@@ -52,6 +52,88 @@ The end-user can choose a vehicle (car or bike), wheels, and a glider (used to f
## [**Design** principles for **children's** technology](http://www.hci.usask.ca/publications/2005/HCI_TR_2005_02_Design.pdf)
### Design Principles for Children's Technology
#### Cognitive Development
##### Literacy
- Interfaces should be strongly visual, avoiding text as much as possible and reducing cognitive load. [7]
- Content-specific metaphors are useful in helping children navigate interfaces [7,28]
- Instructions should be presented in an age-appropriate format [10]
- Instructions should be easy to comprehend and remember [10]
##### Feedback and Guidance
- Children are impatient and need immediate feedback showing that their action have had some effect, otherwise they will repeat the action until some outcome is perceived [25,28]
- Interfaces should provide scaffolding and guidance to help children remember how to accomplish tasks [4]
- Activities should allow for expanding complexity, and should support children as they move from one level to the next in use of the product [10,26].
- Icons should be visually meaningful to children [10]
- Rollover audio, animation, and highlighting should be used to indicate where to find functionality [10]
- The interface should provide indication of the current state of the system, whether it is busy processing or waiting for input from the user [10]
- Interfaces should track and display children’s exploration of environments if it is important for them to remember where they have previously visited [31]
##### Mental Development
- Children’s interfaces need to take into account the fact that children may not yet understand abstract concepts [7]
- Children’s interfaces should not make use of extensive menus and sub-menus as children may not yet have the ability to categorize or have the content knowledge required to navigate efficiently [7]
- Children are accustomed to direct manipulation interfaces, their actions should map directly to the actions on the screen. If other styles are used, expect that most users will require training and that some will be unable to grasp how the interaction works [15,21]
##### Imagination
- Care should be taken when using metaphors for interfaces as
children readily immerse themselves in the environment. While
this leads to more intuitive interactions; it may also lead to expectations that exceed the bounds of the interface [4,22,31]
#### Physical Development
##### Motor Skills
- Make mouse interactions as simple as possible. One-click interfaces are easier than dragging or double clicking [7]
- Make all mouse buttons have the same functionality [7,11]
- Touch screens are good for young children who have difficulty using a mouse [7]
- Young children have difficulty targeting small objects on the screen. Items should be large enough and distanced from each other to compensate for some inaccuracy in targeting [7,11,28]
- Dragging movements are difficult for young children. Dragging should be accomplished by clicking on the object to attach it to the pointer, then clicking again to drop it in the desired location [10,13,28]
- Interfaces should not require children to hold down mouse buttons for extended periods of time, especially if simultaneous mouse movement is necessary [13]
- Using a mouse, continuous unidirectional motion on the screen is easiest for children when a “click-go-click-stop” interface is used, where children click the mouse to start the motion and click again once they want to stop [13]
- Marquee selection should be accomplished by drawing an initial selection area on the screen then allowing users to shape it to the desired size by “pushing out” the edges of the area, rather than the
traditional method of choosing one corner of the rectangle and dragging to its opposite corner [1]
##### Tangibility
- Children like tangible interfaces because they enjoy being able to physically touch and manipulate the devices [6,9,24]
- Direct manipulatives allow children to explore and actively participate in the discovery process [9,19,24,36]
- Physical props and having large input devices encourages collaboration [27]
- Superficial changes to the design can produce very different physical interactions. Different interfaces emphasize different actions [27]
- #### Social/Emotional Development
##### Motivation and Engagement
- Technologies should give children the ability to define their experiences and be in control of the interaction [8,10,25]
- Entertainment click-ons are an effective tool for engaging children. Multiple response click-ons are most popular while humorous and multimedia click-ons are most enjoyable [33]
- Providing occasional entertaining diversions keep children engaged and motivated during learning tasks [33]
- Animated pedagogical agents are useful for learning environments; even those who do not provide any advice or interaction are perceived positively [17]
- Expressive, domain-specific agents are useful due to pedagogical benefits and positive affective impact [17]
- On-screen character interventions should be supportive rather than distracting [10]
Activities should be inherently interesting and challenging so children will want to do them for their own sake [10]
- Supportive reward structures that take into account children’s developmental level and context of use help keep children engaged [10,20]
##### Social Interaction
- Children’s technology should facilitate social interactions between children [8,16]
- Children’s technology should account for children’s beliefs about computers and interact in a socially consistent manner [2,18,32,34,35]
##### Collaboration
- Giving children each their own mouse when collaborating encourages participation and cooperation. It also leads to greater user satisfaction [13,29,30,31]
- Groupware interfaces should provide mutual awareness at all times [3]
- Interfaces should support both “give” and “take” transfers of control to accommodate different interaction styles [13]
- Single-Display Groupware is useful for children’s co-located collaboration as they naturally group to one computer even when they have the opportunity to use separate machines [14,29]
Abstract
-design principles used in adult interfaces cant be applied to children's products, because needs, skills, and expectations are different of each group
...
