New Ways to Tell my Story
Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults
Simone Hausknecht, Michelle Vanchu-Orosco and David Kaufman
Department of Education, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
Keywords: Digital Storytelling, Older Adults, Workshop Evaluation.
Abstract: This study discusses the design, development, and implementation of a digital storytelling workshop for older
adults. The paper reports on the post-evaluation of three iterations of the workshop in three different centres.
Adjustments were made for the second iteration and these are discussed. The facilitation and a socially
supportive environment were important to digital learning. Participants reported increased skills in digital
storytelling as well as other computer and internet skills. Finally, it was found that participants enjoyed the
contribution of others and sharing of stories, creative expression through learning story creation, and
facilitation. The main difficulty reported by participants was related to time restrictions.
1 INTRODUCTION
The aging population is increasing in numbers,
particularly in proportion to other age demographics.
It is estimated that 30 % of the population will be over
60 years by the year 2050 (WHO, 2012). This has led
to increased discourse on improving quality of life to
live a happy and healthy lifespan. For example, the
concept of ‘active aging’ promoted by the World
Health Organization (2002) has been described as
follows. “Active ageing is the process of optimizing
opportunities for health, participation and security in
order to enhance quality of life as people age.”
(WHO, 2002). Improving older adults’ quality of life
can incorporate a vast number of aspects and can be
attained in many ways depending on the individual. It
requires a holistic approach, incorporating not only
physical and cognitive health, but also aspects that
contribute to well-being such as creativity, social
engagement, and lifelong learning (Hanna, Noelker,
and Bienvenu, 2015).
Technology and communication are tools which
have the opportunity to enhance the lives of older
adults (Mitzner et al., 2010). Increasing digital
literacy may improve quality of life in a number of
ways, including increased socialization and
information access (Baecker, Moffatt, and Massimi,
2012). Technology also offers the opportunity for
creative expression and sharing facilities. One
technology creation that could be beneficial for older
adults is digital storytelling. Digital storytelling could
encourage older adults to share their stories, become
digital producers, express creativity, and to improve
digital literacy. Furthermore, digital storytelling can
also serve as a learning experience where participants
are both diving into traditional structures of writing a
story (such as the story arc), but also learning
technology (Czarnecki, 2009).
Story and narrative are powerful cultural tools and
are traditional ways to share knowledge. They serve
as one of our main tools of identity, in that we
perceive our lives as embedded in narratives and our
memories are wrapped around these stories (Bruner,
2004). Thus, the combination of technology and
autobiographical narrative could offer many
opportunities for older adults to express themselves in
new and different ways.
The purpose of the current paper and presentation
is to describe the design of a digital storytelling
workshop for older adults and present the initial
evaluation of the program. The paper provides an
overview of digital storytelling and its various uses,
discusses learning for older adults, then examines the
design and implementation of the program. Initial
findings include participant perceptions about the
workshop, learning gains, rewarding aspects, and
areas for improvement. This study contributes to both
research on the use of digital storytelling and the
design of workshops for older adult cohorts.
Hausknecht, S., Vanchu-Orosco, M. and Kaufman, D.
New Ways to Tell my Story - Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults.
In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2016) - Volume 2, pages 231-239
ISBN: 978-989-758-179-3
Copyright
c
 2016 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
231

2 BACKGROUND
2.1 Digital Storytelling
A digital story is simply a story that utilizes
multimedia in its expression. Leslie Rule (2010, p.
56) describes it as “the modern expression of the
ancient art of storytelling. Digital stories derive their
power by weaving images, music, narrative and voice
together, thereby giving deep dimension and vivid
color to characters, situations, experiences, and
insights.” The process involves creating a script and
bringing it to life through technological means. There
are few rules on what can and can’t be used in its
creation; however, it often uses voice, images, sound,
and music. Furthermore, participants do not just
simply produce their stories but also play the role of
editor (Meadows, 2003). All choices and decisions
are made by the story makers, creating an ambience
of their own self-expression within the story
presentation.
