iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://unpaywall.org/10.1007/S11042-020-09927-X
Reflection and awareness in the design process: children ideating, programming and prototyping smart objects | Multimedia Tools and Applications Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Reflection and awareness in the design process: children ideating, programming and prototyping smart objects

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Design of new technology with children has been widely investigated, and lately several workshops have been organised with children for designing novel IoT or smart objects, e.g., for smart cities or parks. Gradually, the research focus has shifted, from an analysis of the technology itself, which children help create, towards an analysis of children’s possible gains in design workshops. However, in spite of several recent efforts, it is still unclear what happens when children participate in diverse parts of a design process, ranging from ideation to prototyping. This paper investigates it, focussing on children’s gains in relation to their knowledge of design. A structured design workshop can help obtain such gains and analyse their achievements. Therefore this paper presents a structured design workshop with 27 children, aged from 11 to 14 years old, ideating, programming and prototyping smart objects for their town park. The workshops was structured and centred around a board-game with cards, so as to playfully make children reflect about design, and promote their awareness of what they were doing. Data were gathered in relation to children’s reflections from different perspectives, during the workshop, and in relation to their awareness of design, after the workshop. The analysis of the gathered data suggests that the workshop positively affected children’s reflections on design and awareness of design, giving indications for future work concerning critical design with children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adams E (2009) Fundamentals of game design. Pearson Allyn and Bacon, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baykal GE, Goksun T, Yantaç AE (2018) Customizing developmentally situated design (DSD) cards: informing designers about preschoolers’ spatial learning. ACM, New York, pp 592:1–592:9

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berger A, Odom W, Storz M, Bischof A, Kurze A, Hornecker E (2019) The inflatable cat: idiosyncratic ideation of smart objects for the home. In: Proc. of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI’19. ACM, New York, pp 401:1–401:12

  4. Blikstein P, Krannich D (2013) The makers’ movement and fablabs in education: experiences, technologies, and research. In: Proc. of the 12th international conference on interaction design and children, IDC’13. ACM, New York, pp 613–616

  5. Darzentas D, Velt R, Wetzel R, Craigon PJ, Wagner HG, Urquhart LD, Benford S (2019) Card mapper: enabling data-driven reflections on ideation cards. In: Proc. of CHI’19, pp 1–15, 04

  6. De Roeck D, Tanghe J, Jacoby A, Moons I, Slegers K (2019) Ideas of things: the iot design kit. In: Companion publication of the 2019 on designing interactive systems conference 2019 companion, DIS’19 companion. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, pp 159–163

  7. Dodero G, Gennari R, Melonio A, Torello S (2014) Gamified co-design with cooperative learning. In: CHI’14 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, CHI EA’14. ACM, New York, pp 707–718

  8. Druin A (2002) The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour & Information Technology 21(1):1–25

    Google Scholar 

  9. Eriksson E, Iversen OS, Baykal GE, Van Mechelen M, Smith R, Wagner M-L, Fog BV, Klokmose C, Cumbo B, Hjorth A, Musaeus LH, Petersen MG, Bouvin NO (2019) Widening the scope of fablearn research: integrating computational thinking, design and making. ACM, New York, pp 15:1–15:9

    Google Scholar 

  10. Foundation ME (2019) Micro:bit educational foundation — micro:bit. https://microbit.org. Accessed 2019 Sep 06

  11. Foundation S (2019) Scratch cards - scratch wiki. https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Scratch_Cards. Accessed 2019 Sep 06

  12. Gennari R, Matera M, Melonio A, Rizvi M, Roumelioti E (2021) Engaging pre-teens in ideating and programming smart objects through play. In: Proc. of methodologies and intelligent systems for technology enhanced learning, 10th international conference (MIS4TEL 2020). Springer

  13. Gennari R, Matera M, Melonio M, Roumelioti E (2019) A board game and a workshop for co-creating smart nature ecosystems. In: Methodologies and intelligent systems for technology enhanced learning, 9th international conference, MIS4TEL 2019, Avila, Spain, 26-28 June, 2019, pp 137–145

  14. Gennari R, Matera M, Melonio A, Roumelioti E (2019) Snap 2: the evolution of a board game for smart nature environments. In: Extended abstracts of the annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play companion extended abstracts, Barcelona, Spain, October 22-25, 2019, pp 405–411

