See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/332648747

Digital storytelling

Chapter · April 2019

DOI: 10.4324/9780429022746-3

CITATIONS READS

4 4,716

3 authors:

Hilary Davis Jenny Waycott

Swinburne University of Technology University of Melbourne
90 PUBLICATIONS 1,609 CITATIONS 138 PUBLICATIONS 5,177 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Max Schleser
Swinburne University of Technology
50 PUBLICATIONS 210 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

International Mobile Innovation Screening View project

Mobile Augment Reality-Parkville View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Max Schleser on 30 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1 Digital storytelling
Designing, developing and delivering
with diverse communities
Hilary Davis, Jenny Waycott and Max Schleser

Digital storytelling in context

Since the mid-1990s, digital storytelling has been widely used as a participatory
approach to enable people from various backgrounds to create and share short
audio-visual narratives. For example, it has been promoted as an educational
activity for developing skills in digital literacy and creativity (Schleser, 2012a),
as a tool for supporting social work practice (Lenette, Cox, & Brough, 2015)
and as an opportunity for intergenerational knowledge exchange in indigenous
communities (Edmonds, 2014). Digital storytelling can take many forms and
ultimately refers to any narrative created and shared using digital tools. How-
ever, the term ‘digital storytelling’ is often used to refer specifically to a par-
ticipatory method that results in ‘a 2- to 5-minute audio-visual clip combining
photographs, voice-over narration, and other audio (Lambert, 2009) originally
applied for community development, artistic and therapeutic purposes’ (de
Jager, Fogarty, Tewson, Lenette, & Boydell, 2017, p. 2548).
In community research and advocacy settings, digital storytelling has been
particularly popular as a facilitated workshop activity to engage members of
marginalised communities and encourage them to share their experiences
(e.g. Schleser, 2014 a; Gubrium, Fiddian-Green, & Hill, 2016). Such pro-
jects often draw on the resources and processes developed by Joe Lambert and
colleagues, who founded the Center for Digital Storytelling (Lambert, 2009,
2013; see de Jager et al., 2017, for a review). This process is participatory: sto-
rytellers are empowered to craft their own stories. Nevertheless, although the
emphasis is on empowering storytellers, co-design is central to many of these
projects: storytellers and researchers/facilitators work together to design visual
narratives. This is meant to be a horizontal, non-hierarchical process, where
the power imbalance between researchers or facilitators and participants is
somewhat mitigated by the active role participants take in crafting their stories.
However, this non-hierarchical participatory process can be difficult to achieve
in practice (de Jager et al., 2017; Waycott, Davis, Warr, Edmonds, & Taylor,
2017). Researchers or facilitators may have a particular agendum or obligation
to funding bodies, making it difficult to take a neutral stance when helping
to craft participants’ stories. As co-designers, facilitators play a mediating role
16 Davis,Waycott and Schleser
in the construction of meaning in the digital story (Waycott et al., 2017).
Furthermore, multiple stakeholders may be involved, especially in digital sto-
rytelling projects that incorporate a community development or advocacy ele-
ment; participation in the design of digital stories can, therefore, be complex
and multi-layered. Ultimately, however, digital storytelling projects often aim
to give voice to people who are otherwise disempowered (Waycott et al.,
2017). This chapter will demonstrate that the co-design element of workshops
is key to tackling issues of complexity when working with both individuals and
groups of people from marginalised and diverse communities. We explore this
further in the case studies that follow.
A key benefit of digital storytelling for this purpose is its inherent flexibil-
ity; that is, the use of a visual arts-based method allows participants to choose
the story they wish to tell, define how they tell it and select data which they
feel best represent their story. For instance, storytellers may include elements
such as still photos, music, moving video and alternate methods of narration
(e.g. voice-over, written text, note-cards). The flexibility of this methodol-
ogy is that it allows storytellers to report on mundane, everyday experiences
or highly emotional and subjective experiences (as illustrated by many of the
examples ahead). Further, it allows people more comfortable with oral or vis-
ual storytelling practices to craft and tell their story using music, images or
art, for example, rather than being limited to the written word. This reso-
nates with particular cultures that emphasise oral traditions of storytelling (see
Castleden, Daley, Sloan Morgan, & Sylvestre, 2013; Edmonds, 2014). The
use of these additional elements may have a significant emotional impact on
audience members. For example, audiences have reported emotional responses
to digital stories that explored the everyday lives of people who are primarily
housebound, with audience members commenting in particular on objects
and places portrayed in visual form (Waycott & Davis, 2017). The ability to
connect storyteller and audience is viewed as one of the strengths of digi-
tal storytelling (Gubrium, Krause, & Jernigan, 2014; LaMarre & Rice, 2016)
and is perhaps one of the reasons it has been embraced as a means of sharing
the stories of people from within diverse or marginalised communities. In the
remainder of this chapter, drawing on digital storytelling projects in diverse and
marginalised communities, we consider whether co-design might be redun-
dant in today’s mobile and social media-rich world. Ultimately, we argue that
co-design still has an important role to play in digital storytelling with diverse
and marginalised communities.