Digital storytelling arose as a new art form in the
1980’s. A large part of the drive for its popularity was
through the founding of the Center for Digital
Storytelling (CDS) by Joe Lambert and Dana
Atcheley (Robin, 2008). Over the next couple of
decades, the art of digital storytelling slowly gained
momentum in the United States. In the early 2000s,
Daniel Meadows and Cardiff University, in
partnership with BBC, brought digital storytelling to
England (Meadows, 2003). The art of digital
storytelling has now spread throughout many
countries and for various purposes.
Digital storytelling has not only gained popularity
as an artistic expression but has been touted as a tool
with a diversity of benefits. For example, digital
storytelling has recently been the subject of research
in education (Robin, 2008), to create a voice or
participatory media (Burgess, 2006), as a public
historical archive (Klaebe et al., 2007), and as a
means of creating empathy, understanding and giving
voice to marginalized cultures (Sawhney, 2009).
Much of the digital storytelling research has
centred around its use in education, whether K-12,
higher education, or professional development. In the
K-12 system, it has been praised as a tool for
increasing literacy and digital literacy skills (Behmer,
Shmidt, and Schmidt, 2006). However, the learning is
not just limited to the digital aspects, but also
incorporates traditional story writing structures
(Czarnecki, 2009). Furthermore, digital storytelling
has also gained use in its ability to promote reflective
practice in various fields such as pre-service teachers
(Tendero, 2006) and nursing (Stacey and Hardy,
2011).
The reflective nature of stories has been noted in
other areas. Bruner (2004) suggests that one cannot
tell an autobiographical story without having some
level of reflection. For example, Stacey and Hardy
(2011) report on a study where newly registered
nurses were provided digital storytelling workshops
to help with adjustment. They created stories on
recent distressing events. The process was found by
many of the participants to be an opportunity to
reflect on difficult experiences and created time to
process the event. It also provided a venue for
expressing themselves openly, although that also
created concern about how they would appear to
others. In another phase of the study the stories were
shared with final year nurses, who appreciated and
recognized the authenticity of the digital storyteller’s
experience. The digital stories created an
environment where the viewers could reflect on their
own fears and empathize with the story teller. This
study emphasizes the power of stories for both teller
and viewer.
Other studies have also found that digital stories
could be used to increase empathy and understanding
of patients and disadvantaged individuals
(Christiansen, 2011; Stenhouse et al., 2013). The
digital stories of patients have been used in nursing
education to create a patient-centered approach
(Christiansen, 2011). The creation of the digital
stories do not simply help the medical practitioner,
but the process can be useful to patients. A study by
Stenhouse, Tait, Hardy, and Sumner (2013) of seven
adults with early stage dementia suggested that the act
of creating a digital story helped with the patient’s
ability to express themselves and supported a sense of
identity. Furthermore, over the four-day workshop,
participants became more social.
Besides medical education, there has been a cross
over between using digital stories as a learning tool
and a community tool through projects where
students are working with disadvantaged persons to
create stories (Militello and Guajardo, 2013) or the
stories are used specifically to educate. For example,
Silence Speaks gives those individuals who may have
experienced violations of human rights an
opportunity to express themselves. In turn, these
narratives are then shared globally in strategic places
to try to promote human rights, equality and health
(McLellan, 2007).
Digital stories are a way for ordinary people to
produce and share their own stories (Burgess, 2006).
Thus, digital storytelling is a way of amplifying the
voices of ordinary people (Burgess, 2006). In the
context of older adults, it could allow for a new
CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
232

avenue to tell their story and archive their history. It
is a way of communicating and making oneself heard,
empathizing with others, and forming meaning
through self-reflection.
There is limited research on using digital stories
with older adults. However, a few have started to
appear. For example, a study by Loe (2013) evaluated
a course on aging that involved students going to local
senior communities and working with elders to
produce a digital story. They were paired together,
elder storyteller and student facilitator, to produce a
digital life story. After completion, the digital stories
were presented to the community. This study reported
positive results, including building a reciprocal
relationship between the pairs, a reviewing and
reflection upon the future and past, and reducing
ageism. This was likely due to the intergenerational
nature of the study and the story process (Loe, 2013).
