Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?

Claudia Haagen-Schützenhöfer; Markus Obczovsky; Paula Kislinger

doi:10.29333/ejmste/13928

Full Text (PDF)

Claudia Haagen-Schützenhöfer ¹ ^* , Markus Obczovsky ¹ , Paula Kislinger ¹

More Detail

¹ Department of Physics, University of Graz, Graz, AUSTRIA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Researchers often develop teaching-learning solutions to improve the quality of instruction. Some of these solutions are developed in the paradigm of design-based research (DBR). The output of DBR projects goes beyond design products for practice and includes contributions to local theories about teaching-learning in specific subject areas and contexts as well as knowledge about how to design and implement these processes. Design knowledge and contributions to local theories are intended to construct a cumulative, content-specific body of knowledge about teaching and learning that is transferable to related subject areas or contexts. To make this process work, dimensions of DBR need to be systematically reported. However, DBR projects are sometimes criticized for focusing more on practical output than on reports about research output and the form of cooperation with practitioners. To empirically investigate these presumed voids, we examined DBR projects conducted by the German-speaking physics education research community during the past 20 years.

Keywords

design-based research
theory-practice gap
curriculum development

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2024, Volume 20, Issue 1, Article No: em2378

https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928

Publication date: 01 Jan 2024

Online publication date: 26 Nov 2023

Article Views: 945

Article Downloads: 547

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Bakker, A. (2018). Design research in education: A practical guide for early career researchers. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203701010
Barab, S. (2014). Design-based research: A methodological toolkit for engineering change. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 151-170). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.011
Behrens, D. (2018). Konzeption, Entwicklung und Evaluation von Lernmaterialien (KEEL) [Conception, development and evaluation of learning materials (KEEL)]. https://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/id/eprint/3691
Bereiter, C. (2002). Design research for sustained innovation. Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society, 9(3), 321-327. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.9.321
Bitzenbauer, P. (2020). Quantenoptik an Schulen. Studie im mixed-methods Design zur Evaluation des Erlanger Unterrichtskonzepts zur Quantenoptik [Quantum optics in schools. Study in mixed-methods design to evaluate the Erlangen teaching concept on quantum optics]. Logos Verlag Berlin. https://doi.org/10.30819/5123
Bliesmer, K. (2020). Physik der Küste für außerschulische Lernorte: Eine didaktische Rekonstruktion [Physics of the coast for extracurricular learning places: A didactic reconstruction]. Logos Verlag Berlin. https://doi.org/10.30819/5190
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Buhl, M., Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., & Jensen, E. O. (2022). Expanding and orchestrating the problem identification phase of design-based research. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 17(4), 211-221. https://doi.org/10.18261/njdl.17.4.2
Burde, J.-P. (2018). Konzeption und Evaluation eines Unterrichtskonzepts zu einfachen Stromkreisen auf Basis des Elektronengasmodells [Conception and evaluation of a teaching concept for simple circuits based on the electron gas model]. Logos Verlag Berlin. https://doi.org/10.30819/4726
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001009
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon, & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77750-9_2
Confrey, J. (2005). The evolution of design studies as methodology. In K. R. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 135-152). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511816833.010
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x032001005
diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77-103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_4
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671-688. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305016
Duit, R., Treagust, D. F., & Widodo, A. (2013). Teaching science for conceptual change: Theory and practice. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 499-515). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203154472.ch25
Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 105-121. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_4
Firestone, W. A. (1993). Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as applied to qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 22(4), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x022004016
Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C. (2016). Lehr- und Lernprozesse im Anfangsoptikunterricht der Sekundarstufe I [Teaching and learning processes in early secondary school optics lessons] [Cumulative habilitation thesis, Universität Graz].
Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C., & Hopf, M. (2020). Design-based research as a model for systematic curriculum development: The example of a curriculum for introductory optics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16(2), 20152. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020152
Haak, I. (2017). Maßnahmen zur Unterstützung kognitiver und metakognitiver Prozesse in der Studieneingangsphase: Eine Design-based-research-Studie zum universitären Lernzentrum Physiktreff [Measures to support cognitive and metacognitive processes in the initial study phase: A design-based research study on the university learning center physics meeting]. Logos Verlag Berlin.