Digital storytelling within diverse or

marginalised communities
In this chapter, we use the term ‘diverse and marginalised communities’
broadly to refer to people whose voices are rarely heard in mainstream media.
This can include people from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, peo-
ple from migrant or refugee communities, older or younger people and those
 Digital storytelling 17
experiencing physical or mental health conditions. This section of the chap-
ter explores examples of digital storytelling used with marginalised or diverse
groups. Our intention is not to create an all-encompassing list of digital story-
telling projects that fall under these categories. Rather, we illustrate how digital
storytelling techniques have been used to represent and support community
representations of self.
The systematic review by de Jager and colleagues (2017) of digital storytell-
ing in research included stories based on Lambert and colleagues’ digital story-
telling process. The majority of research papers included in their study focused
on marginalised community groups. They noted that some of the appeal of
digital storytelling for use with marginalised groups is its ability to present the
perspective or views of ‘counter narratives’ or ‘alternative interpretations of the
world’ that challenge dominant views (p. 250). This is particularly the case for
work that explores aspects of identity which are usually associated with stigma
or social inequity. Examples of such stories include issues of gender, ethnicity,
disability, sexual orientation (e.g. people who identify as LGBTIQ) or health
stigma (e.g. people with HIV/AIDS or mental health issues; see, e.g., de Vec-
chi, Kenny, Dickson-Swift, & Kidd, 2017).
Other counter narratives refer to a sense of place or space in times of signifi-
cant hardship, such as stories of women farmers ‘inside the farm gate’ impacted
by drought, bushfires and other environmental and social factors in rural Aus-
tralia (Farmer Health, n.d.). Some digital storytelling projects are concerned
with either a sense of loss of place or transition between places and spaces,
such as digital storytelling projects concerned with the experiences of people
with refugee and immigrant status (Brushwood Rose & Granger, 2013; Len-
ette & Boddy, 2013). Historias de Migracao – Stories of Migration explores a
Portuguese-speaking community in Stockwell, South London, England. The
project, a collaboration between DigiTales and The University of Greenwich,
England, explores urban exclusion for this community, reflecting on and shar-
ing personal narratives (Digi-Taled, n.d.b). In addition, a range of projects
connect with harder-to-reach populations, such as those experiencing home-
lessness (Woelfer & Hendry, 2010) low socio-economic status (Kent, 2015;
Walsh, Rutherford, & Kuzmak, 2010) or rurality (Wake, 2012). Finally, there
are digital stories concerned with personal or hidden spaces not usually seen
by the outside community, such as reflections on life in institutional care or
incarceration. Hidden Voices, for example, was a programme of expressive
arts workshops in youth clubs and community centres in Sussex, England. The
purpose was to raise awareness of the ‘hidden sentence’ faced by one of soci-
ety’s most invisible groups – prisoners’ families (partners, carers, parents and
particularly young people and children). A key aim was to highlight the impact
of family imprisonment on well-being, relationships and life changes and to
provide a platform for the promotion of the stories – and voices – of young
people affected (Digi-Tales, n.d.a).
In our previous work, we have separately contributed to a number of pro-
jects that involved creating digital stories, or some form of digital media, with
18 Davis,Waycott and Schleser
members of marginalised groups. Davis and Waycott, for example, created dig-
ital stories with three people who were housebound because of chronic illness.
The stories provided an opportunity for the three storytellers to explore their
life histories (before and after becoming housebound), to showcase meaningful
objects in their homes and to share what it was like to be housebound. Partici-
pants’ stories were shared with community members through public displays of
their digital stories at local events organised by their community health provid-
ers (Davis, Waycott, & Zhou, 2015; Waycott et al., 2017). This storytelling
process was valuable for exploring the sense of connection or disconnection
that the storytellers felt with their local community and exploring issues of
loss – of mobility, family and work – while balancing this against memories of
the past and hopes and dreams for the future (Waycott & Davis, 2015; Waycott
et al., 2017). The stories provoked empathetic responses from members of the
local community and from community health workers. Health workers noted
that the visual format of these narratives created a powerful tool for advocating
on behalf of their housebound clients (e.g. to demonstrate to the local govern-
ment the importance of mobility issues when planning local infrastructure) and
for educating the local community about chronic illness.
Schleser has conceptualised and conducted workshops which embrace
smartphone filmmaking and use storytelling to work with organisations rep-
resenting diverse community groups and in a range of social programmes as a
form of creative engagement. These include the Local Mobile Filmmaking Work-
shops (Schleser, 2012a, p. 398) in East London communities with FutureVer-
sity, Southwark Playhouse and B3 Media, initiated and facilitated through the
FILMOBILE (see Schleser, 2010). This approach has recently been extended
to encompass digital storytelling with people over the age of 60 in Melbourne,
Australia, who created and showcased mobile digital stories focusing on their
sense of place and space (McCosker et al., 2018; Digital Participation, n.d.).
Figure 1.1, illustrates elements of the 60+ Online project, e.g., attending

