Children in the information technology design process: A review of theories and their applications <s> Cooperative inquiry <s> + To be published in Fall 1998 by Morgan Kaufmann as a chapter in the book: The Design of Children’s Technology: How We Design, What We Design and Why, edited by Allison Druin. ABSTRACT “That’s silly!” “I’m bored!” “I like that!” “Why do I have to do this?” “What is this for?” These are all important responses and questions that come from children. As our design partners in developing new technologies, children can offer bluntly honest views of their world. They have their own likes, dislikes, and needs that are not the same as adults’ (Druin, Stewart, Proft, Bederson, & Hollan, 1997). As the development of new technologies for children becomes commonplace in industry and university research labs, children’s input into the design and development process is critical. We need to establish new development methodologies that enable us to stop and listen, and learn to collaborate with children of all ages. In the chapter that follows, a discussion of new research methodologies will be presented. <s> BIB001 </s> Children in the information technology design process: A review of theories and their applications <s> Cooperative inquiry <s> In todays homes and schools, children are emerging as frequentand experienced users of technology [3, 14]. As this trendcontinues, it becomes increasingly important to ask if we arefulfilling the technology needs of our children. To answer thisquestion, I have developed a research approach that enables youngchildren to have a voice throughout the technology developmentprocess. In this paper, the techniques of cooperativeinquiry will be described along with a theoretical frameworkthat situates this work in the HCI literature. Two examples oftechnology resulting from this approach will be presented, alongwith a brief discussion on the design-centered learning ofteam researchers using cooperative inquiry. <s> BIB002 </s> Children in the information technology design process: A review of theories and their applications <s> Cooperative inquiry <s> This paper suggests a framework for understanding the roles that children can play in the technology design process, particularly in regards to designing technologies that support learning. Each role, user, tester, informant and design partner has been defined based upon a review of the literature and the author's own laboratory research experiences. This discussion does not suggest that any one role is appropriate for all research or development needs. Instead, by understanding this framework the reader may be able to make more informed decisions about the design processes they choose to use with children in creating new technologies. This paper will present for each role a historical overview, research and development methods, as well as the strengths, challenges and unique contributions associated with children in the design process. <s> BIB003
Developed by Druin and her colleagues at the University of Maryland, cooperative inquiry is a combination of techniques from different design methodologies that have proven useful when working with children. Based on the cooperative design practices of Scandinavian countries and the participatory design practices of the United States, the critical outcome of cooperative inquiry is design-centered learning. Cooperative inquiry is grounded in humancomputer interaction (HCI) research and theories of cooperative design involving a multidisciplinary partnership with children, field research, and iterative low-and high-tech prototyping. A truly cooperative approach, cooperative inquiry treats children as full design partners-equals to the professional adult designers on the team. Professional designers and users (children) of the technology are partnered in intergenerational design teams with the understanding that full participation of users requires training and active cooperation. According to Druin (1999, p. 593) , cooperative design methods informed cooperative inquiry because of their attempt ''to capture the complexity and somewhat 'messy' real-life world of the workplace. It was found that many times sequential tasks were not accomplished by one person, but many tasks were done in parallel and in collaboration with others. Interestingly enough, this description could also easily refer to the complexity and 'messiness' of a child's world. '' Cooperative inquiry incorporates techniques from several different participative methodologies. The process of cooperative inquiry begins with techniques adopted and adapted from contextual inquiry (a part of contextual design) to accommodate work with children. These adaptations still exhibit the underlying principles of contextual inquiry, the most important of which is to observe users in their own environment. To best accommodate designing with children, Druin recommends adaptations to some of the contextual inquiry methods. In the capture of field data through observation, there should be one adult participant observer (similar to the role of a facilitator) and two note takers so that the participant observer is free to interact with the children. This role is important because the participant observer is there to draw the children out and to provide gentle guidance, but only when needed; the observer is not to direct the children. Druin has found that when not told by an adult what to do, children are more exploratory than task oriented-they do what they want to do instead of what adults expect of them. Therefore, it is important that the children lead the interaction and not the adult researcher. The advantage to this approach is that the data collected are true to what