Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Co-designing sustainable practices for emerging technologies education

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper addresses the current lack of emerging technology education in both research and practice and the urgent need for preparing future generations for a digital future. Based on a two-year participatory design process with Danish researchers and pioneer teachers, the article presents outcomes on the collaborative development of interdisciplinary teaching and learning practices for K-12 education, and the professional development that the process spurred within the teachers’ community. The findings indicate that the participatory process became a catalyst for the development of meaningful teaching activities, a community of practice, and the shaping of a common future educational agenda. Furthermore, the results showed how the approach supported teachers’ transformation from active co-designers into change agents for future emerging technology education. Based on an exemplary case, the article demonstrates how participatory design with teachers can support the development of new sustainable practices and communities for emerging technology in education.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://teachablemachine.withgoogle.com

References

  • Abdul, A., Vermeulen, J., Wang, D., Lim, Y., & Kankanballi, M. (2018). Trends and trajectories for explainable, accountable and intelligible systems: A HCI research agenda. In Proceedings of CHI Conference on on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, Paper 582.

  • Akata, Z., Balliet, D., de Rijke, M., Dignum, F., Dignum, V., Eiben, G., Fokkens, A., Grossi, D., Hindriks, K., Hoos, H., Hung, H., Jonker, C., Monz, C., Neerincx, M., Oliehoek, F., Prakken, H., Schlobach, S., van der Gaag, L., van Harmelen, F., … Welling, M. (2020). A research agenda for hybrid intelligence: Augmenting human intellect with collaborative, adaptive, responsible, and explainable artificial intelligence. Computer, 53(8), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2020.2996587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilstrup, K.-E., Kaspersen, M. H., Lunding, M. S., Schaper, M.-M., Van Mechelen, M., Tamashiro, M. A., Smith, R. C., Iversen, O. S., & Petersen, M. G. (2022). Supporting critical data literacy in K-9 Education: Three principles for enriching pupils’ relationship to data. Interaction Design and Children. https://doi.org/10.1145/3501712.3530783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bødker, S., & Kyng, M. (2018). Participatory design that matters—Facing the big issues. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 25(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3152421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boon, W., & Moors, E. (2008). Exploring emerging technologies using metaphors—A study of orphan drugs and pharmacogenomics. Social Science & Medicine, 66(9), 1915–1927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.01.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, A., Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Taking context seriously: Towards explaining policy enactments in the secondary school. Discourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 585–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bressler, J., & Mohnke, J. (2015). School laboratories to teach robotics, smart home and artificial intelligence: From theory to practice.

  • Caspersen, M. E., Diethelm, I., Gal-Ezer, J., McGettrick, A., Nardelli, E., Passey, D., Rovan, B., & Webb, M. (2022). Informatics reference framework for school. https://www.informaticsforall.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Informatics-Reference-Framework-for-School-release-February-2022.pdf

  • Charlton, P., & Avramides, K. (2016). Knowledge construction in computer science and engineering when learning through making. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(4), 379–390. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2016.2627567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dindler, C., & Iversen, O. S. (2014). Relational expertise in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference on Research Papers— PDC ’14 (pp. 41–50). https://doi.org/10.1145/2661435.2661452

  • Dindler, C., Smith, R. C., & Iversen, O. S. (2020). Computational empowerment: Participatory design in education. CoDesign, 16(1), 66–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dindler, C., Iversen, O. S., Hjorth, M., Smith, R. C., & Nielsen, H. D. (2023). DORIT: An analytical model for computational empowerment in K-9 education. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.10059

  • DiPaola, D., Payne, B. H., & Breazeal, C. (2020). Decoding design agendas: An ethical design activity for middle school students. In Proceedings of the interaction design and children conference (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1145/3392063.3394396

