Session Information
16 SES 02 A, Instructional Support with ICT Tools
Paper Session
Contribution
In a world of rapid technological change, where learners are becoming increasingly accustomed to new ways of finding information and communicating with each other, teachers are having to face up to the challenges and opportunities involved in learning how to successfully use technology in their teaching practices. The ongoing digitization of society also has epistemological consequences. Nowadays learning is often viewed as constructive, self-regulated, situated and collaborative (de Corte 2010) – and teaching is increasingly referred to as designing for learning(cf. Laurillard 2012; Olofsson & Lindberg Eds., 2012). Considerable investments are made around the world to introduce technology into schools, with the expectation that teachers will put it to good use (cf. Lim et al 2013). However, in order to do this, teachers need to learn how to master and integrate a new knowledge domain, i.e. technological knowledge, into their existing practices, and understand the reciprocal interaction between technology, pedagogy and content knowledge (cf. Mishra & Koehler 2008). Teachers are thus having to face a number of challenges in an already complex profession, where a multitude of factors have to be constantly taken into consideration and situated problem-solving strategies designed .
Studying and elaborating how technology can be integrated into practice to help teachers successfully design for learning thus becomes a priority for teachers and it has been argued that it would be of high priority for educational researchers as well (cf. Laurillard 2012; Schleicher 2011). However, existing research on the educational use of digital technologies has been criticized of lacking theoretical grounding, providing limited empirical evidence and using ineffective research methodologies, thus providing limited advice to practitioners and limited evidence of the effects of digital technologies in learning. (cf. Bebell et al., 2010; Orlando 2009). This correlates with the identification of a widening gap between educational research and educational practice that is not just limited to the use of digital technologies (cf. Berliner 2008; Dumont & Istance 2010). It is argued that ‘too much research on learning is disconnected from the realities of educational practice and policy making’, and that ‘too many schools do not exemplify the conclusions’ drawn by such research, thus resulting in a situation in which (scientific) theory and educational practice are less informed by each other (Dumont & Instance 2010, p. 21).
Design based research (DBR) is increasingly being considered as one way of informing research on teachers design with educational technologies and simultaneously contributing in closing the research-practice gap described above. However, the dual goals of DBR, i.e. practical design of working educational interventions and theory building on working design models and principles, makes it a potentially powerful, but also a very ambitious and complex endevour (cf. Anderson & Shattuck 2012; McKenney & Reeves 2012). Given that the researcher in DBR is both designer, implementer and evaluator there is an obvious risks for a conflict of interest, biased perspectives, and that taken for granted assumptions don’t become critically scrutinized. Considering the complexity of assessing if, how and why learning occurs, the generalizability of interventions designed in situated contexts into generic design principles as a viable goal of DBR must also be problematized.
Thus, the aim of this conceptual paper is to make a contribution to the theoretical development of the DBR-concept by problematizing certain key-concepts and goals of DBR. This is primarily done by contrasting Simon’s and Schön’s views of design and discussing the potential of using Schön’s view of design as a reflective conversation with the situation as an alternative perspective in DBR research
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L.M., Russell, M. & Hoffman, T. (2010) Concerns, considerations and new ideas for data collection and research in educational technology studies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(1), 29-52 Berliner, D.C. (2008) Research policy and practice: The great disconnect. In Lapan, S.D., & Quartaroli, M.T. (Eds.) Research essentials: An introduction to designs and practices (pp.295-325). Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass. de Corte, E. (2010). Historical developments in the understanding of learning. In Dumont, H., Istance, D., & Benavides, F. (Eds.) The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 35-67). OECD Publishing Dorst, K. (2006) Design Problems and Design Paradoxes. Design Issues, 22(3), 4-17. Dumont, H., & Istance, D. (2010) Analysing and designing learning environments for the 21st century. In Dumont, H., Istance, D., & Benavides, F. (Eds.) The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 19-34). OECD Publishing Laurillard, D. (2012) Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. London: RoutledgeFalmer Lim, C.-P., Zhao, Y., Tondeur, J., Chai, C.-S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Bridging the Gap: Technology Trends and Use of Technology in Schools. Educational Technology & Society, 16 (2), 59–68. McKenney, S. & Reeves, T. C. (2012) Conducting Educational Design Research. London: Routledge Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. (2008). Introducing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. Mor, Y. & Winters, N. (2007) Design approaches in technology-enhanced learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 61-75. Olofsson, A., & Lindberg, J. (Eds.) (2012). Informed Design of Educational Technologies in Higher Education: Enhanced Learning and Teaching. Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global. Orlando, J. (2009). Understanding changes in teachers’ ICT practices: A longitudinal perspective. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(1), 33–44. Schön, D. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Schön, D. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Schön, D. (1992) The theory of inquiry: Dewey’s legacy to education. Curriculum inquiry 22(2), 119–139. Schleicher, A. (2011) Building a High-Quality Teaching Profession: Lessons from around the World, OECD Publishing. Simon, H. A. (1969/1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Simon, H. A. (1973) The Structure of Ill-structured Problems. Artificial Intelligence 4, 181–201.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.