Does he take sugar? Moving beyond the rhetoric of compassion
Our approach is to rethink HCI research in the wild-not in terms of framing or determining how to design and evaluate new technological interventions in situ, but rather in terms of the lives of people in the wild. This entails rethinking how to teach interaction design, how we frame problems, what our expectations are, the way HCI knowledge is used, the way theory is applied, the way studios/classes are run, and what interdisciplinarity means in this context. It also implies the need to shift from being bogged down as a prescriptive discipline, telling others what to do and not to do (the dos and don'ts and "we are the experts" mentality) to a more empathetic, encouraging, and excited community. We see this shift toward different forms of engagement as part of a broader shift in HCI toward moving its research agenda into the wild [24,25] . As we moved from design to co-design, we can shift from creation to co-creation. In addition to changing our methods to adapt to in the wild, we need to rethink our motivations for how and why we are creating technologies in new locations and with new users. In sum, we argue for the following: • Stop thinking with a thirdperson, "Does he take technology?" mentality when it comes to the creation of technology. • As a discipline, add to our repertoire of roles; encourage researchers to think about how to facilitate co-creation sessions. • Continue to create new forms of toolkits that promote creativity and can be adapted by a wide range of users, from care homes in Europe to rural villages in India. © 2013 ACM.