  • Estevez, J., Garate, G., & Grana, M. (2019). Gentle introduction to artificial intelligence for high-school students using scratch. IEEE Access, 7, 179027–179036. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2956136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frauenberger, C., Good, J., Fitzpatrick, G., & Iversen, O. S. (2015). In pursuit of rigour and accountability in participatory design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74, 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong, X., Wu, Y., Ye, Z., & Liu, X. (2018). Artificial intelligence course design: ISTREAM-based visual cognitive smart vehicles. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2018, 1731–1735. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2018.8500457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halskov, K., & Hansen, N. B. (2015). The diversity of participatory design research practice at PDC 2002–2012. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74, 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, C., Haase, J., & Higgins, H. (2010). An action research report from a multi-year approach to teaching artificial intelligence at the K-6 level. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 24(3), 1890–1895. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v24i3.18830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, N., & Kinnula, M. (2018). Empowering children through design and making: Towards protagonist role adoption. In Proceedings of the 15th participatory design conference: Full papers—Volume 1 (pp. 1–12). https://doi.org/10.1145/3210586.3210600

  • Iivari, N., Sharma, S., Ventä-Olkkonen, L., Molin-Juustila, T., Kuutti, K., Holappa, J., & Kinnunen, E. (2022). Critical agenda driving child–computer interaction research—Taking a stock of the past and envisioning the future. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 32, 100408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iversen, O. S., Dindler, C., & Smith, R. C. (2019). En Designtilgang Til Teknologiforståelse [A Design Approach to Technology Comprehension].

  • Iversen, O. S., Smith, R. C., & Dindler, C. (2017). Child as protagonist: Expanding the role of children in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 2017 conference on interaction design and children (pp. 27–37). https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.3079725

  • Iversen, O. S., Smith, R. C., & Dindler, C. (2018). From computational thinking to computational empowerment: A 21st century PD agenda. In Proceedings of the 15th participatory design conference: Full papers— Volume 1 (pp. 1–11). https://doi.org/10.1145/3210586.3210592

  • Kafai, Y., Proctor, C., & Lui, D. (2020). From theory bias to theory dialogue: Embracing cognitive, situated, and critical framings of computational thinking in K-12 CS Education. ACM Inroads, 2020, 47. https://doi.org/10.1145/3381887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaspersen, M. H., Bilstrup, K-E. K., & Petersen, M. G. (2021). The Machine Learning Machine: A Tangible User Interface for Teaching Machine Learning. In TEI 2021 - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (pp. 1-12). Article 19 Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430524.3440638

  • Kensing, F., & Blomberg, J. (1998). Participatory design: Issues and concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 7(3–4), 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008689307411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E., & Sheldon, J. (2010). Augmenting your own reality: Student authoring of science-based augmented reality games. New Directions for Youth Development, 2010(128), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, P., & Van Brummelen, J. (2021). Engaging teachers to co-design integrated AI curriculum for K-12 classrooms. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–12). https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445377

  • Lunding, M. S., Grønbæk, J. E. S., Bilstrup, K.-E. K., Sørensen, M.-L. S. K., & Petersen, M. G. (2022). ExposAR: Bringing augmented reality to the computational thinking agenda through a collaborative authoring tool. In CHI Conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–14). https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517636

  • Millea, J., Green, I., & Putland, G. (2005). Emerging technologies: A framework for thinking. ACT Department of Education and Training. http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/54114

  • Mouta, A., Sánchez, E. T., & Llorente, A. P. (2019). Blending machines, learning, and ethics. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on technological ecosystems for enhancing multiculturality (pp. 993–998). https://doi.org/10.1145/3362789.3362909

  • Nicholson, R., Bartindale, T., Kharrufa, A., Kirk, D., & Walker-Gleaves, C. (2022). Participatory design goes to school: Co-teaching as a form of co-design for educational technology. In CHI Conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–17). https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517667

  • Rotolo, D., Hicks, D., & Martin, B. R. (2015). What is an emerging technology? Research Policy, 44(10), 1827–1843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabuncuoglu, A. (2020). Designing one year curriculum to teach artificial intelligence for middle school. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 96–102). https://doi.org/10.1145/3341525.3387364

  • Schaper, M.-M., Smith, R. C., Tamashiro, M. A., Van Mechelen, M., Lunding, M., Bilstrup, K.-E., Kaspersen, M. H., Jensen, K. L., Petersen, M. G., & Iversen, O. S. (2022). Computational empowerment in practice: Scaffolding teenagers’ learning about emerging technologies and their ethical and societal impact. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2022.100537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonsen, J., & Robertson, T. (Eds.). (2013). Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routledge.

