The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Participatory Design for Learning
Abstract
The goal of the learning sciences is to not only understand the phenomena of learning, but also to impact educational practices and enable more effective learning. Our goal is to develop and draw attention to design practices that are relevant to participatory design of learning environments and learning technologies and that directly involve learners, teachers, and other community members in all the different steps of designing. Learner-centered and design-based approaches in the learning sciences are, like participatory design (PD), founded on the principle that target populations are best served when designs address the needs of community members. PD focuses on giving such stakeholders a high degree of agency throughout the design process, emphasizing the cultivation of knowledge communities in which content and expertise are co -created by experts and other participants working in concert. Learning is both an implicit and explicit desired outcome of many designed systems and experiences.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the field of learning research, there are different approaches drawing on the idea of PD more or less loosely.
“In the field of learning research, there are different approaches drawing on the idea of PD more or less loosely (DiSalvo et al., 2017).”
From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as DiSalvo et al., 2017
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
What is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations
Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376727 · Cited by 3,241
Kinnula, M., Iivari, N., Kuure, L., & Molin-Juustila, T. (2023) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-023-09473-8 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- DiSalvo, B., Yip, J., Bonsignore, E., & Carl, D.
- Venue
- Participatory Design for Learning
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2017-05-25
- Pages
- 3-6
- OpenAlex
- W2904332373
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 10.00
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- participatory design, learning environment, educational technology, learner-centered design, design-based research, stakeholder agency, co-creation, knowledge communities, teaching practice, design practice
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