Design and the Future of the HCI Classroom: Lessons Learned from an International Survey on HCI Education

Lauren Wilcox Richard Henneman Abstract Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology HCI continues to grow in demand as an academic field as Atlanta, GA, USA Atlanta, GA, USA digital technology is embedded more and more into society. [email protected] [email protected] We conducted an international survey on active learning techniques in HCI classrooms. Results of our survey can Betsy DiSalvo Lindsay Kelly inform an online community of practice and suggest Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology improvements to professional HCI training. In this position Atlanta, GA, USA Atlanta, GA, USA paper, we: a) share a summary of the findings of our survey, [email protected] [email protected] b) draw on our findings to pose important questions for a community of practice dedicated to HCI education, and c) discuss how our findings can be used to form working groups to implement the first iteration of a living curriculum for HCI.

HCI Education Survey Background Our research team at Georgia Tech conducted an IRB- approved, international survey of HCI instructors from 2016- 2017, and analyzed participants’ syllabi when provided. The ACM CHI 2018 Workshop on HCI Education. survey featured a total of 39 questions, including both closed and open-ended questions. It focused on collecting baseline data about the administration of HCI classes, current challenges faced by instructors of HCI classes, as well as more specifics about design components of such classes.

HCI Education Survey Findings and Discussion Questions We received a total of 110 survey responses from HCI instructors affiliated with a wide range of universities across

Asia, South America, North America, and Europe. We Similarly, we found that ethics in HCI was present, but not a analyzed survey questions with single-selection and multiple- well-represented topic in HCI courses. As computing selection responses using descriptive statistics. We examined technology continues to pervade modern life, HCI research responses to open-format survey questions through inductive and pedagogy should evolve to help students face important thematic analysis (by three authors, done collaboratively). ethical considerations [3]. For HCI courses, these considerations include: Finding 1: There is a plethora of HCI classes being taught, spanning diverse disciplinary areas, topics and research • New privacy and security contexts arising from the methods, but some clear gaps are evident. increased ubiquity of personal devices, embedded systems in home, work, school, and public settings, and The most common research methods taught include opaque digital collection and usage practices on Internet interviews, ethnographic observation, survey design, sites. sketching, personas and scenarios, and usability studies. • Increased need to engage vulnerable populations in HCI Research and evaluation methods that were poorly research and design, such as children and adolescents represented include spoken language interface techniques, who often interact with rapidly-changing digital physiological data collection and analysis and psychometric technology, but also face unprecedented rates of chronic data collection and analysis. A working group on teaching illnesses and early-age access to personal technologies. recent and emerging input and output techniques could • Increased access to user populations in developing focus on these gap areas, to complement those focused on countries and societies, and new cultural and economic more traditional user research methods. A first iteration of a scenarios arising from such access. living curriculum for HCI could consider how current and • Opportunities to conduct research and “design at a emerging forms of input affect the user research and distance” through current methods to support risky or evaluation phases of a user-centered or human-centered exceedingly complex projects that would not be possible design process. The complexity of instrumenting sensors to without remote observation and communication tools. capture behavior and physiology (e.g., using spoken input, physiological input and self-reported psychometrics) in design A working group dedicated to ethics could tackle questions and evaluation processes will be an important emphasis area. that include: Conducting formative user research and evaluating user experiences through multi-modal methods can fill vital gaps in Which learning objectives, resources, and outcomes can be current user research methods. taught, to support ethical approaches in these contexts?

An important question related to this implication for a working How can instructors encourage students to foreground group includes: responsible innovations as they ideate and converge in the design process? What training and course curricula can fill these methodological gaps?

Many students who enroll in HCI classes do so after already 100 or more) as awareness of and interest in HCI completing at least some Computer Science (CS) training [4]. increases. A working group on transferability of knowledge could tackle questions related to the relationships between CS Ideally, large HCI courses would be outlined to balance the courses and HCI courses (among other disciplinary need to administratively structure and unify the learning relationships with HCI), such as: experience for a large and diverse set of students, with the need to support the creativity, student autonomy, and flexibility What are the most effective ways of communicating the value needed for students to pursue emergent phenomena arising of the user-centered design process (e.g., understanding the during the discovery and ideation phases of a design process. user prior to starting the design; being comfortable with The specific types of support students need can differ across iteration; resisting coding too early; resisting biases toward different cultural contexts [1]. A working group on HCI known technologies in formative research and design)? education at-scale could address questions that include:

