Art and Design with Children's Participation by Deniz Hasirci

In this session, the discrepancy in the definition of participation, participatory methods used in art and design projects with children, and possible difficulties that arise from these processes will be discussed. A design project and an art project will be explored and the differences in both methods will be compared. The participatory design processes of a school design project will be explained. In this project, the children and youth of different age groups collaborated to form a learning environment, and an interpretation of a life-size mural of Picasso’s “Guernica”.

Additionally, examples will be given from realized design and art projects that have come to life by a series of participatory processes with children and other stakeholders, such as teachers, principals, museum personnel, volunteers, and parents. Quite often, users do not have a say in the environments they occupy. Although participatory efforts aim to prevent using standard methods and tried-and-true solutions, commonly, the findings are not reflected upon the resulting spaces. This is not to say that these processes are worthless.

However, consideration has to be given so that children are not tokenized. It is important that they are interpreted correctly, just methods are used, and the space that is created at the end carries qualities that are actual results of the processes. The same is true for art projects. Although they are more flexible when compared to design project in terms of architectural standards, functional needs and requirements, project organizers may still tend to have their opinions applied instead of actually listening to the children.

This is a crucial point as these processes are very educational for both the users and the designers, and can be very efficient and fruitful when the findings are extended into the project correctly. In the examples to be given, the ongoing participatory processes have already had this
collaborative and unifying effect. The presentation will connect to one design (“Peace Village”) and one art workshop (“Difference and Peace”) to be applied by the author with children from Hartsfield Elementary School, as well as a panel discussion and the exhibition of the Kids’ Guernica mural completed in 2007 by Turkish and Greek children.

Participation
Children have a right to take part in the decision-making process as active participants who are considered equals to all of the participants as well as the persons organizing the activity (Clark and Percy-Smith, 2006; Sanoff, 1990). This approach dates back to Hart and his definition of participation as the “process of sharing decisions which affect one’s life and the life of the community in which one lives”, and that participation being the fundamental right of citizenship for everyone in a community (1992, p. 5). This approach considers the child an equal in the decisions that are made. Several research studies have been established gaining support for this view. However, care should be given so that one does not fall into tokenist approaches that “use” the participatory acts with children for their own good without really listening to them.
Involving children in participatory processes of design and architecture is an attempt to come closer to an inclusive and holistic approach within the design world. This is especially true when one considers the fact that children almost never have a say regarding the environments they grow up in. The involvement of parents and teachers is key in any issue related to children and children’s environments. Where children’s environments are considered, it is crucial that they be a source of fulfilment as well as part of enhancing educational programs within schools. Thus, what can working with children teach designers and architects?

First, if a space is created for children, the fact that they have a say in the space they will occupy is very important. Also, in a changing world in which children are experiencing a life very different than the children of 10, or even 5 years ago, it is important to consider their needs.

Thus, one cannot keep repeating old tried-and-true solutions for designs in children’s environments (Clark and Percy-Smith, 2007; Hasirci and Demirkan, 2003; Hasirci and Wilson, 2009; West, 2007). 12
There are basically four steps to just participation of children in decisions that will influence them directly.

First, children should be given the opportunity to know, discuss, and contribute to those decisions.

Second, in order to be able to do this, it is important that they receive the necessary background information on the subject and have equal access to a discussion platform.

Next, they should be asked their opinions while in a decision-making situation and have the opportunity to get those opinions across.

The fourth step is that their viewpoints should be taken seriously as they might present an issue not considered by the designers.

Merely a chance to be heard is often what anyone deserves. Lastly, children should be informed of the outcomes after the participatory process is complete and the final decisions have been made. They and all participants should be able to question the results, reject, and discuss them (Kural et al., 2007; Skivenes and Strandu, 2006).

Art and Design Projects – Differences in Approach and Methodology
There are some commonalities and differences in the approach to participation in art and design projects, especially with children. To begin with the commonalities, first, in both cases, the aim should be to motivate children, get them to participate, listen to them and obtain the necessary information from them, and to interpret this information correctly (Hasirci and Wilson, 2009). These factors apply to both art and design projects. Another feature that is crucial to any participatory project is to get the participators warmed up to one another. This can be done in a number of ways, by talking and/or with games, and a considerable amount of time should be given to this activity before the actual process starts.
In terms of differences, although there is a joint objective in both an art and a design project, an art project is much more flexible in terms of creative process. Both methodology and results may change depending on a simple idea that comes up from a participant. It is open-ended, and can change from one moment to another taking shape according to the agreed decision. A design project on the other hand, has a particular aim that has to be solved at the end of the process. Whether it is the production of the design of a building, a logo, or a chair, if standardized methods are not utilized, the process may remain only at the level of exercise and may not lead to the desired result. There are various techniques to be applied that change according to thepurpose of the participatory process.

