The UX of History
July - December 2025
qualitative research
participatory design
pedagogy intervention
content design
RESEARCH METHODS
Qualitative research-through-design, remote ethnography, directed storytelling, directed storytexting, directed storywriting, expert feedback, embodied LARP ideation, iterative prototyping, formative prototype walkthroughs, content testing, classroom pilots, educator debriefs, inductive coding, affinity mapping, and triangulation.
ETHICS Statement
Participants were recruited through trusted educator, parent, and student networks across India and the UK, extended through snowball sampling. All sessions followed strict protocols around consent, assent, anonymisation, and adult-mediated participation. Educators in India acted as co-researchers, facilitating sessions and sharing contextual reflections.
THE PROBLEM WAS PERSONAL
History in the Indian education system is often taught as fixed knowledge - dates, rulers, events, and singular narratives to memorise. But history is rarely singular; it is lived, contested, and shaped by perspective.
What happens when curiosity is flattened at that age? Would I have been an entirely different person if I had learnt to be critical of the knowledge I was consuming?
Could we reimagine history for our younger selves?
Help them gain critical consciousness, relatability to their past, and comfort with contradiction, as we become increasingly global citizens?
OUR ANCHOR
METHODS OF ENQUIRY
Retrospective Experiences from Global Students
Directed Storytelling sessions with international Master’s students, each reflecting on their school history education in the UK, Türkiye, and Ukraine (left to right). Participants chosen through convenience sampling method.
Participant's quotes overlayed with our understanding and interpretations
Affinity Mapping across the conversations to uncover recurring themes and spark ideas + areas of interest
Across these stories, one pattern repeats: adolescence is where criticality sparks.
Understanding the Educator's Experience
To understand the educator’s perspective on history education; we spoke with Educator P.T., a history educator from Mumbai who’s spent over thirteen years teaching across CBSE and ICSE boards. A conversation that began with discussing curriculum, reforms and exam formats; soon grew into a meditation on truth itself.
Our perspective shifted when Educator P.T. said, “Schools of thought… we can agree in Philosophy, not in History.” That paradox became the hook: philosophy could act as history’s mirror; helping students question how knowledge is formed and interpreted, while keeping history anchored in evidence.
Understanding Current Students' Experience
To understand how students feel about history lessons in school; in a way that was non-intrusive and safeguarded anonymity; we shared two open-ended written questions in a directed storytelling format, we called this directed storywriting. The goal was to invite reflection through narrative.
The responses were unexpectedly vivid. When asked how they felt about history classes, students used phrases like:
“Boring” “Just memorisation” “Outdated past” “Explained in points” “Only teaching from textbooks”
When asked how they might design their own history class, answers brimmed with imagination and ownership. “Through stories, videos, and comics” “Personally see the events” “Performing an act with friends” “Using current affairs” “There would be no teacher” “Explain as a story; understanding rather than memorising”
Reading these responses, what stood out was the instinctive design thinking. They were describing the very principles we had been exploring; experiential learning, performative inquiry, and co-created knowledge.
What’s fascinating is how closely their vision mirrors the mechanics of a Live Action Role-Play; a participatory, role-based form of learning that transforms content into experience. This pointed us towards designing a framework where play, empathy, and evidence can coexist.
Crazy 8s: Divergent Ideation
The Crazy 8s session; eight ideas in eight minutes each; was our way of loosening up (Nielsen, 2013).
A nuanced research question was extremely valuable in thinking laterally within specific parameters.
Some ideas leaned toward empathy (like letter-writing to historical figures), others toward performative engagement (like LARPing or creative timelines). But together, they reflected a shift; from teaching history as fixed knowledge to exploring it as lived experience.
Affinity Mapping for Emergent Directions
Affinity Mapping the Crazy 8s, leading to emergent directions
We then grouped the ideas through affinity mapping (Hanington & Martin, 2012), revealing three broad directions:
This ideation marked an important turn. We had begun to see design as a bridge between structure and possibility.
Feedback to get Unstuck
We had a direction but not a shape; torn between staying topic-agnostic or focusing on one chapter of history.
After a tutorial with our tutor Dr. Alastair Steele, one idea lodged itself firmly: situate it in the real world. Take something small; a trip to the grocery store; and notice how many versions of the “same” event exist.
Dr. Steele introduced us to the Futures Cone, a tool from foresight studies that visualises how one present moment can branch into many possible, plausible, and preferable futures (Voros, 2003). The tip represents now, and the opening represents all the futures that could unfold. What struck me most was the 'Past Cone'. If the future has many possibilities, the past has many origins. The “present” then is a meeting place of multiple pasts and unfolding futures.
This reframing mirrored what we’d been circling in our own project; that history is not a straight line, but a web of interdependent stories. The idea of the dual cone (Carey et al., 2022) gave us a spatial metaphor for plural histories: not as a timeline of single events, but as something multi-directional and alive.
