Patterns and Themes in Designing with Children

Valuing implicit decision-making in participatory design: A relational approach in design with people with dementia

Proceedings of the eighth conference on Participatory design Artful integration: interweaving media, materials and practices - PDC 04

PurposeThis paper has chosen a participatory action design (PAD) to approach the construction of KPIs in a novel way. A PAD will assist the researcher to encourage involvement, engagement of multiple stakeholders in the KPIs construction process.Design/methodology/approachA workshop series based on participatory action design was developed together with the researcher and stakeholders at the innovation department of a large international organization. PAD facilitated interaction between the researcher, stakeholders, and KPIs under construction.FindingsThe findings show that the PAD workshops created interlevel collaboration and group dynamics in constructing the KPI. The knowledge that was shared during the PAD workshops enabled an understanding of the process of constructing a KPI in innovation, where stakeholders design and implement simultaneously. In the end, it was a challenge to construct a KPI using the PAD, as certain conditions seemed not to be.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper enhances our empirical understanding of applying PAD to construct KPIs in innovation. This study adds to the growing interest in literature to implement novel methods such as PAD to construct a KPI in innovation.Practical implicationsPractically, the findings of this study will inform managers in innovation (projects) to use a method such as PAD to construct KPIs in innovation. This study shows the implication of using a PAD for a KPI and what opportunities and challenges it can bring.Originality/valueThis paper is one of the few papers that address using the participatory action design methodology for the construction of KPIs in innovation. To date, PAD is rarely used to construct KPIs in innovation.

In this paper we examine the challenges of introducing learning goals in Participatory Design (PD) activities in a school context. In order to increase the transparency of mutual learning in accordance with traditional PD values, we argue that learning through design approaches can inspire us to actively formulate learning goals, stage activities and include reflection as an integral part in the PD activity in order to meet those learning goals. We tested this approach in several master student projects, where the students were required to involve children in schools in the design of a technology. Our data analysis is based on their written reports as well as a specific exam question. We found that defining good learning goals was hard, but useful, especially when designing and discussing informed consent forms with teachers. Staging activities in order to meet the learning goals was possible, although learning goals were sometimes derived from the activities. Finally, incorporating moments of reflection for children was still difficult for our students because they felt pressed for time. We present some of the advantages and problems so that practitioners can consider the added value of this approach.

Contributions from the behavioral sciences to the design of computer systems have come primarily from psychology, and have focused on individual cognition. In this symposium, we consider the applicability to system design of approaches that focus on social interaction. The participants comprise pairs of researchers engaged in projects that aim to bring together systematic studies of naturally occurring human activities with the design of computer-based technology. Each of the projects emphasizes the importance of the social organization of communities, everyday communication and practice. The symposium participants — anthropologists, linguists and computer scientists — bring interdisciplinary perspectives to bear on the problem of how to design tools that incorporate the right mix of support for current work practices, solutions to recognized problems, and innovations in the way that work gets done. The aim of the symposium is to explore the possibilities for a productive relationship between research on socially organized human activities and system design. In this forum we will examine the problems that such interdisciplinary efforts face and the payoffs that they produce. Drawing on experience with their respective research projects, the participants will address the following questions concerning the development of a design process grounded in empirical studies: what is the relevance of activity studies to the design of new technology? What people do in everyday work settings is an obvious subject matter for social science, but just what is the relationship between that subject matter and system design? What part should an understanding of what people do now, with existing technological resources, play in the design of new technologies? How has new technology changed the nature of everyday work activities? The technological resources available in the domain of intellectual work, for example, are continually changing. Given this moving technological base, new forms of interaction between people emerge. What are the implications of those new forms, made possible by system design, for social science research? What social theory and methods do you draw on in your studies of work practice? What are the difficult theoretical or methodological problems, and what are the consequences of looking at everyday activities with the aim of designing new technology? What is the motivation behind your system design effort? That is, what problem in the domain of interest is your design intended to address? How has your design approach been affected by your empirical research? How has working with your collaborator changed your view of the problem domain? What has been most difficult about your collaboration and what has been most valuable? How have you negotiated differences in technical background, methods, conceptualization of the problem domain? To ground the discussion, participants will offer examples from their ongoing research projects. Brief descriptions of those projects are included here, but the symposium is intended as a lively debate of the questions posed, not as a presentation of findings. We hope through our discussion and through the participation of the symposium audience to shed light on the issues, while encouraging the development of new collaborations between social and computer scientists.