Figure 1.1 60+ online digital storytelling workshops.

 Digital storytelling 19
workshops, creating storyboards, and filming and editing digital stories using
smartphones and tablets.
Other initiatives have included projects with the community groups Spirit
of Rangatahi (Schleser, 2014a), the Pasifika Youth Empowerment Program
(Schleser, 2016), the NGO National Council for Woman (Schleser, 2012
b online, Rarotonga) and festivals such as Festival for the Future, East End
Film Festival, Edge of the City (all in the UK), HeART beat (Russia) and
Digital NatioNZ (New Zealand). The aim of these workshops was to cre-
ate a bottom-up approach that enabled and empowered participants and that
may potentially create sustainable social impact. In the projects with Spirit of
Rangatahi and Pasifika Youth Empowerment Program, the aim was to cre-
ate digital stories highlighting an insider perspective. The digital stories were
shared in community forums and provided a means for the groups to showcase
how they wanted to be represented. In both iterations, it was the first time that
participants had worked with smartphones for storytelling. Both projects ran
over multiple workshop sessions and included using a social media storytell-
ing template created for this purpose (Schleser, 2015), engaging participants
in filming and editing the digital stories and finally showcasing inspirational
mobile and smartphone films. The editing sessions were conducted on the
participants’ smartphones and in a collaborative editing process. A number of
free apps (such as Adobe Clip and/or Adobe Spark Video) allowed participants
to explore editing and learn the craft of storytelling.
These workshops incorporated a youth leadership framework. The commu-
nity groups selected youth to be trained prior to the workshops. In the com-
munity workshops, these youth then trained their peers, with Schleser acting as
a facilitator, narrative advisor and technician. Thus, the workshops provided a
means to create an alternative representation of young people for the commu-
nity in Wellington (New Zealand) and Rarotonga (in the Pacific). Edmonds
(2014) followed a similar approach of engaging mentors from within the com-
munity to support digital storytelling with indigenous youth in Australia.
The key focus of the Pasifika Youth Empowerment Program was to tackle
youth obesity by providing alternative lifestyle choices for Pacific youth.
A team of researchers (Schleser & Ridvan, 2018) developed the Pasifika Youth
Empowerment Programme (YEP), which consisted of five interactive learn-
ing modules in which 15 Pasifika youth (18–24 years) from Wellington, New
Zealand, participated. The digital story approach developed by Schleser for
this project was used to capture youth views and cultural perspectives and
highlight their knowledge of environmental drivers of obesity. It demonstrated
how young people can become important public health advocates within their
communities. Similarly, Gubrium and colleagues conducted digital storytelling
workshops with young women from a minority ethnic group with the aim of
understanding and improving sexual health among members of that commu-
nity (Gubrium et al., 2016).
The community project Spirit of Rangatahi demonstrates how young
Pacific people can use smartphones as creative tools and learn how to use
20 Davis,Waycott and Schleser
digital storytelling to create digital self-representations. The project developed
a framework for youth leadership (through peer-to-peer learning) and sustain-
able digital literacy skills. The young filmmakers, aged 11 to 17, were invited
to be part of the International Mobile Innovation Screening at Ngā Taonga
Sound & Vision in Wellington, New Zealand, in 2014 (Schleser, 2018; see also
www.mina.pro).

