What happens when you are trying to design a new technology for kids and things do not go as expected?  In the case of the University of Maryland KidsTeam, you might help create Nickelodeon’s Do Not Touch button—an interactive button that plays with kids’ desire to do exactly what they’ve been told not to do. This is an example of the Cooperative Inquiry method of technology co-design in action, where children engage in the design process in equal partnership with adults. Adults can come to the co-design task from different perspectives, including as the primary developer of a new technology for children or a researcher studying the method. Children and adults work together throughout the design process using a variety of techniques including low-tech prototyping, sticky note critiquing, and layered elaboration. While some research has examined the impacts of co-design on the participating children, little research has studied adults’ experiences.  Medha Tare, senior director of research at the Joan Ganz Cooney Center, and Mona Leigh Guha, director of research and evaluation at PBS Kids, recently presented their work on this topic at the 2023 Interaction Design for Children conference in Chicago.

In order to better understand the experiences of adult designers, researchers at the Cooney Center posed the question: What do current and former adult co-designers report as their perceptions, learnings, challenges, and benefits of a co-design experience with children? 

To address this question, we conducted an online survey with adults (N=18) who have worked with children as part of a co-design process currently or in the past while they were leading the design of a technology.  The survey explored the nature of their participation in co-design, their understandings or learnings from the experience, their thoughts on the value of the experience, how it ultimately impacted the technology design, and challenges or improvements they would suggest to the process.

Common themes in adults’ experiences

The open-ended survey responses were analyzed to identify common themes.  One of the primary themes was around what adults learned from their experiences, ranging from the importance of gathering varied perspectives in the design process to specific design skills and techniques that they continue to employ.

I have grown personally and have learned from children throughout the years. It’s hard to list all of the benefits but some include varied perspectives, humility, spontaneity, improvisational skills, better abilities to see beyond what is being said and interpret deeper meaning, and more. – University-affiliated researcher who has participated in and led co-design teams for 20 years

Another important theme was the value of the ideas generated during these co-design sessions. Adults reported that co-design with children improved the usability of the end product and its ability to meet the needs of its intended users. Adults also valued children’s creativity and their ability to come up with unique and innovative ideas.

We would have created our own “adult” version of fun without understanding the inherent factors that made something fun for children. We’re hinged. They’re not. It’s in that space that creativity happens. – Technology designer from a major children’s media company who participated in co-design for 3 years

The survey also solicited ideas for what could be changed or improved. While the feedback on using Cooperative Inquiry was mostly positive, some adults shared concerns that the ideas could be biased toward the small number of children who participated; similarly, one participant noted the challenge in recruiting more diverse children and families. 

When asked if they would recommend a co-design process with children to other designers in the field, on a scale of 1 to 5, participants’ average response was 4.7. Some caveats shared included that some situations may not afford the bandwidth and/or resources necessary to undertake co-design with children, and that relaying the business value of the investment can be challenging. Though one participant who represented a major children’s media company noted the value of the method for “teaching execs how kids think.”

 

The road ahead

This work represents a first step toward understanding the immediate and long-term benefits and challenges for adults engaging in co-design with children.  Adults strongly valued the varied perspectives that co-designing with children offered and felt that the resulting products’ usability and ability to meet children’s needs were greatly improved through this process. Adults also noted both the personal benefits, such as developing empathy and patience, as well as professional benefits, including opening new career opportunities.  The practice will continue to evolve and has already seen new ways of working online with youth and bringing new communities into the work by expanding where design work happens.

Future research may include conducting a more formal investigation of both children and adults’ experiences with technology co-design processes and considering ways to investigate the impact that co-design processes have on finished and marketed technologies. At the Cooney Center, we will continue to explore the potential for co-design and other methods of designing for children in our Sandbox initiative.

 

Download the paper.

Technology may promise to disrupt. Yet, all too often in education, tech tools simply digitally replicate the ways we’ve always gone about teaching and learning. From gradebooks to slide decks, to gamified learning, many ed tech offerings tend to be fancy window dressing more than new approaches. 

XR– or “extended reality,” the umbrella term for immersive tools including virtual and augmented reality– has the potential to be truly different. These emerging technologies can unlock learning opportunities never before known in our classrooms. They promise new and exciting ways for students to explore, build understanding, and creatively design. 