Contributions from the behavioral sciences to the design of computer systems have come primarily from psychology, and have focused on individual cognition. In this symposium, we consider the applicability to system design of approaches that focus on social interaction. The participants comprise pairs of researchers engaged in projects that aim to bring together systematic studies of naturally occurring human activities with the design of computer-based technology. Each of the projects emphasizes the importance of the social organization of communities, everyday communication and practice. The symposium participants — anthropologists, linguists and computer scientists — bring interdisciplinary perspectives to bear on the problem of how to design tools that incorporate the right mix of support for current work practices, solutions to recognized problems, and innovations in the way that work gets done. The aim of the symposium is to explore the possibilities for a productive relationship between research on socially organized human activities and system design. In this forum we will examine the problems that such interdisciplinary efforts face and the payoffs that they produce. Drawing on experience with their respective research projects, the participants will address the following questions concerning the development of a design process grounded in empirical studies: what is the relevance of activity studies to the design of new technology? What people do in everyday work settings is an obvious subject matter for social science, but just what is the relationship between that subject matter and system design? What part should an understanding of what people do now, with existing technological resources, play in the design of new technologies? How has new technology changed the nature of everyday work activities? The technological resources available in the domain of intellectual work, for example, are continually changing. Given this moving technological base, new forms of interaction between people emerge. What are the implications of those new forms, made possible by system design, for social science research? What social theory and methods do you draw on in your studies of work practice? What are the difficult theoretical or methodological problems, and what are the consequences of looking at everyday activities with the aim of designing new technology? What is the motivation behind your system design effort? That is, what problem in the domain of interest is your design intended to address? How has your design approach been affected by your empirical research? How has working with your collaborator changed your view of the problem domain? What has been most difficult about your collaboration and what has been most valuable? How have you negotiated differences in technical background, methods, conceptualization of the problem domain? To ground the discussion, participants will offer examples from their ongoing research projects. Brief descriptions of those projects are included here, but the symposium is intended as a lively debate of the questions posed, not as a presentation of findings. We hope through our discussion and through the participation of the symposium audience to shed light on the issues, while encouraging the development of new collaborations between social and computer scientists.

Participatory design (PD) is a methodology that emphasizes user participation in the design of new technologies to leverage change within organizations and services. PD originated in the computer science field in the 1970s and 1980s when new programs and technologies were developed to empower workers, by involving them in decisions that affected them. PD in health research has been proven to change clinical practice. Genuine user involvement that includes all stakeholders, and robust collaborations across sciences, sectors, and disciplines are basic elements of successful research to change clinical practice and to implement novel technical and organizational approaches. This paper summarizes seven case studies involving the use of PD in telehealth research. All cases presented promoted organizational changes supported by health information and communications technology, and have been implemented at either international, national, regional, or local levels. We describe how PD can be applied in health sciences and used to facilitate organizational changes, new perspectives, and new communications methods. The relevance and suitability of PD as a research design in health science is explained, and recommendations for conducting PD studies in telehealth research are presented. In PD, mutual learning and co-creation is facilitated. Consequently, learning from users, rather than studying them, corroborates our understanding and the emergence of new knowledge.

