Designing storytelling technologies to encouraging collaboration between young children

Benford, Steve; Bederson, Benjamin B.; Åkesson, Karl-Petter; Bayon, Victor; Druin, Allison; Hansson, Pär; Hourcade, Juan Pablo; Ingram, Rob; Neale, Helen; O’Malley, Claire; Simsarian, Kristian T.; Stanton, Danaë; Sundblad, Yngve; Taxén, Gustav

doi:10.1145/332040.332502

Cited by 188 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Countless research papers, conference presentations, and successful European Union reviews confirm that the technical and educational research communities see the importance of what has been created and how it has been created (Alborzi et al, 2000;Benford et al, 2000;Fast & Kjellin, 2000;Taxen et al, 2001). We have also been encouraged by the use of many of our first year technologies.…”

Section: Making New Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They began this by sketching their ideas using simple art supplies (e.g., paper, clay, paste and pipe cleaners) to create "low-tech prototypes" (see Figure 4). We call this participatory design and this has become a central method to our research (Benford et al, 2000;Druin, 1999 Figure 5). One particularly interesting idea (see Figure 5) The dice metaphor is an example of a tangible storytelling object that the technical developers on our team used to create a true interactive prototype.…”

Section: From a Sandwich To A Storytelling Room: Project Activities Omentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Child as Learner, Critic, Inventor, and Technology Design Partner: An Analysis of Three Years of Swedish Student Journals

Druin¹,

Fast²

2002

International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From autumn 1998 to spring 2001, 27 Swedish children (14, at age 5 and 13 at age 7) partnered with researchers supported by the European Union 1 to create new storytelling technologies for children. After each of the many design activities, children were asked to reflect with drawings and/or writing in a bound paper journal. As the project concluded in year three, the children's journals were analyzed and four constructs emerged from the data: learner, critic, inventor, and technology design partner. This study examines the motivation for such a research and learning experience, describes the changes in roles we saw represented in our child partners' journals, and suggests possible future directions for educators and technology developers. (Bruner, 1960, p.72).Today, educational theorists emphasize learning models that support active construction of knowledge and skills by each student. Educators and researchers have moved from supporting environments for passive assimilation of isolated facts, to advocating ones in which the learner actively explores the world: adapting, refining, and elaborating internal models of understanding (

show abstract

Section: Making New Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: From a Sandwich To A Storytelling Room: Project Activities Omentioning

confidence: 99%

The Child as Learner, Critic, Inventor, and Technology Design Partner: An Analysis of Three Years of Swedish Student Journals

Druin¹,

Fast²

2002

International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Benford et al (2000) describe a continuum of support. The strongest support is enforcing collaboration, a good example being the SIDES multi-touch table application (Piper et al, 2006).…”

Section: The Value Of Constraints For Awareness Control and Availabimentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanisms for collaboration

Yuill

Rogers

2012

ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multi-user interfaces are said to provide 'natural' interaction in supporting collaboration, compared to individual and non-co-located technologies. We identify 3 mechanisms accounting for the success of such interfaces: high awareness of others' actions and intentions, high control over the interface and high availability of background information. We challenge the idea that interaction over such interfaces is necessarily 'natural' and argue that everyday interaction involves constraints on awareness, control and availability. These constraints help people interact more smoothly. We draw from social developmental psychology to characterize the design of multi-user interfaces in terms of how constraints on these mechanisms can be best used to promote collaboration. We use this framework of mechanisms and constraints to explain the successes and failures of existing designs, then apply it to three case studies of design, and finally derive from them a set of questions to consider when designing and analysing multi-user interfaces for collaboration.

show abstract

“…In Pebbles, PDA's can be used as input devices to control information displayed on a wall-mounted electronic board (Myers et al, 1998). In Kidpad (Benford et al, 2000), graphics objects, which are displayed on a single screen, can be manipulated with a varying number of mice. These examples show that the platform is not limited to a single personal computer.…”

Section: Context Of Usementioning

confidence: 99%

A Unifying Reference Framework for multi-target user interfaces

Calvary¹,

Coutaz²,

Thévenin

et al. 2003

Interacting with Computers

686

422

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a framework that serves as a reference for classifying user interfaces supporting multiple targets, or multiple contexts of use in the field of context-aware computing. In this framework, a context of use is decomposed in three facets: the end users of the interactive system, the hardware and software computing platform with which the user have to carry out their interactive tasks and the physical environment where they are working. Therefore, a context-sensitive user interface is a user interface that exhibits some capability to be aware of the context (context awareness) and to react to changes of this context. This paper attempts to provide a unified understanding of context-sensitive user interfaces rather than a prescription of various ways or methods of tackling different steps of development. Rather, the framework structures the development life cycle into four levels of abstraction: task and concepts, abstract user interface, concrete user interface and final user interface. These levels are structured with a relationship of reification going from an abstract level to a concrete one and a relationship of abstraction going from a concrete level to an abstract one. Most methods and tools can be more clearly understood and compared relative to each other against the levels of this framework. In addition, the framework expresses when, where and how a change of context is considered and supported in the context-sensitive user interface thanks to a relationship of translation. In the field of multi-target user interfaces is also introduced, defined, and exemplified the notion of plastic user interfaces. These user interfaces support some adaptation to changes of the context of use while preserving a predefined set of usability properties.

show abstract

Designing storytelling technologies to encouraging collaboration between young children

Cited by 188 publications

References 18 publications

The Child as Learner, Critic, Inventor, and Technology Design Partner: An Analysis of Three Years of Swedish Student Journals

The Child as Learner, Critic, Inventor, and Technology Design Partner: An Analysis of Three Years of Swedish Student Journals

Mechanisms for collaboration

A Unifying Reference Framework for multi-target user interfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About