Bridging the chasm between design and execution
I found this article on design based research not only fascinating, but oddly synchronous with the MAODE (Master of Arts: Open and Distance Education) module I am currently doing – H809 Practice based research in educational technology – as my interest is in how we construct learning programmes for use through our various Internet connected devices.
‘DBR is a methodology designed by and for educators that seeks to increase the impact, transfer, and translation of education research into improved practice’. (Anderson and Shattuck, 2012. p. 16)
We are currently stripping down a couple of papers.
I can see that I will automate this process, do a review of who, what, when, why a paper is written. Then check as a skim read for other signs that make it credible for my interests (or creditable at all).
- Being Situated in a Real Educational Context
- Focusing on the Design and Testing of a Significant Intervention
- Involving multiple iterations
- Involving a Collaborative Partnership Between Researchers and Practitioners
- Evolution of Design principles
In action research, the educator is both researcher and teacher
(Kuhn & Quigley, 1997).
This becomes inevitable. And is played out in just about anything we do if we think either that there is a problem with it or that it can be improved and we want to improve it. On the one hand as player and participant we are in the best position to understand what is going on, on the other we may be so adapted to certain behaviours and to the familiarity of a situation that we cannot see it with either fresh eyes or the eyes of an objective observer. These are techniques and attitudes that can be taught.
Mingfong, Yam San, and Ek Ming (2010) identified four design characteristics that they suggest must be aligned to create effective interventions. These are:
- Frameworks for learning,
- The affordances of the chosen instructional tools,
- Domain knowledge presentation,
- Contextual limitations
(Mingfong et al 1020 p. 470).
Design practice—whether in the manufacture of cars or of fashions—usually evolves through the creation and testing of prototypes, iterative refinement, and continuous evolution of the design, as it is tested in authentic practice. (Anderson and Shattuck, 2012. p. 17)
“Research through mistakes.” (Anderson and Shattuck, 2012. p. 17)
I came across this in the OU MBA module B822 ‘creativity, innovation and change’ – where mistakes are recognised as a test and a way forward, rather than a barrier to change or innovation.
Grayson Perry – is one of several artists and creatives who talk positively of mistakes. It’s how we learn.
Martin Sorrell – on mistakes in business
There are many others – a search ‘mistakes’ in this blog will find more.
Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 13, no. 1; Educational Researcher, vol. 32, no. 1; and
Educational Psychologist, vol. 39, no. 4.
Anderson, T, & Shattuck, J 2012, ‘Design-Based Research:A Decade of Progress in Education Research?’, Educational Researcher, 1, p. 16, JSTOR Arts & Sciences IV, EBSCOhost, viewed 8 February 2013.
Mingfong, J., Yam San, C., & Ek Ming, T. (2010). Unpacking the design process in design-based research. In Proceedings pedagogy
Kuhn, G., & Quigley, A. (1997). Understanding and using action research in practice settings. In A. Quigley & G. Kuhne (Eds.), Creating practical knowledge through action research (pp. 23–40). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Looi, C.-K., Chen, W. the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 2). International Society of the Learning Sciences.