...
@@ -120,112 +202,41 @@ A catalogue of design principles
Cognitive Dev
(Literacy)
-most children have not reached reading proficieny level usually assumed for adults
-older children may not fully understand text-based instructions, younger children may not know the alphabet yet
-conventional interfaces use text-based menus and help functions, and may require textual input (problematic)
-children creative spellers, not good for interface recognized textual input
-reading and writing level varies, interfaces must be designed with narrow age-group in mind to meet needs of users
-graphical metaphors- helpful for children's interfaces (Steiner and Moher), graphical interface resembling a storybook helped 4-7 yr olds infer purpose and operation of storytelling software, top half kids created images, lower half kids wrote the story, familiar storybook layout helped kids learn to use software quickly (what is they don't read???)
-Searchkids, graphical search interface that allows querying, browsing, and reviewing of search results thru graphics, uses content-specific metaphors (zoo navigation info about animals), allows kids to form queries by dragging represenative icons, kids could easily navigate a large info space previously inaccessible to them, Druin's research reinforces idea that content-specific, graphical metaphors are appropriate representations 4 kids and that visual interfaces w/ minimal text are most useful (Druin)
-Hanna present interface design guidelines for kids tech 4rm years of expierence w/ developing children's software, to deal w/ varying literacy level they suggest presenting instructions in age-appropriate format and including option of having text instructions read aloud (most children not accustomed to reading on a screen), also suggest that instructions should be easy to remember and should avoid making use of concepts unfamiliar to children, on screen characters can speak instructions w/ corresponding animations (this method is helpful becuz it directs attentions and helps in understanding )
-Common theme: text is not effective means of conveying info to kids, visual or audio cues r better (as long as info is age-appropriate and clear)
### Children's Design Principles
#### Cognitive Development
##### Literacy
- Interfaces should be strongly visual, avoiding text as much as possible and reducing cognitive load. [7]
- Content-specific metaphors are useful in helping children navigate interfaces [7,28]
- Instructions should be presented in an age-appropriate format [10]
- Instructions should be easy to comprehend and remember [10]
##### Feedback and Guidance
- Children are impatient and need immediate feedback showing that their action have had some effect, otherwise they will repeat the action until some outcome is perceived [25,28]
- Interfaces should provide scaffolding and guidance to help children remember how to accomplish tasks [4]
- Activities should allow for expanding complexity, and should support children as they move from one level to the next in use of the product [10,26].
- Icons should be visually meaningful to children [10]
- Rollover audio, animation, and highlighting should be used to indicate where to find functionality [10]
- The interface should provide indication of the current state of the system, whether it is busy processing or waiting for input from the user [10]
- Interfaces should track and display children’s exploration of environments if it is important for them to remember where they have previously visited [31]
##### Mental Development
- Children’s interfaces need to take into account the fact that children may not yet understand abstract concepts [7]
- Children’s interfaces should not make use of extensive menus and sub-menus as children may not yet have the ability to categorize or have the content knowledge required to navigate efficiently [7]
- Children are accustomed to direct manipulation interfaces, their actions should map directly to the actions on the screen. If other styles are used, expect that most users will require training and that some will be unable to grasp how the interaction works [15,21]
##### Imagination
- Care should be taken when using metaphors for interfaces as
children readily immerse themselves in the environment. While
this leads to more intuitive interactions; it may also lead to expectations that exceed the bounds of the interface [4,22,31]
-older -> not fully understand text-based instructoins, young -> not know alphabet yet
- Make mouse interactions as simple as possible. One-click interfaces are easier than dragging or double clicking [7]
- Make all mouse buttons have the same functionality [7,11]
- Touch screens are good for young children who have difficulty using a mouse [7]
- Young children have difficulty targeting small objects on the screen. Items should be large enough and distanced from each other to compensate for some inaccuracy in targeting [7,11,28]
- Dragging movements are difficult for young children. Dragging should be accomplished by clicking on the object to attach it to the pointer, then clicking again to drop it in the desired location [10,13,28]
- Interfaces should not require children to hold down mouse buttons for extended periods of time, especially if simultaneous mouse movement is necessary [13]