  15. Gennari R, Melonio A, Rizvi M (2020) From TurnTalk to classtalk: the emergence of tangibles for class conversations in primary school classrooms. Behav Inf Technol 39(1):88–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gennari R, Melonio A, Rizvi M, Bonani A (2017) Design of IoT tangibles for primary schools: a case study. In: Proc. of the 12th biannual conference on Italian SIGCHI chapter, CHItaly ’17. ACM, New York, pp 26:1–26:6

  17. Gianni F, Divitini M (2017) Designing IoT applications for smart cities: extending the tiles ideation toolkit. IxD & A 35:100–116

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hourcade JP (2015) Child-computer. Interaction Self

  19. Huyghe J, Wouters N, Geerts D, Vande Moere A (2014) Localudo: card-based workshop for interactive architecture. In: Proc. of the extended abstracts of the 32nd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI EA ’14. ACM, New York, pp 1975–1980

  20. Iivari N, Kinnula M (2018) Empowering children through design and making: towards protagonist role adoption. In: Proc. of the 15th participatory design conference: full papers–volume 1, PDC ’18. ACM, New York, pp 16:1–16:12

  21. Iversen OS, Smith RC, Dindler C (2017) Child as protagonist: expanding the role of children in participatory design. In: Proc. of the 2017 conference on interaction design and children, IDC’17. ACM, New York, pp 27–37

  22. Kinnula M, Iivari N (2019) Empowered to make a change: guidelines for empowering the young generation in and through digital technology design. In: Proc. of the FabLearn Europe 2019 conference, FabLearn Europe ’19. ACM, New York, pp 16:1–16:8

  23. Kinnula M, Iivari N, Molin-Juustila T, Keskitalo E, Leinonen T, Mansikkamäki E, Similä M (2017) Cooperation, combat, or competence building-what do we mean when we are ‘empowering children’ in and through digital technology design?. In: Proc. of the international conference on information systems, AIS

  24. Klapwijk R, Rodewijk N (2018) Purposeful prototyping through a discussion game in primary education. In: Proc. of fablearn Netherlands 2018, pp 50–61

  25. Knowles B, Beck S, Finney J, Devine J, Lindley J (2019) A scenario-based methodology for exploring risks: children and programmable IoT. In: Harrison S, Bardzell S, Neustaedter C, Tatar DG (eds) Proc. of the 2019 on designing interactive systems conference, DIS 2019, San Diego, CA, USA, June 23-28, 2019. ACM, pp 751–761

  26. Kortuem G, Kawsar F, Sundramoorthy V, Fitton D (2010) Smart objects as building blocks for the internet of things. IEEE Internet Computing 14 (1):44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lechelt S, Rogers Y, Marquardt N (2020) Coming to your senses: promoting critical thinking about sensors through playful interaction in classrooms. In: Rubegni E, Vasalou A, Burguès NP, Sawhney N (eds) Proc. of the 19th ACM international conference on interaction design and children, IDC 2020, London, United Kingdom, June 17-24, 2020. ACM, pp 11–22

  28. Lechelt Z, Rogers Y, Marquardt N, Shum V (2017) Democratizing children’s engagement with the internet of things through connect us. In: Ubicomp 2016 adjunct–proc.of the 2016 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing

  29. Mavroudi A, Divitini M, Mora S, Gianni F (2018) Game-based learning for iot: the tiles inventor toolkit. In: Auer ME, Tsiatsos T (eds) Interactive mobile communication technologies and learning. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 294–305

  30. Melonio A, Rizvi M, Roumelioti E, de Angeli A, Gennari R, Matera M (2020) Children’s beliefs and understanding of smart objects: an exploratory study. In: Proc. of international conference on advanced visual interfaces (AVI’20). ACM

  31. Microsoft (2019) Microsoft makecode. https://makecode.microbit.org. Accessed 2019 Sep 06

  32. Mora S, Gianni F, Divitini M (2017) Tiles: a card-based ideation toolkit for the internet of things. In: Proc. of the 2017 conference on designing interactive systems, DIS’17. ACM, New York, pp 587–598

  33. Read JC, Fitton D, Sim G, Horton M (2016) How ideas make it through to designs: process and practice. In: Proc. of the 9th nordic conference on human-computer interaction, Gothenburg, Sweden, October 23 - 27, 2016. ACM, p 16