We address the theme of “participation(s) otherwise” by bringing forward what we see as an opportunity to combine existing participatory and service design approaches to participation in the way they weave connections between design, IT, digitalization and democracy, focusing on the context of the public sector. This is a context where participatory design, despite interest and projects, has not been widely adopted. However, service design, the ‘new kid on the block’, is establishing itself by very pragmatically addressing the emerging need for people-centered design approaches in organizations, including in the public sector. Service design might at first be easily dismissed by participatory design because of what may seem a superficial take on people-centeredness and its links to business-centered interest in ‘design’. With this exploratory paper, we emphasize what both disciplines can learn from one another and propose that participatory design and service design join forces in expanding notions of participation and addressing the challenges of digitalization in the public sector.

Design and engineering concepts are increasingly welcomed by healthcare communities for developing products and environments. With the recognition of healthcare as a safetycritical industry, design processes can also be used to develop services, organisations, and management systems in healthcare. The case study reported on here forms part of a wider research study of medical device purchasing practice, and provides an example of applying systemic design methods to one healthcare context. Collaboration between the researchers and a hospital provided an opportunity to explore design approaches as part of the research process, in terms of data collection, analysis, synthesis, as well as in the implementation of new practices. The paper firstly gives justification for using design and systems approaches, and specifies the particular aspects of design approaches used, including a discussion on their applicability to the purchasing of medical devices. Design approaches used included diagramming methods, participatory design, and risk analyses techniques, which were used in conjunction with qualitative methods. A description of the techniques used with the collaborating hospital then follows, including some of the methodological challenges encountered. The case study shows a practical example of how design methods and tools can be used to research within a healthcare context, and is

Current eHealth interventions are poorly adopted by people with low health literacy (LHL) as they often fail to meet their needs, skills, and preferences. A major reason for this poor adoption is the generic, one-size-fits-all approach taken by designers of these interventions, without addressing the needs, skills, and preferences of disadvantaged groups. Participatory design approaches are effective for developing interventions that fit the needs of specific target groups; yet, very little is known about the practical implications of executing a participatory design project for and with people with LHL. This study aimed to demonstrate the application of participatory design activities specifically selected to fit the needs and skills of people with LHL and how these were manifested within an overarching eHealth design process. In addition, the study aims to present reflections and implications of these activities that could support future designers to engage people with LHL in their design processes. We used the design process of a smart asthma inhaler for people with asthma and LHL to demonstrate participatory design activities. The study was framed under 5 stages of design thinking: empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test within 2 major iteration cycles. We integrated 3 participatory design activities deemed specifically appropriate for people with LHL: co-constructing stories, experience prototype exhibition, and video prototype evaluation. Co-constructing stories was found to deepen the understanding of the participant's motivation to use or not to use maintenance medication. This understanding informed and facilitated the subsequent development of diverse preliminary prototypes of possible interventions. Discussing these prototypes in the experience prototype exhibition helped provoke reactions, thoughts, and feelings about the interventions, and potential scenarios of use. Through the video prototype evaluation, we were able to clearly communicate the goal and functionality of the final version of our intervention and gather appropriate responses from our participants. This study demonstrates a participatory design approach for and with patients with asthma and LHL. We demonstrated that careful consideration and selection of activities can result in participants that are engaged and feel understood. This paper provides insight into the practical implications of participatory activities with people with LHL and supports and inspires future designers to engage with this disadvantaged target group.