Co-design in digital storytelling workshops

The development of portable and mobile devices such as smartphones and
tablets (e.g. iPads) has led to additional opportunities for mobile digital sto-
rytellers. As a filmmaker working with emerging media and smartphones,
Schleser’s research (Schleser, 2012a, 2014b, 2018a, 2018b; Schleser et al.,
2018) has shifted from exploring visual discourses related to aesthetics towards
exploring frameworks of collaboration and participation, as outlined earlier.
Until recently, very few documentary film formats have been useful as frame-
works to engage in and analyse bottom-up approaches. Now that smartphones
and apps for filmmaking and digital storytelling are more accessible and have
improved in quality, a number of filmmakers, designers and creators have uti-
lised digital storytelling and ‘mobile-mentary’, that is, mobile documentary
making (Schleser, 2011), as a tool for making political statements and giving
voice to various communities (see, e.g., Schleser, 2014b, 2018a,b; Schleser
et al., 2018).
Mobile digital storytelling offers much promise for diverse communities.
Potentially, diverse communities may use privately or community-owned
mobile technologies, apply newly acquired skills, make use of free apps such
as Adobe Clip or Adobe Spark Video and apply templates such as those made
available by Schleser on YouTube (Schleser, 2015) to design, develop and
deliver their own digital stories. Co-design embodies a process of ­co-creation,
where designers who are trained in creativity work together with non-­
designers in the design process (Sanders & Stappers, 2008). The philosophy of
co-design rejects the designers’ claim to be ‘expert’ problem solvers. Rather,
in co-design, designers act as facilitators, guiding end users’ awareness of design
choices, providing opinions and professional advice about the potential out-
comes of various choices. The end users give opinions and provide contextual
experience to the design (Sui, 2003). Thus, the process is a negotiation and
development exercise to customise the requirements for each individual com-
munity group.
Diverse and marginalised communities still face powerful constraints in terms
of access to digital technology, WiFi, internet access (Thomas et al., 2017)
and digital storytelling skills. Jenkins points to the shift from the focus of the
digital-dive discourse on questions of technological access to those of oppor-
tunities for participation and the need for development of cultural competen-
cies. He considers these new media literacies as social skills in the 21st century
( Jenkins, 2009). Within the workshop-based co-design approach, researchers
 Digital storytelling 21
support the development of digital literacy skills and help storytellers grapple
with questions about choosing appropriate content for the audience and narra-
tive structure (e.g. Edmonds, 2014; Schleser, 2018b).
Co-design provides a valuable forum for discussing ideas, supporting film-
ing and editing, and providing inspiration and connections to other story-
tellers, community groups and non-governmental organisations. Digital tools
work best when expanding face-to-face contact and thus impacting the peer
group and beyond. Community engagement programs are key to ensuring
that digital storytelling initiatives are designed, developed and delivered with
and for diverse communities. The co-design element is key to tackling com-
plexity arising from working with institutions, such as city councils and policy
makers. An additional layer of complexity arises out of the requirements of
community groups or individuals and the specific issue they wish to address or
explore, for example, health, mental health, physical disability, ethnicity and
housing. Many of these are explored in the brief case studies in this chapter.
Every workshop requires a tailor-made approach and alignment of technical
skills, narrative frameworks and creative inspiration for storytelling. In the
projects described earlier, through co-design methods we embraced the par-
ticipants’ interests and aligned the storytelling process with their skill level.
For example, young Pacific youth enthusiastically performed their own music
for digital storytelling workshops, as rapping, jamming and performing street
dance is part of their subculture. Senior citizens could use their life experience
to tell stories that span generations. Housebound people expressed a strong
preference for researchers to film and edit the stories, with the storytellers
providing guidance about content and narrative. In these instances, we used
a social media storytelling formula and amended this for each demographic
through co-design.