Heran-Dörr, E. (2006). Entwicklung und Evaluation einer Lehrerfortbildung zur Förderung der physikdidaktischen Kompetenz von Sachunterrichtslehrkräften [Development and evaluation of teacher training to promote the physics didactic competence of subject matter teachers]. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. https://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/00005878/
Hußmann, S., Thiele, J., Hinz, R., Prediger, S., & Ralle, B. (2013). Gegenstandsorientierte Unterrichtsdesigns entwickeln und erforschen: Fachdidaktische Entwicklungsforschung im Dortmunder Modell [Developing and researching subject-oriented teaching designs: Didactic development research in Dortmund model]. In M. Komorek (Ed.), Fachdidaktische forschungen: Der lange Weg zum Unterrichtsdesign: Zur Begründung und Umsetzung fachdidaktischer Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprogramme [Subject didactic research: The long path to teaching design: On the justification and implementation of subject didactic research and development programs] (pp. 25-42). Waxmann.
Jannack, V. (2017). Empirische Studie zum Einsatz von Problembasiertem Lernen (PBL) im interdisziplinären naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht: Kompetenzentwicklung bei Schülerinnen und Schülern und Akzeptantz bei Lehrerinnen und Lehrern [Empirical study on the use of problem-based learning (PBL) in interdisciplinary science teaching: Competence development in students and acceptance in teachers]. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/212115186.pdf
Jung, W. (1992). Probing acceptance, a technique for investigating learning difficulties. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 278-295). IPN.
Kelly, A. (2004). Design research in education: Yes, but is it methodological? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_6
Küpper, A. M. (2021). (Weiter-)entwicklung und Evaluation der Lernumgebung “Mit dem Licht durch unser Sonnensystem und darüber hinaus” zur dualen Förderung von Kompetenzen zum Umgang mit Fachwissen, der sozialen Integration, der Kooperationsfähigkeit und der Selbstständigkeit im inklusiven Physikunterricht der Orientierungsstufe: Ein design-based research-Projekt [(Further) development and evaluation of the learning environment “with light through our solar system and beyond” for the dual promotion of skills in dealing with specialist knowledge, social integration, the ability to cooperate and independence in inclusive physics lessons at the orientation level: A design-based research-project] [Doctoral thesis, University of Cologne].
Laumann, D. (2017). Magnetismus hoch 4: Fachliche Strukturierung und Entwicklung multipler Repräsentationen zum Magnetismus für die Hochschule [Magnetism to the power of 4: Professional structuring and development of multiple representations on magnetism for universities]. Logos Verlag. https://doi.org/10.30819/4571
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Klagenfurt, 2014. Retrieved October 31, 2023, from https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/39517
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2018). Conducting educational design research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315105642
Mikelskis, H., & Mikelskis, H. F. (2010). Physikdidaktik: Praxishandbuch für die Sekundarstufe I und II [Physics didactics: Practical handbook for secondary schools I and II]. Cornelsen Scriptor.
Mikelskis-Seifert, S., Ringelband, U., & Brückmann, M. (2008). Four decades of research in science education–From curriculum development to quality improvement. Waxmann.
Newman, M., & Gough, D. (2020). Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application. In O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. M. Bedenlier, M. Bond, & K. Buntins (Eds.), Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application (pp. 3-22). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_1
Niedderer, H., & van Aufschnaiter, S. (2008). Curriculum development and related research yesterday and today–The example of the IPN curriculum physics. In S. Mikelskis-Seifert, U. Ringelband, & M. Brückmann (Eds.), Four decades of research in science education–From curriculum development to quality improvement (pp. 13-28). Waxmann.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., . . . Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(11), 1451-1458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.06.004
Prediger, S., & Link, M. (2012). Fachdidaktische Entwicklungsforschung–Ein lernprozessfokussierendes Forschungsprogramm mit Verschränkung fachdidaktischer Arbeitsbereiche [Subject-didactic development research–A research program that focuses on the learning process and interlinks subject-didactic work areas]. In H. Bayrhuber, U. Harms, & B. Muszynski (Eds.), Formate fachdidaktischer Forschung: Empirische Projekte–historische Analysen–theoretische Grundlegungen [Formats of didactic research: Empirical projects–historical analyzes–theoretical foundations] (pp. 29-45). Waxmann.
Prediger, S., & Zwetzschler, L. (2013). Topic-specific design research with a focus on learning processes: The case of understanding algebraic equivalence in grade 8. In T. Plomp, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research–Part B: Illustrative cases (pp. 407-424). SLO.
Prediger, S., Gravemeijer, K., & Confrey, J. (2015). Design research with a focus on learning processes: An overview on achievements and challenges. ZDM, 47(6), 877-891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0722-3
Prediger, S., Komorek, M., Fischer, A., Hinz, R., Hußmann, S., Moschner, B., Ralle, B., & Thiele, J. (2013). Der lange Weg zum Unterrichtsdesign [The long road to instructional design]. In M. Komorek, & S. Prediger (Eds.), Der lange Weg zum Unterrichtsdesign. Zur Begründung und Umsetzung fachdidaktischer Forschungs-und Entwicklungsprogramme [The long road to instructional design. On the justification and implementation of didactic research and development programs] (pp. 9-23). Waxmann.
Reinmann, G. (2005). Innovation ohne Forschung? Ein Plädoyer für den design-based research-Ansatz in der Lehr-lernforschung [Innovation without research? A plea for the design-based research approach in teaching-learning research]. Zeitschrift für Lernforschung [Journal for Learning Research], 33(1), 52-69. https://doi.org/10.15460/eder.6.2.1909
Reinmann, G. (2022). Was macht design-based research zu Forschung? Die Debatte um Standards und die vernachlässigte Rolle des Designs [What makes design-based research? The debate about standards and the neglected role of design]. Educational Design Research, 6(2), 48.
Roggema, R. (2016). Research by design: Proposition for a methodological approach. Urban Science, 1(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci1010002
Roskam, A. (2020). Kognitive Verarbeitungsprozesse in der Interaktion mit Strömungsexperimenten in einer Ausstellung [Cognitive processing processes in interaction with flow experiments in an exhibition]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30756-1
Sajons, C. M. (2020). Kognitive und motivationale Dynamik in Schülerlaboren. Kontextualisierung, Problemorientierung und Autonomieunterstützung der didaktischen Struktur analysieren und weiterentwickeln [Cognitive and motivational dynamics in student laboratories. Analyze and further develop the contextualization, problem orientation and autonomy support of the didactic structure]. Logos Verlag Berlin. https://doi.org/10.30819/5155
Schecker, H., & Hopf, M. (2021). Entwicklung von Unterrichtskonzeptionen [Development of teaching concepts]. In T. Wilhelm, H. Schecker, & M. Hopf (Eds.), Unterrichtskonzeptionen für den Physikunterricht: Ein Lehrbuch für Studium, Referendariat und Unterrichtspraxis [Teaching concepts for physics lessons: A textbook for studies, traineeships and teaching practice] (pp. 1-16). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-63053-2_1
Shah, J. K., Ensminger, D. C., & Thier, K. (2015). The time for design-based research is right and right now. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 27(2), 152-171.
Skorsetz, N. (2019). Empathisierer und Systematisierer im Vorschulalter: Eine Fragebogen- und Videostudie zur Motivation, sich mit Naturphänomenen zu beschäftigen [Empathizers and systematizers in preschool age: A questionnaire and video study on the motivation to deal with natural phenomena]. Logos Verlag Berlin. https://doi.org/10.30819/4825
Smith, G. J., Schmidt, M. M., Edelen-Smith, P. J., & Cook, B. G. (2013). Pasteur’s quadrant as the bridge linking rigor with relevance. Exceptional Children, 79(3), 147-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900202
Smoor, S. (2018). Lehr-lern-labore als Instrument der Professionalisierung im Lehramtsstudium Physik [Teaching-learning laboratories as an instrument of professionalization in physics teacher training courses]. https://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/id/eprint/3962
Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institution Press.
Stokes, D. E. (2011). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institution Press.
Tobias, V. (2010). Newton’sche Mechanik im Anfangsunterricht: Die Wirksamkeit einer Einführung über die zweidimensionale Dynamik auf das Lehren und Lernen [Newtonian mechanics in early teaching: The effectiveness of an introduction to two-dimensional dynamics on teaching and learning]. Logos Berlin.
van den Akker, J. J. H., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (2006). Educational design research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203088364
Wiener, G. (2017). Elementary particle physics in early physics education. CERN. https://indico.cern.ch/event/657410/contributions/2904368/attachments/1614319/2565184/JW_ElementaryParticles.pdf
Wilhelm, T., & Hopf, M. (2014). Design-Forschung [Design research]. In D. Krüger, I. Parchmann, & H. Schecker (Eds.), Methoden in der naturwissenschaftsdidaktischen Forschung [Methods in scientific didactic research] (pp. 31–42). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37827-0_3
Wilhelm, T., Tobias, V., Waltner, C., Hopf, M., & Wiesner, H. (2012). Design-based research am Beispiel der zweidimensional-dynamischen Mechanik [Design-based research using the example of two-dimensional dynamic mechanics]. Retrieved October 31, 2023, from https://www.thomas-wilhelm.net/veroeffentlichung/Plenarvortrag.pdf

How to cite this article

APA

Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C., Obczovsky, M., & Kislinger, P. (2024). Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(1), em2378. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928

Vancouver

Haagen-Schützenhöfer C, Obczovsky M, Kislinger P. Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2024;20(1):em2378. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928

AMA

Haagen-Schützenhöfer C, Obczovsky M, Kislinger P. Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2024;20(1), em2378. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928

Chicago

Haagen-Schützenhöfer, Claudia, Markus Obczovsky, and Paula Kislinger. "Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2024 20 no. 1 (2024): em2378. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928

Harvard

Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C., Obczovsky, M., and Kislinger, P. (2024). Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(1), em2378. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928

MLA

Haagen-Schützenhöfer, Claudia et al. "Design-based research–Tension between practical relevance and knowledge generation–What can we learn from projects?". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 20, no. 1, 2024, em2378. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13928