schepers et al., 2019) and on providing children with long-term skills and competences regarding digital technology (Dindler et al., 2020, Iivari et al., 2016, Iversen et al., 2018, Kinnula, Iivari et al., 2017). These studies represent the stream of research we call for and contribute to in this paper.