Conclusion
Digital storytelling remains a viable, important way for diverse communities
to connect with each other and with others. However, when working with
diverse community members, we must carefully consider context (what to
record, what to share and where to share). Co-design provides a method to
develop a tailor-made approach when considering a complex set of institu-
tional, policy, technical and narrative frameworks.
We argue that it is important for diverse communities to create digital stories
in creative, meaningful ways, and it is important for them to have the skills and
technology to do so in safe spaces where they feel comfortable (e.g. in indi-
vidual or private spaces such as at home, in group settings such as workshops or
out and about in the community using mobile and other technologies). If we,
as researchers, designers and advocates, are responsive to participants’ needs
and desires, and we support participants in their endeavours, then digital stories
can potentially generate significant social impact and better enrich the lives of
people from diverse and marginalised communities.
22 Davis,Waycott and Schleser
References
Brushwood Rose, C., & Granger, C. A. (2013). Unexpected self-expression and the limits
of narrative inquiry: Exploring unconscious dynamics in a community-based digital sto-
rytelling workshop. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(2), 216–237.
Castleden, H., Daley, K., Sloan Morgan, V., & Sylvestre, P. (2013). Settlers unsettled: Using
field schools and digital stories to transform geographies of ignorance about Indigenous
peoples in Canada. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 37(4), 487–499. doi:10.1080/
03098265.2013.796352
Davis, H., Waycott, J., & Zhou, S. (2015). Beyond YouTube: Sharing personal digital sto-
ries on a community display. In OzCHI, Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Australian
special interest group for computer human interaction (pp. 579–587). New York: ACM.
De Jager, A., Fogarty, A., Tewson, A., Lenette, C., & Boydell, K. M. (2017). Digital story-
telling in research: A systematic review. The Qualitative Report, 22(10), 2548–2582.
De Vecchi, N., Kenny, A., Dickson-Swift, V., & Kidd, S. (2016). How digital storytelling
is used in mental health: A scoping review. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing,
25, 183–193.
Digi Tales.(n.d.a).Hidden voices: Digital storytelling within prisoners’families [Project page].Retrieved
from http://digi-tales.org.uk/hidden-voices-digital-storytelling-prisoners-families-2/
Digi Tales. (n.d.b). Historias De MigraIcao – Stories of migration [Project page). Retrieved from
http://digi-tales.org.uk/historias-de-migracao-stories-migration/
Digital Participation. (n.d.). 60+ Online [Project page]. Retrieved from https://digitalpar
ticipationhci.wordpress.com/60-online/
Edmonds, F. (2014). Digital storytelling and Aboriginal young people: An exploration of
digital technology to support contemporary Koori culture. In M. Berry & M. Schleser
(Eds.), Mobile media making in an age of smartphones (pp. 92–103). Basingstoke, UK: Pal-
grave MacMillan.
Farmer Health. (n.d.). From inside the farm gate: Rural women’s stories of surviving and thriving
[Project page]. Retrieved from www.farmerhealth.org.au/inside-farm-gate
Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A., & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm:
Uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In D. Warr,
M. Guillemin, S. Cox, & J. Waycott (Eds.), Ethics and visual research methods: Theory, meth-
odology and practice (pp. 157–170). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gubrium, A. C., Krause, E. L., & Jernigan, K. (2014). Strategic authenticity and voice: New
ways of seeing and being seen as young mothers through digital storytelling. Sexuality
Research and Social Policy, 11(4), 337–347.
Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Kent, G. (2015). Shattering the silence: The power of purposeful storytelling in challenging
social security policy discourses of ‘blame and shame’ in Northern Ireland. Critical Social
Policy, 36(1), 124–141.
Lambert, J. (2009). Where it all started: The centre for digital storytelling in California. In
J. Hartley & K. McWilliam (Eds.), Story circle digital storytelling around the world (pp. 79–90).
Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lambert, J. (2013). Digital storytelling: Capturing lives, creating community. London: Routledge.
LaMarre, A., & Rice, C. (2016). Embodying critical and corporeal methodology: Digital
storytelling with young women in eating disorder recovery. Forum Qualitative Sozial-
forschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 17(2), 7.
 Digital storytelling 23
Lenette, C., & Boddy, J. (2013). Visual ethnography and refugee women: Nuanced under-
standings of lived experiences. Qualitative Research Journal, 13(1), 72–89.
Lenette, C., Cox, L., & Brough, M. (2015). Digital storytelling as a social work tool: Learn-
ing from ethnographic research with women from refugee backgrounds. The British Jour-
nal of Social Work, 45(3), 988–1005.
McCosker, A., Bossio, D., Holcombe-James, I., Davis, H., Schleser, M., & Gleeson, J.
(2018). 60+ online: Engaging seniors through social media & digital stories. Melbourne: Social
Innovation Research Institute.
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design.
CoDesign, 4(1), 5e18.
Schleser, M. (2010). Collaborative mobile filmmaking. Retrieved from https://youtu.
be/4XdkVUZJSoY
Schleser, M. (2011). Mobile-mentary: Mobile documentaries in the mediascape. Saarbrücken, Ger-
many: Lambert Academic Publishing.
Schleser, M. (2012a). Collaborative mobile phone film making. In E. Milne, C. Mitchell, &
N. de Lange (Eds.), Handbook of participatory video. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: AltaMira
Press.
Schleser, M. (2012b). E Vaine Toa [Film]. Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/55147342
Schleser, M. (2014a). Pacific youth (mobile storytelling). Retrieved from https://youtu.be/
UgXs5L3UVYY
Schleser, M. (2014b). Towards mobile filmmaking 2.0. In B. Monahan, L. Rascaroli, &
G. Young (Eds.), Saving private reels. London: Continuum.
Schleser, M. (2015). Social media storytelling template. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/
Re5T1GXMVLU
Schleser, M. (2016). Spirit of Rangatahi mobile filmmaking workshop. Retrieved from https://
youtu.be/gR7K3z4nURw
Schleser, M. (2018a). Smart action and the connected self. In M. Bohr & B. Sliwinska
(Eds.), The evolution of the image: Political action and the digital self. London: Routledge.
Schleser, M. (2018b). #24Frames 24Hours: An emerging documentary form: Workshop-
generated videos. In A. Miles (Ed.), Digital media and documentary: Antipodean approaches.
Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.
Schleser, M., & Ridvan, F. (2018). Pasifika youth and health perspectives: Creative transfor-
mation through smartphone filmmaking and digital Talano. In M. Schleser & M. Berry
(Eds.), Mobile story making in an age of smartphones. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.
Sui, K. W. M. (2003). Users’ creative responses and designers’ roles. Design Issues, 19(2),
64–74.
Thomas, J., Barraket, J., Wilson, C., Ewing, S., MacDonald, T., Tucker, J., & Rennie, E.
(2017). Measuring Australia’s digital divide: The Australian digital inclusion index 2017. Mel-
bourne: RMIT University, for Telstra. doi:10.4225/50/596473db69505
Wake, D. (2012). Exploring rural contexts with digital storytelling. Rural Educator, 33(3),
23–37.
Walsh, C. A., Rutherford, G., & Kuzmak, N. (2010). Engaging women who are home-
less in community-based research using emerging qualitative data collection tech-
niques. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(3), 192–205. doi:10.5172/
mra.2010.4.3.192
Waycott, J., & Davis, H. (2017). Sharing the housebound experience through visual sto-
rytelling. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCHI conference on creativity and cognition
(pp. 2–14). Singapore: ACM
 24 Davis,Waycott and Schleser
Waycott, J., Davis, H., Warr. D., Edmonds, F., & Taylor, G. (2017). Co-constructing
meaning and negotiating participation: Ethical tensions when ‘giving voice’ through digi-
tal storytelling. Interacting with Computers, 29(2), 237–247.
Woelfer, J. P., & Hendry, D. G. (2010, April 10–15). Homeless young people’s experiences
with information systems: Life and work in a community technology centre. In Proceed-
ings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2010,
Atlanta, GA, April 10–15, 2010, ACM.

View publication stats