When given the chance, older adults seem to
embrace the opportunity to be content producers
versus simply consumers, as was seen in a study of
the program Enmesh (Waycott et al., 2013).
Participants could share photos, and comment, tell
stories and discuss with other older adults. Although
not specifically a digital story in the way we are
considering it here, the study emphasized the social
benefit and creative expression older adults gained
through sharing photos and stories.
2.2 Older Adults and Learning
Lifelong learning and cognitive engagement have
been discussed in the research community as valuable
elements that can contribute to quality of life (e.g.,
Jenkins and Mostafa, 2015). Older adults have
different reasons for continued learning than younger
cohorts. In many instances, learning for the older
adult is a personal choice versus formal learning for a
degree or work; and therefore, requires interest and
relevance to the older adult. It has been found that
there are two main motivations for continued learning
by the older adult, interest in the content and social
factors (Kim and Merriam, 2004). Furthermore,
Jenkins and Mostafa (2015) conducted a study
examining data from a longitudinal study that
compared participants’ subjective well-being with
their learning habits and found a significant
relationship between high levels of reported well-
being and learning. However, this only applied to
informal learning that included arts groups and night
classes.
The informal and social nature of learning that
seems to be valuable for older adults may benefit
from constructivist design considerations, such that
the program is learner centred, and learners have the
opportunity for collaboration and sharing of different
perspectives. Furthermore, the knowledge and
learning is part of the practice of performing an
activity (Land, Hannafin, and Oliver, 2012). In the
current workshop design, all learning is embedded in
the practice of creating a digital story.
Two other aspects specifically considered in the
current design were scaffolds and planning for group
sharing and knowledge construction. Participant’s
computer experience was expected to vary, and their
zones of proximal development would also vary. The
zone of proximal development is the level to which
an individual can attain learning goals with the
guidance of another, either a peer or facilitator, but
the task may be too difficult to achieve on their own
(Vygotsky, 1978). Thus, to reach certain goals,
scaffolding (support for learners) is needed such as
through peers, artefacts, or facilitators. Scaffolds are
support designed to help and guide the learner
towards an achievement (Hannafin et al., 1999). In
the current workshop design, the scaffolds had to be
flexible and multiple to account for the different skill
levels coming into the program.
Another aspect that may be valuable for
educational programs is a collaborative social
environment where participants can share
experiences and understanding. This allows for
multiple perspectives for reflective practice and to
negotiate meaning (Land and Hannafin, 2002).
Furthermore, previous studies have found that older
adults find leisure activities more rewarding when
they are social (Mannell and Kleiber, 1997; Kim and
Merriam, 2004). In the current workshop design, all
learning occurs within a social and sharing
environment.
3 PROGRAM DESIGN
The design was inspired by the work of the Center for
Digital Storytelling (now called StoryCenter) and its
Digital Storytelling Cookbook (Lambert, 2010),
creative writing sharing techniques, and film
techniques. It was designed to create as many shared
experiences as possible. However, each participant
worked on their own digital story. The social
opportunities became more limited as the participants
moved to the computers, where they were divided by
a screen. However, a collaborative environment was
still maintained.
The program was designed with two specific
sections: story creation and digital creation. Many
participants had limited story writing experience. A
New Ways to Tell my Story - Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults
233

digital story is not composed of individual parts
which are combined but is a unified piece, so it was
important that participants had a full story to work
with. This also facilitated a writing group
environment where participants could get to know
each other through sharing life narratives before
moving to the computer. However, for the second
iteration we implemented an introduction to the
software, which provided understanding of the digital
story process as a whole. This helped to provide a
richer understanding of the length of the story,
number of pictures and other aspects that differentiate
digital stories from written stories.
3.1 Further Design Consideration
Software Choice: During the design phase, we also
underwent a difficult decision on the software tools.
We wanted software that would be easily accessible,
simple, could be accessed from multiple locations,
had publishing options, and would suit our
demographic and program. The software also needed
to meet the different levels of computer skill and
knowledge of the participants. Thus, we wanted a
system that had some built in scaffolding to provide
users with ‘how to use the program’ information
readily available.
We reviewed the existing software programs that
were available in the summer of 2014. Of these, most
were aimed at students and often used to create 'comic
book' stories. Of our top three choices, MS
Photostory, PhotoStage, and WeVideo, we found that
MS Photostory was no longer supported and
Photostage required installation so would appear
‘different’ on MACs and PCs. We also consulted
researchers and programs that had experience with
digital storytelling. After our review we chose a
program called WeVideo.
WeVideo was recommended by Bernard Robin
(University of Houston) and is a browser-based
software application that does not change, regardless
of hardware used. Further, WeVideo has been
adopted by StoryCentre (formerly the Center for
Digital Storytelling). The program has a full range of
options and tools that can be used to create digital
stories, instructional videos, is online so can be
accessed from any computer, and produces a digital
story with good quality s MPEG-4 multi-media file
that can be viewed with most digital media players.
Technical Experience: We had no required technical
experience since we wanted to make it accessible to
all. As expected, the participants ranged from those
who worked with computers in their careers, to those
who had never used one. For this reason, a ratio of at
least one facilitator to five participants was used.
Time Constraints: The initial workshops were based
on two hour sessions, occurring once a week, for eight
weeks. These time constraints were due to venue
requirements. In our initial design we realized this
could be a limiting factor, but it was design restriction
that we had to work with. Some venues allowed the
workshop to be extended to 10 weeks. Additionally,
workshop participants were expected to do some
work at home.
Story Style: Within digital storytelling there are
many different forms, sometimes more of a life
history approach which is a retelling of a person’s life
or it can be a complete short story with a beginning,
middle, and end which is seen more in the workshops
of the Center for Digital Storytelling. In this program
we chose the latter. Participants were asked to reflect
on an event or moment in their lives that stood out.
We also incorporated reflective journals to help
develop the theme, emotions, and personal
understanding of the story. Many of the stories did not
take place over one incident, although some did, but
a specific idea or lessons learned were incorporated.
For example, one participant wrote about how she
was a dancer, until her body failed in later years due
to arthritis. She had to learn to accept her body and
found new ways to dance.
3.2 Program
The first iteration of the design took place in
September of 2014. For the second and third
iterations, some changes were made based on the
feedback from participants and observations by
facilitators. Two specific changes that were made
were familiarizing participants with a more
comprehensive view of the process by introducing
participants to the digital storytelling software earlier
and having extra hours, tutorials, with facilitators
outside of the workshop.
The first adjustment was to have an earlier session
in the program focused on creating a digital story in
the chosen software. The participants were given
photos, sound, and other parts of a digital story and
shown how to upload these. They were also given a
few mini lessons and encouraged to play around with
the software.
From the initial feedback we also noted that
participants were finding it difficult to finish their
stories given the amount of time. Our first adjustment
was for a facilitator to meet with participants outside
of the workshop, a one-on-one learning sessions.
CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
234

However, this was not sustainable so tutorial groups
were formed with a set time for facilitators to work
with more than one participant. Below is an example
of the program.
Final Outline of Weekly/Workshop
Week 1 – Introduction to the research study and
digital storytelling. Learners our introduced to the
research study and to what digital storytelling is. They
will start to think about the stories of their life.
Week 2 – Intro to WeVideo, practice creating
Learners are introduced to the digital storytelling
software. They are given photos, music, a voice clip
and shown how to upload these, and lay them out.
This also gives them an opportunity to think about
how many photos they may need.
Week 3 – Writing a Script (draft)
Learners will begin to explore the art of story writing
and think about the story they may want to tell.
Activities are used to help them come up with ideas.
Sharing of ideas.
Week 4 – Sharing Your Story and Editing
Learners bring their story to class and get an
opportunity to workshop it with other learners and the
facilitator getting feedback.
Week 5 –Images and Storyboarding
Learners bring their edited script and storyboard it,
figuring out the photos to go with each section.
Week 6 – Voice, Sound, Music; Record the Narrative
Learners explore ideas of voice, sound and music, and
start recording their stories. Learners upload images,
recording, etc… to Wevideo and start to put it
together.
Week 7 – Record and Edit in WeVideo
Learners continue putting the pieces together.
Week 8/9/10 – Record, Edit, Final Touches, Publish.
Learners continue editing and share their stories.
The viewing of the participants’ digital stories
occurred in class; however, a special event was also
held where participants from all of the workshops had
an opportunity to showcase their work to family,
friends, and others in the community.
4 METHOD
The workshops took place in the greater Vancouver
area, Canada. The research grant is a partnership
grant where the researchers worked with community
organizations to host the digital storytelling
workshops for older adults. Participants were
recruited through advertisement with the partnership
facilities. The digital storytelling workshops ran once
a week for two hours, for 8-10 weeks depending upon
the centre and time restrictions. There have been three
iterations of the program so far consisting of 7 groups
of 4-10 participants.
Participants: Participants were older adults aged
over 55 who signed up for the digital storytelling
workshop. A total of 40 participants, from all three
initial iterations of the workshop, filled out the final
surveys.
Instrumentation: Participants were given an
anonymous survey at the end of the workshop
evaluating the program. A five point scale was used
to rate various aspects of the workshop and to rate
perceptions of digital skills improvement. There were
also open ended questions asking the participants
what they liked best and what could have been
improvement.
5 RESULTS
The questions on the evaluation forms were analysed
for descriptive measures using IBM SPSS Statistics
V22, a statistical software package. For the open-
ended questions, two researchers coded the data and
formed categories, continuously checking on their
agreement.
5.1 Workshop Experience
The workshop was evaluated on facilitation, process,
and software used. All participants were able to use
the software; however, varying levels of assistance
were required. Some participants required more
hands-on help from facilitators. Most of the
participants completed their digital stories during the
course of the workshop and were given the
opportunity to share their work during the final
session.
Overall most participants rated the workshop as
being good or very good as can be observed in Table
1. The facilitation was rated as being very good by
most participants, both in regard to communication
(70%) and helpfulness (82.5%). Approximately 95%
of participants felt the process used was good to very
good. The software used was also rated high with
close to 87 % of participants rating it good to very
good.
New Ways to Tell my Story - Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults
235

Table 1: Workshop evaluation.
Question Categories Frequency (n) Percent (%)
Facilitator’s
ability to
communicate
Very Poor 0 0
Poor 0 0
Fair 3 7.5
Good 9 22.5
Very Good 28 70
Total 40 100.0
Facilitator’s
helpfulness
Very Poor 0 0
Poor 0 0
Fair 1 2.5
Good 6 15
Very Good 33 82.5
Total 40 100.0
Process used to
create digital
story
Very Poor 0 0
Poor 1 2.6
Fair 1 2.6
Good 16 41
Very Good 21 53.8
Total 39 100.0
Software used
to create digital
story
Very Poor 0 0
Poor 2 4.3
Fair 3 7.9
Good 18 47.4
Very Good 15 39.5
Total 39 100.0
Almost two-thirds of participants found the
workshop just right (see Table 2). However, 28.2% of
participants found it difficult, while a few participants
found it easy and one found it very difficult. Overall
this is a good outcome and would suggest the
workshop was accessible to most participants.
Table 2: Difficulty level of workshop.
Question Categories Frequency (n) Percent (%)
I found the
workshop
Very Easy 0 0
Easy 3 7.7
Just right 24 61.5
Difficult 11 28.2
Very difficult 1 2.6
Total 39 100.0
5.2 Skill Improvement
Participants were asked whether they thought their
skills improved in specific digital literacies and
digital storytelling skills.
Table 3: Skill improvement.
Did skills
improve:
Categories
Frequency
(n)
Percent (%)
Using a
computer
N
ot at all 4 10.3
Slightly 11 28.2
Moderately 13 33.3
Very 7 17.9
Extremely 4 10.3
Total 38 100.0
Using computer
software
N
ot at all 3 7.9
Slightly 10 26.3
Moderately 16 42.1
Very 7 18.4
Extremely 2 5.3
Total 40 100.0
Using the
internet
N
ot at all 11 28.2
Slightly 8 20.5
Moderately 15 38.5
Very 3 7.7
Extremely 2 5.1
Total 40 100.0
Approximately two-thirds of participants reported
that they improved on computer and computer
software skills either slightly or moderately (see
Table 3). A small percentage reported no
improvement, while almost one-quarter of
participants reported that their computer and
computer software skills were very or extremely
improved over the course of the workshop. Just over
one-quarter of participants reported no improvement
of their internet skills, with one-fifth reporting a slight
improvement. However a large number of
participants (38.5%) reported moderate improvement
in their internet skills.
Table 4: Skill creating a digital story.
Did skills
improve:
Categories Frequency (n) Percent (%)
Creating a
digital story
N
ot at all 0 0
Slightly 1 2.5
Moderately 10 25
Very 20 50
Extremely 9 27.5
Total 40 100.0
As might be expected, the skill with the most
improvement reported was digital storytelling (Table
4). All participants reported some increase, with over
three-quarters reporting their skills were very or
extremely improved.
CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
236

5.3 Benefits and Improvements
The participants were asked open-ended questions
about what they liked best and what they would
improve.
5.3.1 What Participants Liked Best
Three major themes emerged regarding what
participants liked most about the workshop. These are
sharing/interactions with others, digital story
creation/learning, and facilitation.
Shared Social Experience
One major theme that emerged was the shared
experience with other participants and what that
brought to the program. The environment allowed for
participants to give each other feedback, share stories,
and socialize. This came out as an important aspect of
participants’ experience. Below is an example of
some of the comments.
“The fellowship/moral support of fellow
participants”
“Sharing the works of the other participants.”
“Interaction with other participants”
“Story sharing”
“Supporting each other”
These examples of some of the comments shows
the comradery and appreciation participants had of
the shared learning experience.
Expression through Learning Story Creation
Some participants revealed that what they liked best
was learning something new and creating their own
story. As one participant wrote:
“I liked learning the software and the process of
putting the pieces together.”
There were also comments that showed the
excitement of learning how to turn pictures into living
stories as expressed by these two participants
“Turning still photographs into a live picture,
with sound and life. And also learning to building a
story”
“Able to tell and express the story of a picture
with emotions.”
And as one participant wrote the best aspect was
“Finding new ways to tell my story” and another
participant simply wrote that they “learned or
discovered I can write stories.”
The story creation could even be very
empowering as expressed by a participant who wrote,
“The very organized and helpful approach to build
an effective and powerful story - it is a process that
gives one a bit more self-respect!”
Helpful Facilitation
Another aspect that came up for many of the
participants was facilitation. As outlined earlier the
program involved a high level of facilitation both
during the workshop, and outside the workshop when
needed. This was appreciated by participants and can
be observed by comments such as,
“Friendly, kind assistance of the mentors”
“Approachable, supportive facilitators”
“Got opportunity to ask questions and get
assistance when I got stuck”
“The facilitators teaching us something new”
5.3.2 Improvements
The major theme that appeared for needing
improvements was related to time, or not enough of
it. These did not encompass one aspect of the program
but different participants felt they needed more time
on different areas, as seen by these participant
comments.
“More editing time”
“We could have had more time to do research and
work more on the timeline.”
“A lengthier course to help people like me who
are not too computer savvy to grasp the technological
details”
“Needed a lot more time - in developing the story
and in the lab.”
The need for time was the only consistent theme
that arose. This is understandable as it was a concern
from the start. We described how we attempted to
adjust for this through tutorials. Even with the extra
facilitation sessions, the later groups still had time
come up as something they would like more of as one
person wrote “longer training”.
6 DISCUSSION
Overall participants were satisfied with the digital
storytelling process and workshop. They reported
gaining skills in digital storytelling which may
contribute to lifelong learning. Hopefully, these new
skills will encourage some of the participants to
continue their exploration of digital storytelling.
Furthermore, many participants also suggested that
the workshop improved their digital skills. The
learning of technology was embedded in the program,
due to its necessity, and was an added benefit. It was
the authentic practice of creating a digital story with
technology in which the learning occurred.
New Ways to Tell my Story - Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults
237

The program included a high level of scaffolding,
particularly by guidance from facilitators, since some
participants needed the extra help and time to finish
creating their stories. As was reported by participants,
this was appreciated and was seen as one of the
aspects that was most favourable. However, the
sustainability of having many one-on-one sessions is
not realistic in many community programs. Time
limitations was one of the main factors affecting the
need for extra sessions.
Although, for many, there was a high level of
guidance, participants managed to create their own
individual stories with the freedom to express
themselves and their life narrative in new and
meaningful ways. Moreover, they became digital
producers and not simply consumers producing
artifacts that could be distributed among family,
friends, or whomever they wished. Similar to the
work of Waycott et al. (2013) we found that they were
eager producers of digital content and found the
program rewarding as noted by the evaluation.
In regards to the level of difficulty of the program,
participants mainly marked that the workshop was
just right or a little difficult. This places the workshop
design within most learners’ zone of proximal
development, yet required the program to have a fair
amount of scaffolding built in. The one on one time
with facilitators allowed for the wide range of
different digital skill levels.
What the older participants liked best about the
program seemed a strong indication of what made the
learning a valuable experience for them. The
opportunity for shared experience, creative
expression, and helpful facilitation appeared to be
what made the program successful for the
participants. Shared experience has come up in
previous work on leisure activities and learning as
being important for older adults (Kim and Merriam,
2004). Similar to the nurses in Stacey and Hardy
(2011), the older adults seemed to appreciate learning
a new way to express themselves and having the
opportunity to do so.
6.1 Limitations and Future Directions
This study was limited by the fact that it was a self-
reported survey. Thus, participants claimed to have
learned something, but this was not specifically
tested. The fact that they created a digital story would
suggest they at least learned how to do this, but for
increased digital literacy skills this is dependent on
self-assessment. This could be improved by more
rigorous assessment methods.
However, this may not be critical as lifelong
learning is more related to feeling engaged and
enjoying the experience. Furthermore, at this point
the digital stories created have not been analysed.
This will be done soon may provide a more thorough
understanding. The workshop also had a high level of
support with a least two facilitators per group of up to
10 participants, it is difficult to determine what the
success would be with less individual support
provided. One area that would be interesting to follow
up is in developing an intergenerational program
where youth and older adults can create together. This
may provide added intergenerational aspects and help
with the issue of limited time. Another possibility is
that designs could be longer or broken into two
sections. Thus, participants could learn storytelling
techniques and development in one workshop series,
and digital storytelling in another workshop series.
7 CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, our study addressed the design and
evaluation of a digital storytelling workshop for older
adults. The insights gained from the feedback allows
for further understanding into approaches to
workshop design for older adults. Overall the positive
response of the participants offered some evidence
that older adults find creating their own digital stories
a worthwhile experience. Through reflecting on past
life narratives participants were able create an artefact
to share a moment in time with others. The reported
increase in digital literacy were also a benefit and may
help as a guide for future programs.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We wish to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and the AGE-
WELL Network of Centres of Excellence (NCE) for
supporting this project financially.
REFERENCES
Baecker, R., Moffatt, K., and Massimi, M. (2012).
Technologies for aging gracefully. Interactions, 19(3),
32-36.
Behmer, S., Schmidt, D., and Schmidt, J. (2006, March).
Everyone has a story to tell: Examining digital
storytelling in the classroom. In Society for Information
Technology and Teacher Education International
Conference (Vol. 2006, No. 1, pp. 655-662).
CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
238

Bruner, J. (2004). Life as narrative. Social research, 691-
710.
Burgess, J. (2006). Hearing ordinary voices: Cultural
studies, vernacular creativity and digital storytelling.
Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies,
20(2), 201-214.