  34. Root E, Heuten W, Boll S (2019) Maker cards: evaluating design cards for teaching physical computing to middle-school girls. In: Proc. of mensch und computer 2019, MuC’19. ACM, New York, pp 493–497

  35. Roumelioti E, Gennari R, Matera M, Melonio A, Rizvi M (2020) Towards making children independent in design. In: Wakkary R, Andersen K, Odom W, Desjardins A, Petersen MG (eds) DIS ’20: designing interactive systems conference 2020, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, July 6-10, 2020, Companion volume. ACM, pp 227–232

  36. Said-Metwaly S, den Noortgate WV, Kyndt E (2017) Approaches to measuring creativity: a systematic literature review. Creativity 4(2):238–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sauro J, Lewis J (2012) Quantifying the user experience. Morgan Kaufmann

  38. Schut A, Klapwijk R, Gielen M (2018) Effects of convergent and divergent feedback on creative thinking during children’s design processes. In: Proc. of PATT36 international conference, 07

  39. Thang B, Sluis-Thiescheffer W, Bekker T, Eggen B, Vermeeren A, de Ridder H (2008) Comparing the creativity of children’s design solutions based on expert assessment. In: Proc. of IDC’08, pp 266–273

  40. Thinkers S (2019) Khandu: building little thinkers! http://khandus.com/en/. Accessed 2019 Sep 06

  41. Thoring K, Müller R (2011) Understanding the creative mechanisms of design thinking: an evolutionary approach. In: Proc. of of the second conference on creativity and innovation in design, DESIRE, pp 137–147

  42. Vaajakallio K, Mattelmäki T (2014) Design games in co-design: as a tool, a mindset and a structure. Co-Design 10:03

    Google Scholar 

  43. Van Mechelen M, Laenen A, Zaman B, Willems B, Abeele VV (2019) Collaborative design thinking (codet): a co-design approach for high child-to-adult ratios. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 130:179–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ventä-Olkkonen L, Hartikainen H, Norouzi B, Iivari N, Kinnula M (2019) A literature review of the practice of educating children about technology making. In: Lamas D, Loizides F, Nacke L, Petrie H, Winckler M, Zaphiris P (eds) Human-computer interaction – INTERACT 2019. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 418–441

  45. Wood G, Dylan T, Durrant A, Torres PE, Ulrich P, Carr A, Cukurova M, Downey D, McGrath P, Balaam M, Ferguson A, Vines J, Lawson S (2019) Designing for digital playing out. ACM, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  46. Yilmaz S, Daly SR, Seifert CM, Gonzalez R (2016) Evidence-based design heuristics for idea generation. Des Stud 46:95–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

All children participated in the workshop on a voluntary basis, and their parents authorised their participation through a written consent form, approved by the ethical committee of Free University of Bozen-Bolzano. Post-workshop data processing was undertaken in aggregated and anonymous form so as to meet rules on data protection.

Authors thank all participating children and their parents, without whom this work would have not been possible.

Funding

The work reported in this paper was funded by means of: PRIN 2017 “EMPATHY: EMpowering People in deAling with internet of THings ecosYstems; SNaP 2019 “Smart Nature Protagonists”; the Smart Design 2020 research framework between the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano and Politecnico di Milano.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy

    Rosella Gennari, Alessandra Melonio & Eftychia Roumelioti

  2. Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy

    Maristella Matera & Mehdi Rizvi

Authors
  1. Rosella Gennari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maristella Matera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessandra Melonio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehdi Rizvi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eftychia Roumelioti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosella Gennari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The order of authors is alphabetical. All authors gave major contributions to the research. In particular, Gennari supervised the overall research design, and acted as moderator. Matera supervised the data processing, and acted as moderator. Melonio supervised the game design, and acted as moderator. Roumelioti developed the game design, and acted as technical facilitator. Rizvi managed the electronics and developed programming snippets for the programming and prototyping part, and acted as technical facilitator. All authors contributed to the paper writing, which was coordinated by Rosella Gennari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gennari, R., Matera, M., Melonio, A. et al. Reflection and awareness in the design process: children ideating, programming and prototyping smart objects. Multimed Tools Appl 80, 34909–34932 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09927-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09927-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation