DBR (Design-Based Research) in mobile learning-Mlearn2013 Doha A_Palalas C_Glahn

495 views
380 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
495
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

DBR (Design-Based Research) in mobile learning-Mlearn2013 Doha A_Palalas C_Glahn

  1. 1. Mixed Martial Arts for Researchers Design-based Research (DBR) Christian Glahn & Agnieszka (Aga) Palalas mLearn 2013
  2. 2. Be prepared for the truth and nothing but the truth!
  3. 3. Chapter 1 The Nature of the Art
  4. 4. “Design experiments” > design-based research = design research = DBR = EDR = researching innovative educational designs in their naturalistic settings interventional research >practice>research (Brown, 1992; Collins, 1992) 4
  5. 5. A systematic but flexible methodology aimed to improve educational practices through iterative analysis, design, development, and implementation, based on collaboration among researchers and practitioners in real-world settings, and leading to contextually-sensitive design principles and theories. (Wang & Hannafin, 1999, p. 7) 5
  6. 6. DBR is a qualitative multimethod approach for exploring uncharted domains while designing effective solutions for these domains.
  7. 7. Qualitative means that the outcomes of DBR will not be able to test hypotheses DBR is not a qualitative method!
  8. 8. Exploring means that, both, practice and theory do not suggest anything meaningful. DBR identifies working hypotheses
  9. 9. Uncharted means that theory (aka "prior research") does not predict the potential outcome of a project. DBR lets theory emerge by isolating research problems.
  10. 10. Designing means that the project outcomes include at least one working solution supports your claims DBR does not simply transfer a solution from one domain into another
  11. 11. Chapter 2 When it is Time to Fight and When to Run
  12. 12. DBR is a flexible and powerful approach unless you are unprepared or unaware
  13. 13. Informed Exploration Enactment Evaluation: Local Impact Evaluation: Broader Impact
  14. 14. Rule No. 1 Find out what you are doing (next)
  15. 15. Run if you want to •  Want to build a mobile app •  Use a mobile app in your practice
  16. 16. Fight if •  You have identified a problem rooted in practice •  You can't solve it by combining and deducing mobile solutions and theories
  17. 17. Rule No. 2 Find out what others did
  18. 18. Run if •  There are similar (commercial) tools for the problem •  There is a lot of literature
  19. 19. Fight if •  Tools need more than just a redesign •  The literature does not make sense for your problem
  20. 20. Rule No. 3 Make sure that DBR is indeed appropriate
  21. 21. Run if •  Your project can be structured into logical steps •  There are (working) hypotheses that can get tested
  22. 22. Fight if •  A practical solution is required •  The literature does not provide sufficient information
  23. 23. Chapter 3 There is always more than One Way
  24. 24. (Van den Akker, 1999, p. 9) 24
  25. 25. What are the characteristics of an <intervention X> for the purpose/ outcome Y (Y1, Y2, …, Yn) in context Z? (Plomp, 2009, p. 19) 2
  26. 26. Multi-method means that all means necessary are allowed. It does not mean that it will be any easier
  27. 27. Rule No. 1 Always start from a solid research questions to guide the design process
  28. 28. Rule No. 2 Always answer your questions
  29. 29. Rule No. 3 Identify methods you can use
  30. 30. Rule No. 4 Select a method that helps isolating a working hypothesis
  31. 31. Rule No. 5 Document the identified working hypotheses for further research by others
  32. 32. DBR •  Practice ï ðresearch •  Drawing on engineering and technological research •  Focusing on design, construction, implementation and adoption of learning solutions •  Process focused and iterative •  Interventionist: applied solutions to real educational problems •  Contextual: real people, context, and cultural background, in-situ investigation/evaluation
  33. 33. DBR •  Applied •  Participatory •  Collaborative •  Utility oriented •  Theory driven •  Unifying theory and practice •  Evolving •  Systemic
  34. 34. DBR •  Rich feedback •  Responsive •  Flexible •  Agile BUT o  Multileveled and multifaceted o  Complex o  Messy
  35. 35. Participatory 1/2 •  Co-developing theory and design in-situ •  Testing in real-world learning situations involving all actors/end users •  With people for people •  End-users as partners (active co-creators) •  Combination of motivation and efforts •  Students as researchers •  Diverse evaluation perspectives “We are moving away from a passive information age towards an active participation age” (Farmer & Gruba, 2006, p. 149)
  36. 36. Participatory 2/2 •  Diverse expertise of practitioners & researchers •  Collaboration & support •  Network of colleagues o  Flexible dialogue from whenever o  Online platform and tools (e.g., Wiggio, Collaborate) •  Dynamic feedback from actors o  At milestones and agile
  37. 37. Benefits of DBR (m-learning) Context is king •  Evolution of theory •  Evolution of practice
  38. 38. More Benefits of DBR (m-learning) •  Build foundational understanding of m-learning trends and needs •  Gain insight into learner m-learning behaviours •  Generate inspiration and ideas for appropriate design •  Define what functionality is most critical •  Improve the usability of infrastructure •  Inform future design solutions •  Provide professional development •  Raise awareness and understanding of m-learning
  39. 39. (Palalas & Hoven, 2013) (Palalas & Hoven, 2013)
  40. 40. §  The scope of DBR •  •  •  •  •  •  §  The role of the researcher •  •  •  §  complexity of the system – breadth coordination of research and design activities no objective measure of learning amount of data consensus-reaching and interaction among actors intensity multifaceted conflicting roles threats to validity Transferability of findings 4
  41. 41. DBR: Recommendations •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  Rigorous data collection/analysis procedures Regular communication Findings documentation and reporting Sound conceptual framework Clear deadlines and deliverables “Flexible” (academic schedules) Solid project management a Collaborative DBR research team “If a researcher is intimately involved in the conceptualization, design, development, implementation, and researching of a pedagogical approach, then ensuring that researchers can make credible and trustworthy assertions is a challenge” (Barab & Squire, 2004, p.10)
  42. 42. Plan Well •  Project context •  Objectives •  Audience •  Location •  Methods •  Schedule •  Outcomes
  43. 43. aga@epluslearning.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/apalalas Presentations: http://www.slideshare.net/agaiza Publications: http://athabascau.academia.edu/apalalas 4
  44. 44. Bannan, B. (2009). The Integrative Learning Design Framework: An illustrated example from the domain of instructional technology. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 53-73). SLO: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development. Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-Based Research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1-14. doi:10.1207/ s15327809jls1301_1 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. Collins, A. (1992). Towards a design science of education. In E. Scanlon and T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15–22). Berlin: Springer. Dede, C. (2004). If Design-Based Research is the answer, what is the question? The Journal of the Instructional Sciences, 13 (1). Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-Based Research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. Retrieved from http://www.designbasedresearch.org/reppubs/DBRC2003.pdf Farmer, R., & Gruba, P. (2006). Towards model-driven end-user development in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(2 & 3), 149-191. Palalas, A. (2012). Design guidelines for a Mobile-Enabled Language Learning system supporting the development of ESP listening skills (Doctoral dissertation, Athabasca University). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10791/17 Palalas, A., & Hoven, D. (2013). Implications of using DBR to investigate the iterative design of a mobile-enabled language learning system. CALICO Plomp, T. (2009). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 9-36). SLO: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development. Reeves, T. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research: The design, development and evaluation of programs, processes and products (pp. 52-66). New York: Routledge. Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and Methods of Development Research. In J. van den Akker, R.M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design approaches and tools in education and training (pp. 1-14). Boston: Kluwer Academic. Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23.

×