Finding 2: Most HCI instructors’ primary affiliation is What strategies and techniques can instructors use to infuse academic; as such they may not have ties to HCI industry fun, creativity, and risk-taking into a class environment that practitioners. Furthermore, instructors in our survey might otherwise feel “procedural” due to the course seldom reported having training related to the learning management demands? goals of their classes. Do fewer opportunities to interact one-on-one with professors Resources connecting HCI educators to industry partners and negatively affect students’ willingness to take risks in training resources could better orient educators with industry- individual and team project work? relevant learning content for a complex, rapidly-changing field. Related questions for a working group on academic– Many of the classes represented in our survey required industry relationships include: students to create a working prototype as a method for evaluating learning. Often, concrete deliverable requirements How can we systematically study the needs of students and are given to students to guide them as they build their instructors of HCI courses, the effectiveness of learning prototypes. These generally-stated guidelines must be written techniques in HCI courses, and the success of HCI programs? to accommodate a vast range of student projects. For group projects, guidelines are often open-ended to accommodate a How much emphasis should be placed on the industry variety of project topics and user groups. perspective in evaluating HCI programs and courses? How much emphasis on the academic perspective? How can deliverables specifications be designed to ease the manual evaluation of prototypes and other deliverables, Finding 3: HCI instructors face many challenges in especially for large classes? evaluating student work in the classroom and managing growing class sizes (some classes had enrollments of

How can we ensure that requiring particular deliverables to on understanding how culture impacts the use and production facilitate student evaluation does not prevent students from of technology and how those understandings can shape iteratively revisiting stages in a design process when such learning for groups that are traditionally underrepresented in iteration would in fact be most conducive to learning? technology fields. DiSalvo’s previous project, the Glitch Game Testers, has been one of the most successful programs to At the workshop, we look forward to discussing our findings engage low income African American males with CS. Another further, and using them to inform the creation of working previous project, Designing and Studying of Maker Oriented groups to implement the first iteration of a living curriculum [2] Learning to Transform Advanced Computer Science, explored and strengthen the community of practice in HCI education. the use of microcontrollers and other hands-on making activities in undergraduate CS courses. Authors Lauren Wilcox, Ph.D. is an assistant professor in the School Lindsay Kelly is a master’s candidate in the Human- of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech. At the workshop, Computer Interaction program at Georgia Institute of Wilcox will contribute by drawing on her experiences Technology. She has a background in Higher Education reinvigorating the curricula for courses such Foundations of consulting and is involved in ongoing research at Georgia HCI, User Interface Design, and Personal Health Informatics Tech’s Center for 21st Century Universities (C21U). Outside and teaching these topics for the past several years at Georgia of her research and coursework, she is a teaching assistant Tech. Lessons learned from the workshop will be incorporated for a User Interface Design class. She is also a member of into her teaching. Through her participation in the ACM Future the MS-HCI Graduate Council, a group of five students who of Computing Academy, Wilcox will also share insights learned present feedback from MS-HCI students to program from this CHI workshop with the ACM FCA Working Group on administration and help make informed decisions on how to Education and Outreach. improve the program.

Dick Henneman, Ph.D. is a Professor of the Practice in the References School of Interactive Computing and Director of the master’s 1. J. Abdelnour-Nocera , A .Austin , M. Michaelides, S. Modi, A program in Human-Computer Interaction (MS-HCI) at the cross-cultural evaluation of HCI student performance: reflections for the curriculum, Proc 2nd Int’l Conf on Design, Georgia Tech and. Dr. Henneman joined Georgia Tech with User Experience, and Usability, 2013, Las Vegas, NV. corporate experience in design management, user interface 2. E. Churchill , J. Preece, A. Bowser, Developing a living HCI design, and user research at NCR, IBM/Internet Security curriculum to support a global community, Proc CHI '14 EA, Systems, and AT&T. At the workshop, Henneman will share 2014, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. insights about the HCI skills that are in demand in industry 3. C. Frauenberger, A.S. Bruckman, C. Munteanu, M. today, as well as what is needed to prepare students for the Densmore, and J. Waycott. 2017. Research Ethics in HCI: A jobs of the future. Town Hall Meeting. Proc ACM CHI EA '17. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1295-1299. Betsy DiSalvo, Ph.D. is an assistant professor in the School 4. Strong, Gary W. "New directions in human-computer of Interactive Computing at Georgia Institute of Technology. interaction: education, research, and practice." interactions 2.1 (1995): 69-81. She directs the Culture and Technology Lab, which focuses