the children really think, not what the children think the adults want from them. BIB002 The interactor must never take notes as children may find it distracting and/or intimidating. They may also see the interactor as an authority figure and as a result may not give the same feedback they would give to a peer. The reason for two note takers is that one can record the children's activities and the other can record their dialogue. Casual clothing should be worn by all of the researchers to avoid representing authority figures, and the interactor should be at the children's level in a physical sense (e.g., the interacting adult should not be standing and watching the children if the children are doing something on the floor, but be down with them engaging in the activity.) The interactor needs to ask questions to draw out the children's thoughts and feelings using informal language to express them . The members of the design team also make use of such contextual inquiry methods as brainstorming and interviewing to capture users' tasks, roles, and design ideas BIB003 . These techniques from contextual inquiry facilitate observing what children do with existing technologies. Another technique that Druin borrows from contextual inquiry and adapts for cooperative inquiry is that of pictorial flowcharts. In cooperative inquiry, although the adults take notes (short text descriptions of conversation and activities), the children themselves combine ''drawings with short amounts of text to create 'cartoon-like flow charts''' (Druin, 2002, p. 23 ). Druin uses this diagramming technique because she has found that children do not necessarily work in an orderly fashion. Often, they may start multiple tasks without finishing any of them and then decide to go back to one of the tasks later. Therefore, the researchers found it easier to depict this kind of activity by using diagrams of patterns of activity and the roles the children adopt rather than by the tasks they do BIB002 . The adults' and children's notes are compared for similar and new ideas, and an analysis of activity patterns of the children is made to identify roles that the children have taken throughout the session (e.g., storyteller, collaborator, leader, etc.) BIB003 . Cooperative inquiry also uses techniques from participatory design. In participatory design, the researchers listen to what the users have to say by direct collaboration in the development of low-tech prototypes. Unlike contextual inquiry, with its minimal interaction between researcher and user, cooperative inquiry involves more than observation. Low-tech prototypes are developed by the entire intergenerational team to support the brainstorming and idea generation stage of the design process. Low-tech prototyping (e.g., paper-based prototypes), because of the nature of the activity and the materials used, also provides equal footing for children and adults. Low-tech prototyping is integral to participatory design because the high-tech prototypes emerge from these initial low-tech ones  BIB002 BIB003 BIB001 . In the cooperative inquiry approach, Druin combines different approaches to design to achieve the best results. As she states, ''Low-tech prototyping is a much more effective design tool when done in concert with contextual inquiry. Based on design ideas that have emerged from contextual inquiry notes, prototyping can focus discussion and be a bridge for collaborative brainstorming activities'' (Druin, 1999, p. 596) . As she did with the principles of contextual inquiry, Druin has adapted basic principles of participatory design to form part of the cooperative inquiry approach. Methods need to be adapted for use with an intergenerational team because the power dynamics are different and children must learn their new role as design partners (they are used to the authority structure of teacher-student). To accomplish this, she advises the team to invent something new (e.g., a new sandwich or a new milk carton). Children and adults work together in small groups, brainstorming about what is wrong with the existing ''technologies.'' Gradually, the children become comfortable working as critics, designers, and inventors. Druin considers children from the ages of 7 to 10 years old to be the ideal design partners because they are able to develop ideas from abstract concepts but are still open to exploring new ideas. To put the children at ease, she insists on using more than one child and more than one adult on each design team to achieve an equitable balance of adults and children. Although she encourages the adults on the team to be playful, she reminds them to interact together as adults when appropriate. Druin provides diverse low-tech prototyping materials and encourages the team to use them as soon as possible in different combinations and in nontraditional ways. She has found that the longer the team waits before using the prototyping tools, the simpler the final design is likely to be. Finally, she advocates a flexible goal or open-ended design problem to best make use of the cooperative inquiry methodology . Another technique that Druin has introduced into her cooperative inquiry approach is ''technology immersion,'' which involves observing what the children do when exposed to unlimited access to extraordinary amounts of technology. Used with the observational techniques of contextual inquiry and low-tech prototyping of participatory design, technology immersion is effective to identify roles and patterns that are not obvious in short contextual inquiry sessions. Druin finds technology immersion to be the most useful after some initial contextual inquiry and participatory design sessions have been undertaken BIB002 BIB001 .