Affordances and Constraints to Agency in Student Co-Design (Poster 4)

• In Event: Whose Agency? What Learning? Whence Power?

Abstract

Purpose

With the goals of equitable and consequential learning, educational curriculum often faces the challenges of how to make learning meaningful, engaging, and authentic to students’ lives. This requires deeper understanding of how students experience curriculum. Student co-design – the process in which students participate in designing learning programs and curriculum – is one avenue for including students’ perspectives and experiences into the creation of curriculum and learning environments, while also positively impacting learning and identity development (Author, Pitt et al., 2018; 2021; Yip et al., 2017). However, to do so requires designers’ agentic participation. In this work, we specifically examine agency in relation to: a) broader histories, educational structures, and norms; b) situated structures, activities, and goals; and c) interpersonal relationships, specifically, design facilitator participation and guidance.

Theoretical framework

Youth co-design asks designers to take on new and different roles and relationships. This process shifts youth into the role of protagonist within the design of learning environments and curriculum (Iversen et al., 2017). Though youth voice may be amplified in co-design, it is still situated within the normative power dynamics of society broadly and, more specifically, public education. Collins and Bilge (2020) framework of organizational power includes four dimensions of power: Structural, cultural, disciplinary, and interpersonal. These four domains highlight how power, privilege, and inequity is reproduced through institutional policies (structural), institutional norms and values (cultural), disciplinary measures (disciplinary), and individual relationships (interpersonal).

Method & Data sources

Data for this project includes video recordings of virtual design sessions for the student co-design focused on redesigning three university education courses (19 sessions total; 21 student participants, plus 2 facilitators). During each co-design process, the design teams created conceptual maps of learning and development and then iterated on the conceptual maps throughout the design process. Analysis for this presentation focused on, first, an examination of virtual conceptual maps used as a design tool for mapping developmental trajectories and learning, second, the co-design process to examine power distribution and participation, and third, design participant interviews. Analysis included examining participants’ opportunities to impact the design process and products and reports (public or individual) of agency or lack of agency.

Substantiated conclusions & Scholarly significance

Broader histories, educational structures, and norms: Throughout the co-design sessions, students reoriented to the new roles and norms of co-design, reflecting publicly and individually on their opportunity to participate agentically as it contrasted to their previous educational experiences. Design norms and participation patterns were explicitly discussed, leading to reflections on normative educational structures and the unagentic roles students typically occupy.

Situated structures, activities, and goals: However, within the design process, the types of agency afforded shifted upon the situated activity (i.e. individually brainstorming ideas vs. collectively reorganizing conceptual maps).

Interpersonal relationships, specifically, design facilitator participation and guidance: Finally, participants’ agency was impacted by shifting positioning and power within the design process. The role of the design facilitator specifically seemed to impact: a) individual participation and positioning and b) the design process, opening up opportunities for participants’ agency to be recognized.

Authors

• Gavin Tierney, California State University - Fullerton
  Presenting Author

• Sharon Lin
  Presenting Author