Timeline-ing as an Experiment
We wanted to put the webbed timeline idea on its feet quickly. The next day was my housewarming gathering, we used the evening as our micro-experiment.
After a tutorial with our tutor Dr. Alastair Steele, one idea lodged itself firmly: situate it in the real world. Take something small; a trip to the grocery store; and notice how many versions of the “same” event exist.
Version 1 (left) was three individual sketchnotes on a shared canvas. It captured detail but not dialogue.
Version 2 (right) asked each of us to layer onto one another’s timelines: “Here’s what I was doing when you were doing that.” Suddenly the canvas behaved like a stacked timeline; overlaps, blind spots, and contradictions became visible.
And yet, after we finished, we stalled. It was interesting, but… so what?
That pause taught us: motivation matters. There needed to be a reason to read, compare, and contest these layers; stakes that pull players to investigate rather than just describe. What if this became a Live-Action-Role-Play (LARP)? Not just reading histories, but embodying them, with evidence and consequence.
LARPing: The Windrush Scandal
We needed a tight topic to LARP; Independence or Brexit (suggested by Expert A.C.) were too vast to prototype. In a mix of curiosity and panic, we turned to ChatGPT to help find a smaller, UK-based event. That’s how we found the Windrush Scandal.
We designed five roles based on secondary research; migrants, home office officials, journalists, archivists, and a community elder; each embodying a perspective in the bureaucracy of belonging.
The system mirrored the real scandal where paperwork decided personhood.
Migrants carried documents that the government deemed insufficient. They had to make their case at the Home Office, armed with “memory slips” as fragments of proof. Officials evaluated these slips and decided each migrant’s status, defining new rules each round. Documents without legitimacy vanished into the void. Those wronged could appeal to the Community Elder, a respected figure with limited power. Journalists documented events through empathy or bias, and the Archivist decided what fragments of truth would survive for the future.
Designing game mechanics, gameplay, character roles and props
Playtesting the Live-Action-Role-Play and iterating gameplay and game mechanics before testing with participants
Once the flow felt coherent, we ran it with 7 participants (aged 23-28, Indian international students) through convenience sampling.
The post-game debrief was heavy but deeply reflective; several participants described feeling “haunted” by how easily lives could be invalidated.
To LARP or enable to build a LARP, that is the question
We had designed an immersive experience to explore history, but in doing so, we’d also done the very thing we wanted students to do: research, interpret, question, and empathise. We had investigated real sources, government records, conflicting media narratives, and built a living system of evidence and bias.
That realisation became our turning point: what if the workshop itself became a toolkit for students to build their own LARPs?
This felt like one of those rare design eureka moments; the kind that collapses distance between method and outcome.
OUR POSITIONALITY
I questioned our positionality here: What is our role as experience designers here? If students are the ones building the LARPs, are we simply creating a plug-and-play kit?
We found an entire field: EduLARPs (Educational Live-Action Role-Plays). They’ve been used in classrooms across Europe and North America, especially in literature, language, and ethics education. But our review of academic work by Mochocki (2013; 2014) and Bowman & Standiford (2015) revealed some gaps.
Research into Edu-LARPs to understand leverage points
Our project sat within this triangulation. We weren’t designing a LARP to teach history; we were designing a process for students to think historically.
BUILDING THE LARP FRAMEWORK
We re-examined our process and distilled the LARP-making journey into intuitive stages; merging overlapping steps and simplifying where possible. The structure needed to be modular, time-bound, and flexible enough for different classrooms.
Iteratively building the LARP framework for students
We speed dated this with an Educator B.P, who responded enthusiastically:
Speed dating our framework with Educator B.P, an ICSE-curriculum educator and secondary school coordinator
FROM FRAMEWORK TO PROTOTYPE
With that feedback, we began crafting the student guide; starting with text content, then moving to low-fidelity prototypes, and then mid-fidelity prototypes.
Whiteframes of Student Guides | Content design by Ojaswi Kejriwal, execution by Diya Paode
Low-Fidelity and Mid-Fidelity prototypes | Directed by Diya Paode, executed by Ojaswi Kejriwal
Next came the facilitator guide, inspired by two moments: observing a Parallel Histories debate and receiving feedback from Stephanie Singer, who stressed the importance of emotional safety in participatory settings. These also pushed us to design an introductory five-minute LARP; a warm-up that lets students learn-by-doing before building their own.
Low to High Fidelity Facilitator Guide | Content, Illustration Design by Ojaswi Kejriwal, Layout Design by Diya Paode
USER TESTING: CONTENT
Testing was divided into 3 tracks: content testing, live experience and concept testing.
For content testing, our goal was to check whether the student and facilitator guides communicated clearly, made sense sequentially, and felt engaging for real classrooms.
We began with students, connecting remotely and always with parental consent.
Student H, aged 13 from Pune (Sarthak’s family friend), joined a video call proctored by parents.
