Search

Purpose: As scholars, educators and policymakers recognize the impact of partnership-based research, there is a growing need for more in-depth understanding of how to conduct this work, especially with and in diverse project teams. The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical examination of adopting a culturally disruptive approach in a research–practice partnership (RPP) that includes Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers, designers and educators who worked together to collaboratively design culturally situated experiences for sixth graders. Design/methodology/approach: Following a design-based implementation research methodology, data from design and implementation are presented as two case studies to illustrate key findings. Findings: Leveraging the frame of culturally disruptive pedagogy, key tensions, disruptions, self-discoveries and resulting pedagogical innovations are outlined. While the authors experienced multiple forms of disruptions as researchers, designers and educators, they focused on tracing two powerful cases of how culturally disruptive research directly and immediately resulted in pedagogical innovations. Together the cases illustrate a broader shift toward interdependence that the team experienced over the course of the school year. Research limitations/implications: A new frame for conducting culturally disruptive research is presented. Both the theoretical application and practical implementation of this frame demonstrate its usefulness in conceptualizing culturally situated research through cultivating an uncomfortable yet generative interdependence. Practical implications: Findings include examples and strategies for how to practically conduct multi-sector, interdisciplinary research and teaching. Scholars and educators share their stories which illustrate the practical impact of this work. Originality/value: Critical insights presented in this paper build on and contribute to the growing body of work around RPPs, community-based research and other critical partnership methods.

Purpose: This paper aims to be a think piece that promotes discussion around the design of coding toys for children. In particular, the authors examine three different toys that have some sort of block-based coding interface. The authors juxtapose three different design features and the demands they place on young children learning to code. To examine the toys, the authors apply a framework developed based on Gibson’s theory of affordances and Palmer’s external representations. The authors look specifically at the toys: interface design, intended play scenario and representational conventions for computational ideas. Design/methodology/approach: As a research team, the authors have been playing with toys, observing their own children play with the toys and using them in kindergarten classrooms. In this paper, the authors reflect specifically on the design of the toys and the demands they place on children. Findings: The authors make no claims about whether one toy/design approach is superior to another. However, the differences that the authors articulate should serve as a provocation for researchers and designers to be mindful about what demands and expectations they place on young children as they learn to code and use code to learn in any given system. Research limitations/implications: As mentioned above, the authors want to start a discussion about design of these toys and how they shape children's experience with coding. Originality/value: There is a push to get coding and computational thinking into K-12, but there is not enough research on what this looks like in early childhood. Further, while research is starting to emerge on block-based programming vs text-based for older children and adults, little research has been done on the representational form of code for young children. The authors hope to start a discussion on design of coding toys for children.