The Case Studies
The Kids’ Guernica Art Project
Often the production of art is individual and it is shared with the public when it becomes a product. If interest in art does not begin at a young age, the appreciation of it in future years is likely to be most difficult.
Therefore, participating in art processes at young ages urges children to value art. Art projects planned with different age groups enable older youth to take responsibility, and to introduce younger ones to art language and methods. In an environment in which there are children and youth of various backgrounds, art provides a common language and creative results can be achieved. The idea behind participatory art is to
systematically integrate theory and practice and enable people to take part in art activities in their environments.

In a participatory art project realized with Turkish and Greek youth, the Kids’ Guernica group enabled youth to contribute to culture with a “peace” concept, and enhance cultural relationships. A mural project that started with children from Chios, carrying the theme and dimensions of Pablo Picasso’s “Guernica”, was completed in Izmir with the participation of a group of middle school children, children from Chios, and undergraduate design students from the Izmir University of Economics (IUE). The organizing committee was Poiein Kai Prattein in coordination with Kids’ Guernica and IUE, and the finalized version of the mural was exhibited in Athens at the Zappion – Megaron. All participants were ecstatic to have created an international joint project with so many different groups of people involved. When the participants were asked about how the groups communicated, they replied by saying, “by painting”. Even this reply points to the beginning of an awareness concerning art that stresses creativity and communication (See Figures 1 and 2). 13
The “Peace Village” idea came from turning the Kids’ Guernica art mural into a three-dimensional design project created using participatory design methods. Thus, it was the coming together of art and design using the different participatory methods of both.

The School Design Project
Decisions regarding spaces for children are often made by owners or stakeholders who are not the actual users of the space, building or environment. When this is the case, several important needs of users may be overseen, causing ineffective use of the space or unsatisfied users. Although, participatory processes seem to consume more time, energy, and resources, they enable quick results that focus on real needs that are more difficult to reach with other methods. Extended life for building through user contribution and possibility of more adventurous solutions due to user backed confidence for project are also other possible advantages (Hadjioannou, 2007; Hasirci and Demirkan, 2003). The idea that lies behind participatory spatial programming workshops is that people from different ages and different fields can come together and create efficient design solutions (Sanoff 1980 and 1990).
In a school design project, the aim was first to start a discussion on learning environments and the design of products, furniture, interior spaces, playgrounds, and entire building complexes for children. The joint project between the Faculty of Art and Design of Izmir University of Economics in Turkey and the Department of Architecture of Chiba University in Japan lasted for three months. In this project, participatory methods were undertaken with elementary school children and volunteer undergraduate architecture, interior architecture and industrial design students. Post Occupancy Evaluations on existing city schools, and the design students’ schools were completed, interviews were done with teachers and students, city plans were assessed in an effort to evaluate the approach to the school, playground and green areas, and scale. Books were read and films were watched, and lengthy discussion sessions were held about school design. As a result, design guidelines for schools were developed, classrooms, desks, and playgrounds were designed.
It was a fruitful process in which the design students learned about participation along with methods of design programming and awareness on the importance of users and of the special qualities of children’s environments. The children were happy to be listened to and the design students were excited to be taking part in this project that required participation on several different levels.
At the end of the summer, designs were exchanged between the two universities, comparing the different approaches. Both groups of projects were developed according to the needs of the school discovered as a result of the research period. The need for better designed gathering areas and green spaces were mentioned frequently, as well as having choices in spending free time within the school and flexibility in spatial arrangements in classrooms. The learning environment providing for development of motor abilities and needs for self-actualization were stated as the most critical needs of the children in both Japan and Turkey.
According to the questionnaires regarding the classrooms completed by the Turkish design students during their visit to their own elementary schools, the most liked features were colourful furniture, plants or a connection of the classroom to the outside, large windows, high ceilings, individual desks for students, and the class providing for interactivity. The most disliked features were, chalk dust, small play areas, hard floor material, small size of the classroom, noisy chairs and furniture, lack of hooks for coats and bags, lack of personal area in the classroom, disordered arrangement of classroom, lack of technology, and children not having their own plants. Regarding the total school environment, most liked features were, school, green spaces, free gardens, and low building heights. The most disliked features were school, dark colours used in the interior, lack of hygiene in restrooms, playground full of stones or pebbles, and lack of spaces for sports.
According to the questionnaires completed by the Japanese design students during their visit to their own elementary schools, the most liked features in the classrooms were, sunny areas in the classroom, balconies and connections to the outside, high ceilings, easy access to the garden, bulletin boards, plants in the classroom, variety in seating choices, carpet on the floor large windows, high ceilings. The most disliked features were, difficulty in seeing the board from the back, seats by the window being cold in the winter, 14 noisy doors, and dark classroom environment, insulation problems, hard floor material, small classrooms, noisy chairs and furniture, lack of personal area in the classroom, and disordered arrangement of classroom. Regarding the total school environment, the most liked features were the green spaces, interesting connection of spaces, free gardens, low building heights, and variety in outdoor areas. The most disliked features on the other hand were, floors being slippery on rainy days, problems regarding legibility of the school environment, monotonous interior space, dark colours used in the interior, lack of social areas, rigidity in terms of plan, lack of maintenance, and plainness. It was observed that, the needs were similar according to the design students of both countries, and inclusion of children as well as teachers and principals in the school assessment and school design stages was very helpful to the project (See Figures 3, 4, 5 and 6).