Student S, aged 15, from Bhopal, participated over WhatsApp,
A group of Student S’s classmates (aged 14-15) in a closed-group parent-approved chat where they could respond privately and safely.
Feedback on the Student Guide content. All sessions used adapted formats to respect safeguarding protocols: informal language, opt-in participation, and no collection of personal identifiers beyond age, location and schooling level. These sessions gave us our first look at how young learners actually read and responded to our guide.
For content testing with educators, we shared both the student and facilitator versions with a diverse group of teachers and learning experts across India and the UK:
Educator B.P., secondary-school coordinator at A. M. Naik School
Educator P.T., Head of Department; History at A. M. Naik School
Educator M.K. & Educator R.A., NGO-affiliated educators for State-Board students
Educator A.L., independent educator (CBSE and ICSE)
Educator A.S., Principal, Podar International (CIE curriculum)
Pedagogist M.A., Head of Experiential Learning, Somaiya Centre for Experiential Learning
Critical Partner H.C., Director of Education, Parallel Histories (UK)
Collective feedback from our educator network helped us refine the tone, pacing, and clarity of both guides; ensuring they felt like usable classroom tools.
USER TESTING: LIVE CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE
The second track; live experience; was about seeing the toolkit come alive. We reached out to educators willing to pilot the LARP workshop in their own classrooms, as remote ethnographies:
Educator R.A. tested an adapted version with 20 of her students, modifying the flow to fit her class rhythm
Educator P.T. tested the toolkit with 32 Grade 8 students.
Pedagogist M.A. will implement her version in April.
Students said they were able to remember the chapter they LARPed with much more nuance
This session was so popular among students that on their request, Priyank sir will be running the next 3 chapters through the LARP pedagogy across Grades 8 and 9!
Student feedback from classroom pilots in Directed Storywriting format and an affinity map of emergent themes.
USER TESTING: CONCEPT ADOPTION
The third track of testing was around the adoption of LARP as a pedagogy.
What our partners had to say about the LARP-based pedagogy
THE PARALLEL: HIGH FIDELITY CHAOS
While testing unfolded, the design work couldn’t stop.
I focused on layouts and content refinement and branding, while Ojaswi developed the illustrations, storyboards and our comic zine. Sarthak and I worked on the packaging design; the container that would hold the toolkit assets and double as a canvas for timeline activities.
The name Un:Scene was my brainchild; signifying what history hides in plain sight, and how this project aims to surface it.
Print making and finishing
MATERIAL EXPERIMENTS & JUGAAD
Sarthak sourced magnetic sheets online for the packaging, but they weren’t strong enough for the button magnets to snap on. So Ojaswi and I embarked on a mini-field study of hardware stores across London, hunting for industrial magnets. None of the shops had what we needed, and buying online again meant risking time and money.
Our fix? Jugaad.
Making of the Box
We bought small metal screw plates, layered them between mountboard and paper, and turned them into a workable, durable magnetic system. It wasn’t perfect; the layers added unexpected thickness, and the box didn’t close as neatly as planned; but the prototype worked. Given a larger budget, we could have refined the materiality. Still, this version carried something more important: evidence of learning through making.
LEARNING BY DOING (AND DOING AND DOING)
This phase was messy, relentless, and deeply satisfying. We learned to design while testing, to build while rewriting, and to make decisions under pressure. Every small imperfection; the stubborn magnets, the over-stuffed box, the unplanned timelines; became a lesson in adaptation.
In the end, Un:Scene is as much a story of making for us as it is for the students. Because design isn’t linear or elegant; it’s improvised, improvised again, and held together with a mix of clarity, teamwork, and a bit of well-timed chaos.
THE FINAL OUTCOME
The Un:Scene toolkit moves through five stages that turn a textbook chapter into a playable historical world.
Stage 1: Build the World, pupils conduct critical research through prompts, using scaffolded cards to build a shared timeline.
Stage 2: People of the World introduces key actors and relationships.
Stage 3: Build the Plan converts the world into a functional game system.
Stage 4: LARP to Life adds characters, quick scripts and simple props for fast playtesting.
Stage 5: Get Set LARP! has groups run their LARPs and reflect by reconnecting artefacts to the timeline.
The Un:Scene Toolkit: Student Guides, Facilitator Guide, and a Zine that visually maps the sequence of events
TO SUM IT ALL UP
Video edit by Diya Paode, critique and feedback by Ojaswi Kejriwal
REFLECTIONS: RED TAPE & REALITIES
Despite the enthusiasm from every collaborator, logistics did fight back on many occasions. Schools were closing for Diwali vacations right in our testing window and educators were buried under exam preparations.
We also reached out to other UAL students through snowball sampling, but timing worked against us; deadlines and stress were everywhere.
Still, every “no” taught us something about access, patience, and partnership.
In the end, our trio became more than a team; it became a small ecosystem of patience, trust, and shared resilience.