- Using a mouse, continuous unidirectional motion on the screen is easiest for children when a “click-go-click-stop” interface is used, where children click the mouse to start the motion and click again once they want to stop [13]
- Marquee selection should be accomplished by drawing an initial selection area on the screen then allowing users to shape it to the desired size by “pushing out” the edges of the area, rather than the
traditional method of choosing one corner of the rectangle and dragging to its opposite corner [1]
-creative spellers, not good for interface recognized textual input (convetional interfaces text-based menus & help functions)
##### Tangibility
-variance of reading & writing level, interfaces designed w/narrow age-group in mind 2 meet need of user
- Children like tangible interfaces because they enjoy being able to physically touch and manipulate the devices [6,9,24]
GRAPHICAL METAPHORS (Steiner & Moher): storybook resemblence (4-7 yr old), infered purpose & operatoin of software, top-half 4 created images, bottom-half 4 writing story, helped to quickly learn software (what is they dont read)
- Direct manipulatives allow children to explore and actively participate in the discovery process [9,19,24,36]
SEARCHKIDS (Druin): graphical search interface allows querying, browsing, & reviewing search results thru graphics, content-specific metaphores (zoo navi 4 animals), form quieries by dragging representative icons, easy navigation of a large info space not accessible in past, research reinforces content-specific graphical-metaphors appropriate representations 4 kids & visual interfaces w/ minimal text are most useful
- Physical props and having large input devices encourages collaboration [27]
INTERFACE DESIGN GUIDELINES (Hanna): 4rm years of expierence w/ developing software, 2 deal w/ varying literacy level suggest presenting instructions in age-appropriate format & include option of having text instructions read aloud (not accustomed to reading screen),instructions should be easy to remember & should avoid using concepts unfamiliar 2 kids, on screen characters can speak instructions w/ corresponding animations (method helpful bcuz it directs attentions & helps in understanding)
- Superficial changes to the design can produce very different physical interactions. Different interfaces emphasize different actions [27]
-Common theme: text not effective to convery into to kids, visual or audio cues r better (info still needs to b age-appropriate & clear)
- #### Social/Emotional Development
Feedback and Guidance
##### Motivation and Engagement
-expect 2 c results of actions immediately, if nothing happens after input they will repeat action til somthing does happen, constant auditory & visual feedback expected
- Technologies should give children the ability to define their experiences and be in control of the interaction [8,10,25]
- Entertainment click-ons are an effective tool for engaging children. Multiple response click-ons are most popular while humorous and multimedia click-ons are most enjoyable [33]
- Providing occasional entertaining diversions keep children engaged and motivated during learning tasks [33]
- Animated pedagogical agents are useful for learning environments; even those who do not provide any advice or interaction are perceived positively [17]
- Expressive, domain-specific agents are useful due to pedagogical benefits and positive affective impact [17]
- On-screen character interventions should be supportive rather than distracting [10]
Activities should be inherently interesting and challenging so children will want to do them for their own sake [10]
- Supportive reward structures that take into account children’s developmental level and context of use help keep children engaged [10,20]
-use system w/out instruction, must be intuitive or provide guidance thtu tasks
- Children’s technology should facilitate social interactions between children [8,16]
- Children’s technology should account for children’s beliefs about computers and interact in a socially consistent manner [2,18,32,34,35]
SCAFFOLDING (Danesh): supports thru necessary steps, 10-13 yr olds forget how to beam info between devices & needed 2 b reminded 2 point devices towards each other used wizard like interface to constrain process (Geney)
##### Collaboration
-Hanna: activities should start simple then increase complexity and difficulty as required skills are mastered, feedback important & should guide thru learning concepts
- Giving children each their own mouse when collaborating encourages participation and cooperation. It also leads to greater user satisfaction [13,29,30,31]
-Sedighian & Klawe: gradually removing feedback & cues in educational game encouraged 12-14 yr olds to take on increasing cognitive responsibilty & stimulated engagement w/ math concepts, initial levels
- Groupware interfaces should provide mutual awareness at all times [3]
- Interfaces should support both “give” and “take” transfers of control to accommodate different interaction styles [13]
- Single-Display Groupware is useful for children’s co-located collaboration as they naturally group to one computer even when they have the opportunity to use separate machines [14,29]
