Cited by 130Child Development and Digital TechnologyTeaching and Learning ProgrammingLiteracy, Media, and Education

Family as a Third Space for AI Literacies: How do children and parents learn about AI together?

Open access
Druga, Stefania, Christoph, Fee Lia, Ko, Amy J·2022·CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

Many families engage daily with artificial intelligence (AI) applications, from conversations with a voice assistant to mobile navigation searches. While there are known ways for youth to learn about AI, we do not yet understand how to engage parents in this process. To explore parents’ roles in helping their children develop AI literacies, we designed 11 learning activities organized into four topics: image classification, object recognition, interaction with voice assistants, and unplugged AI co-design. We conducted a 5-week online in-home study with 18 children (5 to 11 years old) and 16 parents. We identify parents’ most common roles in supporting their children and consider the benefits of parent-child partnerships when learning AI literacies. Finally, we discuss how our different activities supported parents’ roles and present design recommendations for future family-centered AI literacies resources.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3491102.3502031

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. n.d.]. Echo Kids Privacy -Echo Dot Kids Edition Privacy Concerns and COPPA Violations Site. https://www.echokidsprivacy.com/. (Accessed on 08/31/2021).
  2. Edith Ackermann. 1991. The agency model of transactions: Toward an un- derstanding of children's theory of control. Psychologie genetique et sciences cognitives. Geneve: Fondation Archives Jean Piaget (1991).
  3. Jose M Alonso. 2019. Explainable Artifcial Intelligence for Kids. In 2019 Confer- ence of the International Fuzzy Systems Association and the European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology (EUSFLAT 2019). Atlantis Press.
  4. Julia Angwin, Jef Larson, Surya Mattu, and Lauren Kirchner. 2016. Machine bias. ProPublica, May 23 (2016), 2016.
  5. A Antle. 2007. Tangibles: fve properties to consider for children. In Workshop on Tangibles at Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2007). 1-10.
  6. Rachel Barr. 2019. Growing up in the digital age: early learning and family media ecology. Current directions in psychological science 28, 4 (2019), 341-346.
  7. Mark Bauerlein. 2011. The Digital Divide: Arguments for and Against Facebook, Google, Texting, and the Age of Social Netwo rking. Penguin.
  8. Erin Beneteau, Olivia K Richards, Mingrui Zhang, Julie A Kientz, Jason Yip, and Alexis Hiniker. 2019. Communication breakdowns between families and Alexa. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 243.
  9. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77-101.
  10. Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru. 2018. Gender shades: Intersectional accu- racy disparities in commercial gender classifcation. In Conference on fairness, accountability and transparency. 77-91.
  11. Courtney Cazden, Bill Cope, Norman Fairclough, Jim Gee, Mary Kalantzis, Gun- ther Kress, Allan Luke, Carmen Luke, Sarah Michaels, and Martin Nakata. 1996. A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard educational review 66, 1 (1996), 60-92.
  12. Luigi Ceccaroni, James Bibby, Erin Roger, Paul Flemons, Katina Michael, Laura Fagan, and Jessica L Oliver. 2019. Opportunities and risks for citizen science in the age of artifcial intelligence. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice 4, 1 (2019).
  13. Catherine D'Ignazio and Rahul Bhargava. 2015. Approaches to building big data literacy. In Proceedings of the Bloomberg data for good exchange conference.
  14. Yrjö Engeström. 2015. Learning by expanding. Cambridge University Press.
  15. Sean Follmer, Hayes Rafe, Janet Go, Rafael Ballagas, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2010. Video play: playful interactions in videoconferencing for long-distance fam- ilies with young children. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference onInteraction Design and Children (2010). ACM, 49-58.
  16. Kris Gutierrez, Betsy Rymes, and Joanne Larson. 1995. Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Harvard educational review 65, 3 (1995), 445-472.
  17. Kris D Gutiérrez. 2008. Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading research quarterly 43, 2 (2008), 148-164.
  18. Kris D Gutiérrez, P Zitlali Morales, and Danny C Martinez. 2009. Re-mediating literacy: Culture, diference, and learning for students from nondominant com- munities. Review of research in education 33, 1 (2009), 212-245.
  19. Kris D Gutiérrez and Barbara Rogof. 2003. Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational researcher 32, 5 (2003), 19-25.
  20. Seth E Hunter, Pattie Maes, Anthony Tang, Kori M Inkpen, and Susan M Hessey. 2014. WaaZam! Supporting creative play at a distance in customized video environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1197-1206.
  21. Jerome Kirk, Marc L Miller, and Marc L Miller. 1986. Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Vol. 1. Sage.
  22. Sharona T Levy and David Mioduser. 2008. Does it "want" or "was it programmed to... "? Kindergarten children's explanations of an autonomous robot's adaptive functioning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 18, 4 (2008), 337-359.
  23. Annabel Lindner, Stefan Seegerer, and Ralf Romeike. 2019. Unplugged Activi- ties in the Context of AI. In International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution, and Perspectives. Springer, 123-135.
  24. Sonia Livingstone, Mariya Stoilova, and Rishita Nandagiri. 2018. Children's data and privacy online. Technology 58, 2 (2018), 157-165.
  25. Duri Long, Takeria Blunt, and Brian Magerko. 2021. Co-Designing AI Literacy Exhibits for Informal Learning Spaces. CSCW '21: ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (23 10 2021).
  26. Matthew B Miles and A Michael Huberman. 1984. Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Toward a shared craft. Educational researcher 13, 5 (1984), 20-30.
  27. Peter Nikken and Jeroen Jansz. 2006. Parental mediation of children's videogame playing: A comparison of the reports by parents and children. Learning, media and technology 31, 2 (2006), 181-202.
  28. Blakeley H Payne. 2019. An ethics of artifcial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab Personal Robots Group. Retrieved Oct 10 (2019), 2019.
  29. Sherry Ruan, Liwei Jiang, Justin Xu, Bryce Joe-Kun Tham, Zhengneng Qiu, Yeshuang Zhu, Elizabeth L Murnane, Emma Brunskill, and James A Landay. 2019. QuizBot: A Dialogue-based Adaptive Learning System for Factual Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19, Paper 357). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-13.
  30. Emmeline Taylor and Katina Michael. 2016. Smart Toys that are the Stuf of Nightmares. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 35, 1 (2016), 8-10.
  31. Mike van Duuren and Michael Scaife. 1995. How do children represent intelligent technology? European Journal of Psychology of Education 10, 3 (1995), 289-301.
  32. Henriikka Vartiainen, Matti Tedre, and Teemu Valtonen. 2020. Learning machine learning with very young children: Who is teaching whom? International journal of child-computer interaction 25 (Sept. 2020), 100182.
  33. Sara Vogel, Christopher Hoadley, Ana Rebeca Castillo, and Laura Ascenzi- Moreno. 2020. Languages, literacies and literate programming: can we use the latest theories on how bilingual people learn to help us teach computational literacies? Computer Science Education 30, 4 (2020), 420-443.
  34. Anna-Lisa Vollmer, Robin Read, Dries Trippas, and Tony Belpaeme. 2018. Chil- dren conform, adults resist: A robot group induced peer pressure on normative social conformity. Science Robotics 3, 21 (2018), eaat7111.
  35. Lev Vygotsky. 1978. Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children 23, 3 (1978), 34-41.
  36. Lawrence J Walker, Karl H Hennig, and Tobias Krettenauer. 2000. Parent and peer contexts for children's moral reasoning development. Child development 71, 4 (2000), 1033-1048.
  37. Mark Warschauer and Morgan Ames. 2010. Can One Laptop per Child save the world's poor? Journal of international afairs (2010), 33-51.
  38. J Yu, C Bai, and R Roque. 2020. Considering Parents in Coding Kit Design: Understanding Parents' Perspectives and Roles. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on (2020).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Druga, S., Christoph, F. L., & Ko, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Venue
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2022-04-29
Pages
1-17
OpenAlex
W4225000370
Cited by
130
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 5
FWCI
169.40
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Adobe Systems
  • NSF (National Science Foundation) (1539179, 1703304, 1836813, 2031265, 2100296, 2122950, 2137834, 2137312)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Literacy, Media, and Education
Keywords
AI literacy, family learning, parent-child partnership, voice assistants, image classification, object recognition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review