Background: Teachers have limited insight in students' perspectives on education, although these perspectives influence quality of learning. As students' and teachers' perspectives differ considerably, there is a need for teachers to learn more about students' experiences and ideas about education. Participatory design might be a good strategy for taking student perspectives into account in instructional design. In areas outside education, the positive effects of participation have already been demonstrated. Purpose: The main goals of this exploratory study are to develop an approach – based on the principles of participatory design – for student participation in instructional design, and to evaluate how students and teachers experience the discussion about possible changes in the design and how they co-operate in designing lessons. Additionally, the study investigates whether the used approach is workable and suitable for use with a range of courses. Sample: The sample consisted of six teachers (of mathematics, economics and English) from two secondary schools in the Netherlands and their 10th-grade pre-university students (N = 139; average age 16 years). In each class, a small group of seven co-designing students was selected as a representative sample of their class. All other students in these classes (i.e. those not directly involved in participatory re-design) were also included, as evaluators of the proposed changes. Design and methods: A participatory design meeting was organised for each group separately. In all groups, the same approach for participatory design was used. The quality of the meeting and the agreement with the proposed changes were evaluated using open questions. The questions were answered individually by both teachers and co-designing students. The remaining students answered questions about their agreement with the proposed changes. The written answers were analysed using a coding scheme. Results: Findings suggest that both teachers and co-designing students were largely satisfied with the meeting. The atmosphere was experienced predominantly as comfortable and enough opportunities were provided to express thoughts and ideas. Teachers, additionally, stated that the usability of students' suggestions was good. The remaining students predominantly agreed on the proposed changes discussed. No differences were found between the evaluation scores of students of different courses. Conclusions: The main conclusion from this exploratory study is that participatory design appears suitable for use in education. The approach used for initiating and structuring the discussion between the teacher and his/her students was appropriate for designing lessons, according to all those involved. As this study suggests, the barriers to the inclusion of students in the instructional design process are not insurmountable, and there are compelling reasons for implementing participatory design in education.

We contrast the design of traditional technology with the design of new technology. Gathering from our experience, we argue that traditional HCI design techniques are not directly applicable to the design of new technology. We review some of these techniques and show how they should be adapted to be used in the context of novel design. As part of this discussion, we show that user input in the process of novel design should come at a much later stage than for traditional design. Lastly, we suggest a process for novel design where these techniques are applied and re-interpreted.

Participatory design is an essential design strategy for creating artifacts and experiences that reflect the voices of the population being designed for and with. The participatory design process can serve not only to research resulting artifacts but also as an empowering activity for those who participate. This paper explores how participatory design can serve as a context for young participants to enact and voice their emerging identities and reveals how different participatory design activities have unique affordances for supporting this identity enactment. Focusing on a group of 12 and 13-year-old African American girls, this paper presents a case study showing how participatory design activities served as venues for the girls to reflect characteristics of their current identities, project future identities, and apply aspects of their identities to shape materials for others. In doing so, we contribute a case study showing how participatory design allows participants to enact their identities, helping researchers gain insight into characteristics of those they are designing with and for. This paper advances our understanding of participatory design as a design approach for youth, especially as it relates to issues of broadening participation, identity, and equity.

In recent years, ‘living lab (LL)’, a design approach that actively involves users as partners from the early stage of the design process, has been attracting much attention. Compared with the traditional participatory design or co-design approaches, one of the distinctive features of the LL approach is that the process of and opportunity for user participation tends to be long-term and complex. Thus, LL practitioners must appropriately plan and design effective integration of user participation into the design process to promote co-creation with users. In other words, LL practitioners are required to ‘configure user participation’ for the effective promotion of co-creation. However, to date, the knowledge on how to properly configure long-term and complex user participation in LLs has not been systematically clarified, nor have its methodologies been developed. This study develops a novel framework for configuring user participation in LLs. Through a literature review and analysis on LL case studies, we identified the 11 key elements in five categories that should be considered while configuring user participation in LLs. Furthermore, on the basis of the identified elements, we developed a novel framework for configuring user participation in LLs, which is called the participation blueprint. We have demonstrated its use and have also discussed its theoretical and practical contributions to the LL and co-design research community.

The article discusses the project approach, substantiates the practicality and universality of its application in various areas of management practice. The data of the sociological studies carried out by the authors of the features of participatory (involved) design in the educational environment of a general education institution, the urban environment of closed administrative-territorial entities. The possibility of applying the design approach and the concept of participatory (involved) design in various environments is analyzed: intra-organizational, local society. Research methodology: activity approach, systems approach, project approach, guide interviews of experts, mass survey. Results and conclusions: as a result of comparing the data of sociological research, the authors come to the conclusion that the project approach is a flexible tool for identifying and solving various managerial problems of the relationship between subjects and management actors in different environments. Participatory design gives results both at the organizational level (for example, high school) and at the level of urban society (ZATO).