  • Smith, R. C., Bossen, C., Dindler, C., & Iversen, O. (2020). When participatory design becomes policy: Technology comprehension in Danish education. In Proceedings of the 16th participatory design conference 2020—Participation(s) otherwise—Volume 1 (pp. 148–158). https://doi.org/10.1145/3385010.3385011

  • Smith, R. C., & Iversen, O. S. (2018). Participatory design for sustainable social change. Design Studies, 59, 9–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.05.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamashiro, M. A., Van Mechelen, M., Schaper, M.-M., & Sejer Iversen, O. (2021). Introducing teenagers to machine learning through design fiction: An exploratory case study. Interaction Design and Children. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3465193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, X.-Y., Peng, W.-Y., Liu, S.-R., & Xiong, J.-W. (2020). Classroom teaching evaluation based on facial expression recognition. In Proceedings of the 2020 9th international conference on educational and information technology (pp. 62–67). https://doi.org/10.1145/3383923.3383949

  • Teachable Machine. (2022). https://teachablemachine.withgoogle.com

  • Tissenbaum, M., Weintrop, D., Holbert, N., & Clegg, T. (2021). The case for alternative endpoints in computing education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 1164–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toivonen, T., Jormanainen, I., Kahila, J., Tedre, M., Valtonen, T., & Vartiainen, H. (2020). Co-designing machine learning apps in K-12 with primary school children. In 2020 IEEE 20th International conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT) (pp. 308–310). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT49669.2020.00099

  • Touretzky, D., Gardner-McCune, C., Martin, F., & Seehorn, D. (2019). Envisioning AI for K-12: What should every child know about AI? Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 33, 9795–9799. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuhkala, A. (2021). A systematic literature review of participatory design studies involving teachers. European Journal of Education, 56(4), 641–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Mechelen, M., Smith, R. C., Schaper, M.-M., Tamashiro, M. A., Bilstrup, E.-K., Lunding, M., Petersen, M., & Iversen, O. S. (2022). Emerging technologies in K-12 education: A future HCI research agenda. ACM Trans. Comput. Interact.

  • Vincent-lancrin, S., & Van der Vlies, R. (2020). Trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) in education: Promises and challenges (p. 218).

  • Woolner, P., Hall, E., Wall, K., & Dennison, D. (2007). Getting together to improve the school environment: User consultation, participatory design and student voice. Improving Schools, 10(3), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480207077846

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is part of a 5-year research project called CEED (Computational Empowerment for Emerging Technologies in Education), exploring and building new practices of Computational Empowerment for emerging technologies in Danish secondary education through a cross-disciplinary approach between computer science, humanities, and engineering. We thank all teachers, students, Aarhus Municipality and colleagues from Aarhus University who have participated with great enthusiasm in the CEED Project.

Funding

This work was supported by a research grant (#28831) from VILLUM Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department Digital Design and Information Studies, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

    Marie-Monique Schaper, Rachel Charlotte Smith, Maarten van Mechelen, Mariana Aki Tamashiro & Ole Sejer Iversen

Authors
  1. Marie-Monique Schaper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rachel Charlotte Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maarten van Mechelen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mariana Aki Tamashiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ole Sejer Iversen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-Monique Schaper.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schaper, MM., Smith, R.C., van Mechelen, M. et al. Co-designing sustainable practices for emerging technologies education. Int J Technol Des Educ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09857-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09857-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation