Redefining the 'interactive learning' process
Putting the games and toy industries aside, the main drive behind interactive content development for children is an educational one. In both schools and museums the general opinion is if children have access to computers it should be for specific educational aims derived from the national curriculum and other associated educational bodies. "Edutainment" aims to make learning fun and so far has mainly been developed exactly like the word - a literal splicing of educational content and game-play structure.
This design approach often limits the potential of children's experiences with interactive technologies because it dictates the way they learn by applying existing teaching techniques to content development, rather than acknowledging the great potential interactive technologies have to provide children with new ways of learning. They can be involved in developing for themselves, enabling a redefinition of "interactive learning".
'Interactivity' is not enough
Whilst educational professionals and academics debate how to design the future use of technology in educational settings, children are using technology outside of school in ways they find enjoyable and that make sense to them. This means we need people involved in the design of educational technology to be aware of how children are using it individually and socially, and to aim to extend and support this in schools in appropriate and useful ways.
We are now at the stage where simply making products "interactive" is no longer enough. Children who have grown up with interactive technologies often have the highest expectations of what kind of experiences it should enable them to have, regardless of whether they are using it at home or in school. To ensure the success of a product it is becoming increasingly important to include children in the design process at the earliest stage possible, whether the aim is to entertain or to educate.
Academic research vs commercial development
Academic research projects have been developing ways of including children in their design process for a number of years, but with a few exceptions have failed to impact on the commercial market. Although the commercial success of companies, such as Ragdoll Ltd, which pioneered the use of children's responses in their product development process, has increased interest in this area, the majority of companies producing children's technology products have failed to see the huge value that child research can add to their products, as their development decision process is mainly based on cost of goods, product margins, manufacturing issues and release dates.
The problem with many existing products is that people involved in product development think of "children" as an anonymous and depersonalised group who all like the same kind of content and activities. They fail to realise children have very different interests and needs depending on their age, their gender and their learning preferences. Developing a child-centred process can help solve these problems but for it to truly make an impact organisational changes must be made within companies to optimise the effectiveness of this process and improve the likelihood of commercial success.
Four stages of developing a child-centred process
· Designers and developers working in this industry need to stop projecting their own perceptions of technology use on to children and recognise the value of research methods that can be used to involve children in the design process
· they need to be aware of the most appropriate research processes for their target age group. Whilst asking seven-year-olds to design a computer of the future may provide inspiration for some designers, this approach is not suitable for use with four-year-old children
· through these research methods they should aim to develop a fundamental understanding of how their target age group perceive the world around them, how they communicate and connect with it and how they learn through play. Although the difference between adults coming up with a concept based on presumptions about children, designing and developing it and then testing it with them and including children at the start of a project may seem subtle it can make a huge difference to the appropriateness of the final design
· initial concept generation should be derived from the perspective of children as much as possible. Concepts need to be tested with children using an iterative design process, and the results integrated into subsequent design iterations to establish an on-going link with children's needs throughout development and ensure the end product is something children will enjoy and want to interact with on a regular basis.
First hand experience is best
As a designer of children's interactive experiences I find reading research reports and watching response tapes really useful. But although this may seem like stating the obvious I feel the only way to develop the fundamental understanding of how children perceive the world is actually spending time with children of the age group I'm designing for, observing and playing with them and not necessarily just focusing on how they use technology.
Whilst observing children playing with existing technology can be useful in the context of designing more appropriately for them, we must recognise this gives a very small insight into the potential of technology designed for children as it's limited by the form factor and functionality for a completely different age group and purpose. Watching children interact with objects they use in traditional play provides far more inspiration when designing input devices for children than watching a child using a mouse.
Future innovation
Real innovation happens when people move beyond existing beliefs and limitations. Designers and developers making products for children need to move away from the limitations of national curriculum guidelines and existing pedagogical methodologies to embrace the exciting new learning opportunities that interactive technologies offer. Future interactive learning products for children need to support their natural desire to explore and discover, make their own connections and find their own "learning" paths, allowing them to be part of developing future ways of learning.
· Amy Branton is creative director of Skybluepink interaction design studio. She has previously worked for Ragdoll Ltd and Hasbro. amy@skybluepink.co.uk