Conclusion:
A participatory approach can provide a useful set of guidelines in beginning the establishment of children’s environments as well as artwork for an inquisitive new generation. It is also believed that children who have been involved in such participatory processes will be better equipped in dealing with future social and
intellectual situations. However, the first step is the clarification of the definition of participation, and acknowledgement and valuing of children’s contribution. Naïve and tokenist approaches should be prevented in order to contribute to the field as well as create quality spaces for environments that answer the needs of their users.
The Kids’ Guernica mural and Peace Village design workshops that will take place at the Art and Design for Justice Symposium, Tallahassee will carry the same objectives and it is believed that they will be educational experiences for all participants. The children will have the opportunity to watch a presentation on the focus topics of the workshop, discuss issues related to peace, collaborate for specific aims, and finalize the designs. It is believed, this will be a platform to observe the practical side of the theoretical background of participatory process.

References
Clark, A. & Percy-Smith, B. (2006). Beyond Consultation: Participatory Practices in Everyday Spaces, Children, Youth and Environments, 2006, 16(2), 1-9.
Clark, A. & Percy-Smith, B. (2007, May/June). How Parent Explanation Changes What Children Learn From Everyday Scientific Thinking, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(3), p. 189-210.
Hadjioannou, X., (2007). Bringing the Background to the Foreground: What Do Classroom Environments That Support Authentic Discussions Look Like? American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), p. 370-400.
Hart, R. A., (1992). Children's Participation: from Tokenism to Citizenship, UNICEF International Child Development Centre, Florence.
Hasirci, D. & Demirkan, H. (2003). Creativity in Learning Environments: The Case of Two Sixth Grade Art-Rooms, The Journal of Creative Behavior, 1st Quarter, 37(1), p. 17-42.
Hasirci, D. & Wilson, S. G. (2009) Involving Children in Participatory Design: The Case of a Children’s Museum in Izmir, ARCHILD: International Congress – Architecture and Children, The Chamber of Architects, Ankara, Turkey, p. 101-103.
Kural, N., Ozaloglu, S., Tanriover, S., Ural Ertez, S., Hasirci, D. (2007). Bademlidere Child Attraction Center Pilot Study, Published and distributed by the authors.
Sanoff, H. (1980). Methods of Architectural Programming, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Sanoff, H. (1990). Participatory Design, Mansfield, Ohio: BookMasters.
Skivenes, M. & Stranbu, A. (2006). A Child Perspective and Children’s Participation, Children, Youth and Environments, 16(2), p. 10-27.
West, A., Chen X. M., Zhou Y., Zhang C. N. & Qiang, C. (2007). From Performance to Practice: Changing the Meaning of Child Participation in China”, Children, Youth and Environments, 17 (1), p. 14-32.

The paper ”Art and Design with Children’s Participation” was given by Deniz Hasirci from Izmir University of Economics, Turkey

Hasirci graduated from the Department of Interior Architecture and Environmental Design, Bilkent University. She worked in various architectural firms and received her master’s degree and PhD from Bilkent. As a Fulbright scholar, she worked on learning environments and creativity at North Carolina State University. Her articles have been published in The Journal of Creative Behavior and Creativity Research Journal, and magazines such as Arkitekt, Geceyarisi Sineması, Düşe-Yazma, and Patika. She is working on the “Child Attraction Center” World Bank project with academicians from Bilkent, has prepared workshops with the children involved in the study, and is working on the preparation of reports, books and conference presentations with the project members. Following Bilkent where she taught Basic Design and Human Factors courses, she began working at Izmir University of Economics in 2006 as an Asst. Professor, teaching courses such as, Project Preparation Techniques, Art and Design Studio, Drawing and Representation, and Design Semiotics.

Source: http://fadf.ieu.edu.tr/ead07/authors/author%2019.html

^ Top

« The Aesthetic experience by Rosa Naparstek | St. Petersburg, FL at Great Exploration Children's Museum March 5 - April 26 2010 »

Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Navigation

Art and Design with Children's Participation by Deniz Hasirci