1. Distributed Co-Design Greg Walsh Human-Computer Interaction Lab University of Maryland Presented to CHI2011 Doctoral Consortium, May 26, 2011

2. Background

3. Participatory Design (Bodker, et al., 2000, Kensing & Blomberg 1998)

4. Frequency of results for “Participatory Design” or “Cooperative Design” 1990-2010

5. Co-Design (Druin, 1997)

6. Low Tech Prototyping (Guha, 2004)

7. Layered Elaboration (Walsh, et al., 2010)

8. Distributed Design

9. Limitations ● Existing On-line Systems (Walsh, 2010) ● Synchronous only (Whiteboards) ● Adult focused (Google Docs) ● Management of iterations (e-mail) ● Asynchronous Limitations (Druin, et al., 2009) ● Travel expenses ● Time delays between iterations ● Limited co-design techniques ●

10. (Walsh, Brown, Druin, 2011)

11. ICDL

12. DisCo Pilot Study

14. Pilot Study Results ● Possession ● Keep limitations in balance ● Knowing designer = Elaborating designs

15. Follow-up Questions ● How is distributed co-design currently conducted? ● What limitations of distributed co-design need to be overcome? ● What technologies can support this process?

16. Research Approach ● Descriptive study to understand the phenomenon and identify a process. ● Design Research ● Mixed Methods

17. Design Research ● Researchers design and build prototypes as a contribution (Zimmerman, et al, 2007) ● Create the right thing. ● Include children as partners in the design

18. Mixed Methods Approach ● Qualitative ● Design Sessions ● Interview ● Journaling ● Artifact Analysis ● Quantitative ● User logs ● Tool usage ● Survey

19. Expected Outcomes ● Distributed co-design process will be identified ● New techniques for co-located co-design. ● New techniques for design with and for children. ● Giving a voice to underserved or hard-to-serve populations.

20. Take Aways ● Distributed Co-Design: ● is possible but resource intensive. ● is a field fertile for research ● can enable truly international collaborative projects. ● can be applied to collaborative problem solving in an educational setting.

21. Questions? @gxwalsh gwalsh@umd.edu

22. References Bodker, S., Ehn, P., Sjögren, D., & Sundblad, Y. (2000). Co-operative Design—perspectives on 20 years with `the Scandinavian IT Design Model’. Proceedings of NordiCHI (Vol. 2000, p. 22–24). Druin, A., Stewart, J., Proft, D., Bederson, B. B., & Hollan, J. (1997). KidPad: a design collaboration between children, technologists, and educators. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, CHI ’97 (p. 463–470). New York, NY, USA: ACM. Doi:10.1145/258549.258866 Druin, A., Bederson, B. B., Rose, A., & Weeks, A. (2009). From New Zealand to Mongolia: Co-Designing and Deploying a Digital Library for the World’s Children*. Children, Youth and Environments, 19, 1. Guha, M. L., Druin, A., Chipman, G., Fails, J. A., Simms, S., & Farber, A. (2004). Mixing ideas: a new technique for working with young children as design partners. Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community (p. 35–42). Kensing, F., & Blomberg, J. (1998). Participatory design: Issues and concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 7(3), 167–185. Walsh, G., Druin, A., Guha, M. L., Foss, E., Golub, E., Hatley, L., Bonsignore, E., et al. (2010). Layered elaboration: a new technique for co-design with children. Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, CHI ’10 (p. 1237–1240). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/1753326.1753512 Walsh, G. (2010). Developing DisCo: A distributed co-design, on-line tool (Technical Report No. HCIL-2010-18). Human-Computer Interaction Lab: University of Maryland. Walsh, G., Brown, Q., Druin, A. (2011). Social Networking as a Vehicle to Foster Cross-Culture Awareness. In press.

24. Academic contributions [C1] The first version of a geographically distributed, asynchronous, intergenerational design guidelines will be available for future design research projects. [C2] The experiences of an online, intergenerational design team will be identified. [C3] New co-located co-design techniques will be possible. [C4] Support for high-tech prototyping in the traditional low-tech prototype realm of participatory design. [C5] New techniques for working and designing with children will be identified. Global contributions [C5] Underserved and hard-to-serve populations will be able to participate in the co- design process giving a voice to those who, frequently, cannot participate in co-design sessions. [C6] True international co-design projects will be possible.