Certainly, challenges to widespread, equitable adoption remain. These include addressing student safety and privacy concerns; the cost of devices; and the need for interoperability with common classroom tools, including learning management systems. Teachers also need support and encouragement to play around with tech that can seem strange and scary at first, finding creative ways that immersive tools might align to their curriculum, advance content mastery, and foster skills like collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving.   

The promise (and challenges) of XR adoption in secondary school settings was the focus of a forum held in 2022– hosted by the Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop and the XR Association– which brought together teachers, creatives, researchers, and technologists to share and learn from each other. Insights gleaned from the rich dialogue are captured in a new report, Swimming with sharks and walking on Mars: Synthesis of a cross-sector forum on immersive technology in secondary education.

The report, which includes links to video recordings of the forum speakers’ presentations and resources shared by participants, captures key themes discussed throughout the cross-sector gathering. These include the kinds of learning that XR is well-suited to support and its particular value in building empathy, allowing for creativity, and supporting abstract reasoning. The report also describes key obstacles that technologists can address by partnering with schools and teachers, including the need to design for a wide diversity of learners, the need for professional development and teacher support, and the importance of transparent privacy and safety controls to meet technology standards of schools and districts. 

The report distills key takeaways from the event, and points to the need for continued partnership between educators, researchers, and technologists as we work together to bring this exciting tool to students:

• XR shows great promise as a tech tool for secondary classrooms, enhancing both disciplinary content learning and building important 21st century skills.
• XR adoption asks teachers to take risks and be in the role of learner, alongside students. This shift requires support. 
• Equity and accessibility should be built into design from the start.
• Student privacy and safety are essential.
• Assessment of learning with XR will look different than traditional measurement; it should capture a range of skills and domains.

The full report, including links to video recordings and a wide range of resources, can be found here. 

 

 

 

Creative tools for children should be designed to ensure that learning is playful and engaging. At Scratch, we believe that it is important to use a co-design process, ensuring that the needs and perspectives of our users—especially children—are taken into account at every stage. By involving young people in the design of ScratchJr and Scratch, we can create a platform that truly meets their needs and helps them to develop the skills they need to thrive in the digital age.

Recently, we put this philosophy into practice in collaboration with the Joan Ganz Cooney Center. We set out to understand the barriers to a creative coding experience for the youngest children (K-1), and to have the children participate in designing solutions to best fit their own needs. What we discovered will be immensely helpful as we continue to reimagine ScratchJr, our platform for the youngest Scratchers.

Connecting With Partners

While ScratchJr is ideally introduced to a child by an educator or caregiver, we wanted to explore how to improve the experience of a child in a less-than-ideal situation—where they had little to no explanation of how to get started. The challenge is to include children as young as 4 years old in a fun and playful way that allows them to imagine themselves as the designer of the app and what they’d change.

The Joan Ganz Cooney Center is an independent research and innovation lab within Sesame Workshop that advances positive futures for kids in the digital world. The Scratch Foundation participated as a partner in the Cooney Center Sandbox, a recently launched design and innovation lab that helps digital media innovators create products that are good for kids.

Together with the Cooney Center and The GIANT Room, an NYC-based creative STEAM learning organization, we planned in-person sessions to bring children’s voices into our process of re-imagining the ScratchJr onboarding experience. While ScratchJr has been available since 2014, and is grounded in the pedagogical research of Dr. Marina Bers for developmentally appropriate creative coding, we had not looked explicitly into the onboarding process—particularly for children learning outside the classroom.

Meet Our Co-Designers

We held the sessions over the course of three days at a public school classroom with fifteen children aged 4 to 6 years old. The school is located in the Harlem neighborhood of New York City, with 94% of its students being eligible for free or reduced lunch. Seventy-six percent of the students are Hispanic, 19% are Black, 2% are white, and the other 2% are Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or have two or more races. Students participated in the sessions through their school’s free after school program, provided by Harlem Dowling.

The goals of the session were twofold: to design and test a framework for playtesting and prototyping sessions that engages the young participants as co-designers, and to gather feedback from the children that can influence our design process for ScratchJr.

We particularly wanted to understand whether children can use ScratchJr independently, learn things for themselves, share with their friends, and teach each other as part of a community. Our hope was to see children helping each other when they got stuck and experiencing manageable levels of frustration that they were able to work through to be successful. We were also interested in observing what they liked and struggled with, and how we could leverage their imagination to discover what we might add to ScratchJr to expand the world of possibilities.

 

Behind the Scenes: Play Testing

Note: Children’s names have been changed to protect their privacy.

To ease children into the sessions, we began with lightweight warm-up questions—facilitators and kids all shared their favorite games—and unplugged coding activities that sparked kids’ imaginations. When their instructor “became a robot,” children had to speak the “language of code” through crafting materials like pipe cleaners and googly eyes. This exercise helped to prime their computational thinking skills before moving to the ScratchJr app.

Each student was seated around a common table and given their own device. Minimal instruction was given as the students dove into the paint editor and discovered the coding blocks. Facilitators assisted when students were stuck, but most of the collaboration was organically formed through peer-to-peer interactions and help.

During the playtest, Simone saw that James was able to navigate between the paint editor and the coding workspace easily. She was stuck and asked for his help to “go back,” and he immediately offered to show her how.

We also saw a lot of organic sharing. Stella excitedly showed her friends the “birthday party” she made. When asked if her sprites could sing “Happy Birthday,” she said, “I don’t have that” and was prompted, “Can you make it?” This launched into students discovering the audio record feature, and everyone in the room singing “Happy Birthday” so the audio could be added to Stella’s project.

After students explored the app, they gave their thoughts on the experience with ScratchJr as well as creative coding in general. The feedback was as imaginative and varied as the group of kids we worked with: we heard everything from “add a  block so the characters can poop!” to ”add ‘family sprites’ like a family of bears” (which would make story-telling of Goldilocks easier to create) or “sprites that have super powers!”

Digging Into the Findings

After the play-testing sessions, Dr. Azi Jamalian, founder of The Giant Room, and their research team delivered a comprehensive report on findings and recommendations. The ScratchJr team began to process the information and determine next steps to turn these findings into actionable features prioritized in our product roadmap.

How did we do it?

We started by grouping observations and recommended features into four themes: Scaffolding, Usability, Cognitive Connection, and Engagement. The team then discussed each item and gave cross-functional perspectives on what could be explored further or implemented as-recommended.

Once the team was aligned on a list of actionable feature sets, individual team members ranked them on two scales: Low-High priority (how important was the feature) and Low-High lift (how much effort would it take to implement the feature).

Suggestions that were determined to be relatively low lift and relatively high priority, like adding a prompting feature showing where to place blocks, were easy to prioritize: we deemed those “Low-Hanging Fruit.” Other suggestions, which individuals ranked at different points on their scales, required further discussion and debate—should we prioritize developing a micro-tutorial for onboarding, given the other explorations around scaffolding that may negate this need?

In the end, we developed a definitive prioritization list. We noted areas of further ideation vs. prototyping, and captured features we plan to explore after the first ScratchJr web release. This documentation was used to inform and add to the existing ScratchJr Product Roadmap.

Co-Design Never Ends

Our time at PS/MS 161M reaffirmed what we’ve always strongly believed: that we can bring the voices of even the youngest users into our design process. After the success of these sessions, we’re focused on more ways to bring co-design into all of our projects, like envisioning the next iteration of the Scratch online community, designing the web version of ScratchJr, or adding new extensions to the Scratch editor.

Scratch and ScratchJr are used by millions of kids worldwide, and as much as we’d love to spend time co-designing in person with each and every one of those young people, it’s not feasible for our team. Through all of our efforts testing in person and online, we’ll continue to prioritize the voices of those who have been excluded from computer science and creative learning opportunities to ensure that Scratch and ScratchJr are more equitable for everyone.

Our team is working to expand playtesting and prototyping for all of our future design efforts. We know that co-design makes Scratch and ScratchJr stronger platforms—and even better, it helps kids feel a sense of ownership in the community they help to build. We’re glad to encourage young people to become active contributors in the technology they engage with, and to help them along the path of becoming lifelong learners.

Learn more about the Cooney Center Sandbox here and sign up for our newsletter for more information. If you’re interested in partnering with us, please complete this form.