Christiansen, A. (2011). Storytelling and professional
learning: A phenomenographic study of students'
experience of patient digital stories in nurse
education. Nurse education today, 31(3), 289-293.
Czarnecki, K. (2009). How digital storytelling builds 21st
century skills. Library Technology Reports, 45(7), 15-
19.
Hanna, G. P., Noelker, L. S., and Bienvenu, B. (2015). The
Arts, Health, and Aging in America: 2005–2015. The
Gerontologist, 55(2), 271-277.
Hannafin, M., Land, S., and Oliver, K. (1999). Open
learning environments: Foundations, methods, and
models. Instructional-design theories and models: A
new paradigm of instructional theory, 2, 115-140.
Jenkins, A. and Mostafa, T. (2015). The effects of learning
on wellbeing for older adults in England. Ageing and
Society, 35, pp 2053-2070.
Kim, A., and Merriam, S. B. (2004). Motivations for
learning among older adults in a learning in retirement
institute. Educational Gerontology, 30(6), 441-455.
Klaebe, H. G., Foth, M., Burgess, J. E., and Bilandzic, M.
(2007). Digital storytelling and history lines:
Community engagement in a master-planned
development. In Proceedings of the 13th International
Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia:
Exchange and Experience in Space and Place, VSMM
2007. Australasian Cooperative Research Centre for
Interaction Design Pty, Limited.
Land, S. M., and Hannafin, M. J. (2012). Student-Centered
Learning Environments: Foundations, Assumptions,
and Implications. In Jonassen, D., and Land, S. (Eds.).
(2012). Theoretical foundations of learning
environments. Routledge.
Lambert, J. (2010). Digital storytelling cookbook.
Berkeley.
Loe, M. (2013). The digital life history project:
intergenerational collaborative research. Gerontology
and geriatrics education, 34(1), 26-42.
Mannell, R.C. and Kleiber, D.A. (1997). A social
psychology of leisure. Venture Publishing Inc..
McLellan, H. (2007). Digital storytelling in higher
education. Journal of Computing in Higher
Education, 19(1), 65-79.
Meadows, D. (2003). Digital storytelling: Research-based
practice in new media. Visual Communication, 2(2),
189-193.
Militello, M., and Guajardo, F. (2013). Virtually speaking:
How digital storytelling can facilitate organizational
learning. Journal of Community Positive
Practices,13(2), 80-91.
Mitzner, T. L., Boron, J. B., Fausset, C. B., Adams, A. E.,
Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., ... and Sharit, J. (2010). Older
adults talk technology: Technology usage and
attitudes. Computers in human behavior, 26(6), 1710-
1721.
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful
technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory
into practice, 47(3), 220-228.
Rule, L. (2010). Digital storytelling: Never has storytelling
been so easy or so powerful. Knowledge Quest, 38(4),
56.
Sawhney, N. (2009, June). Voices beyond walls: the role of
digital storytelling for empowering marginalized youth
in refugee camps. In Proceedings of the 8th
International Conference on Interaction Design and
Children (pp. 302-305). ACM.
Stacey, G., and Hardy, P. (2011). Challenging the shock of
reality through digital storytelling. Nurse Education in
Practice, 11(2), 159-164.
Stenhouse, R., Tait, J., Hardy, P., and Sumner, T. (2013).
Dangling conversations: reflections on the process of
creating digital stories during a workshop with people
with earlystage dementia. Journal of psychiatric and
mental health nursing, 20(2), 134-141.
Tendero, A. (2006). Facing your selves: The effects of
digital storytelling on teacher education. Contemporary
Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 6(2),
174-194.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society.
Waycott, J., Vetere, F., Pedell, S., Kulik, L., Ozanne, E.,
Gruner, A., and Downs, J. (2013, April). Older adults
as digital content producers. In Proceedings of the
SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 39-48). ACM.
World Health Organization (WHO) (2002). Active aging:
A policy framework. CITY: World Health
Organization. Retrieved on September 23, 2015 from
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/WHO_NMH_NPH_
02.8.pdf.
New Ways to Tell my Story - Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults
239