Theory genesis in the design-based research process – a subject didactic view on theory application, verification and development by using design principles

Der Artikel zielt darauf ab, die Entwicklung von Theorien zu untersuchen, die im Rahmen von Design-based Forschungsprozessen (DBR) in konkrete Designprinzipien umgesetzt werden. Dafür werden aus drei abgeschlossenen Doktorarbeiten der Autor*innen Theorien und Theorieelemente ausgewählt, die sich in Bezug auf Reichweite, Tiefe und empirische Sättigung unterscheiden. Es werden verschiedene Wege der Theoriengenese im Forschungsprozess aufgezeigt (in verschiedenen Phasen des DBR-Zykluses) und es wird ihr Beitrag als theoretischer Output des Forschungsprozesses für den schulischen Kontext und die fachdidaktische Community diskutiert. Die Ergebnisse dieser Analysen münden in der Einführung eines Modells für die Theorieentwicklung in DBR-Projekten.This article intends to provide answers to the overarching question of how theories, which are transferred into concrete design principles, develop in a DBR process. Theories from three completed DBR projects in geography didactics will be examined regarding their genesis in the research process and their function in individual phases of a DBR cycle. The chosen theories differ in scope, depth and empirical saturation. The aim is to analyse the role that these theories take in the DBR research process and to discuss them in terms of their contribution to the output of DBR projects and a possible generalisability of the findings. Finally, the results of the analyses are synthesised into a model for theory genesis in DBR projects

Research Slices: Core Processes for Effective Iteration in EDeR

Educational Design Research (EDeR) methodologists argue that iteration is a core component of EDeR. Iteration is currently defined as a process of gathering more information through actions, such as testing, and using that information to improve the design. In this paper, we seek to tighten the definition of iteration to help EDeR teams conduct iterations more effectively. We argue that EDeR teams should organize their research in slices that deliver small but real value to end users while informing the design research. EDeR should pick slices that are: (a) minimal and focused, (b) deployed in a real context, (c) valuable to the end users, and (d) informative to the research. Slicing helps EDeR teams increase ecological validity when they test because it allows testing which is within real-world educational contexts or with the stakeholders who will use and be impacted by the design. Increasing ecological validity of testing is particularly important because EDeR projects tackle highly complex real-world problems with many unknown elements and relational complexity—this means it is challenging to predict what designs will have the desired impact without real-world deployment. Effective iteration through organizing research in slices helps EDeR teams to better support stakeholder goals, develop more impactful theory, and have greater and earlier impact upon education

Is this systematic enough? Systematicity and openness in the implementation phase of DBR

Within Design Based Research (DBR), designing and implementing an intervention in order to improve an educational practice become part of the research process. This represents a unique feature of DBR. Though the innovative nature of DBR raises questions that have not yet been answered. This paper focuses on the extent to which systematicity, as principle of scientific research, and openness, as essential prerequisite of teaching practice, can be both fulfilled within the implementation phase of DBR studies. By presenting an investigation in the field of German as a foreign language I will offer an example of the challenges that researchers face regarding the tension between systematicity and openness. Besides the discussion about DBR standards, the aim of this paper is to delineate concrete requirements for the further development of this research approach. Guidelines helping researchers to use DBR appropriately represent an important step which could clarify still controversial aspects of DBR and also lead to an increase in its use. In this paper, I suggest that concepts discussed within the implementation research, like for instance Fidelity of Implementation, can help to develop such guidelines

Knowledge by Design in Education: Epistemological questions revisited

The editorial introduces the special issue Knowledge by Design in Education: Key challenges and experiences from research practice, posing key questions, offering an insight into ongoing discussions, and presenting an overview of the included articles

Design research on an online summer school in mathematics education: An insight into philosophical commitments

Design research in education pursues two goals simultaneously: the development of a design and a local theory that clarifies how the design can achieve the intended effects and under what conditions. The results are obtained in an iterative cyclical process including both the implementation of the design and the research on its implementation. Each cycle contains a prospective phase, in which the design is determined, and a reflective phase, in which the implementation of the design is examined. The nested connection of theory and design development leads to a reciprocal relationship between the two final products. This article introduces an example of design research from mathematics education, in which an online summer school for doctoral students was to be framed in response to the sudden lockdown situation at the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. At short notice, the original summer school was moved into the virtual space of a digital conference system resulting in new framework conditions; previous design principles were adapted and a rhythmical organization of space and time was theorized and implemented. Rhythm analyses show that design decisions to realize ontological, epistemological and axiological commitments intertwined and thus fostered students’ interactive learning processes. Consequently, the suggestion is made to merge the three commitments into a three-dimensional framework concept of ethico-onto-epistemological commitments. Such a framework concept would have the function of reconciling ethical, ontological and epistemological dimensions in design research in the pursuit of robust teaching-learning processes and incorporating the ethical responsibilities of design researchers conceptually for both design and local theory

How to align objectives of practitioners and scientists in DBR projects?

The interaction of scientists and practitioners is an essential component within Design-Based Research. Their close collaboration is assumed to hold the potential to increase the quality of both the innovative solution of educational problems and the generation of scientific knowledge. At the same time, there are some challenges associated with realizing this potential. This paper explores the opportunities and challenges of collaboration between researchers and practitioners in DBR projects. After a broader description of the problem situation, an in-depth discussion of the interests, perspectives, and frame conditions of the project actors from science and practice takes place using the example of the determination of project goals. The paper ends with the recommendation of design principles for the cooperation of scientists and practitioners

Conjecturing is not all: Theorizing in design research by refining and connecting categorial, descriptive, and explanatory theory element

Although generating empirically grounded theoretical contributions has been an essential aim of design research from the beginning, the underlying methodology has been described as in need for further elaboration with respect to rigor. Existing methodological elaborations on theorizing in design research often focus on argumentative grammar of strengthening prescriptive conjectures. Beyond these, this paper argues that prescriptive theory elements require generating categorial, descriptive, and explanatory theory elements before the suggested argumentative grammars can be treated. With an example from a design research study for professional development, the immense work of elaborating categorial and explanatory theory elements is illustrated that is needed before concise prescriptive conjectures can be made and tested

Knowledge generation between design, data and theory: Argumentation in design-based research

Design-based research (DBR) is a diversified research genre: The combination of two worlds – that of research and that of education – and the different backgrounds and intentions of those involved entail different emphases, epistemological ideas, ideas on valuable outcomes and normative claims. This becomes visible in very different kinds of reasoning: No uniform structure of argumentation can be discerned, and so far, a differentiation into clear DBR types has not been convincingly achieved. This is a challenge for the orientation of DBR novices, the quality review of DBR studies, and the legitimation of DBR in the field of educational research. This article provides an empirical contribution to the discussion on argumentation: In a literature review, DBR studies are examined regarding their outcomes, the rationales authors use to justify their outcomes and indications for specific challenges in DBR reasoning. The analysis confirms for the sample that preliminary, prescriptive theory is most common alongside diverse practical outcomes. Authors often justify them with emphasis on variation, iteration, cooperation, and data triangulation. Different (standard) orientations, multi-level reasoning, and sub-studies present challenges for authors and readers, going back to the complexity of DBR projects. To justify their results in a comprehensible way, authors are confronted with the task to actively select an argumentation strategy

Design-Based Research (DBR) als Research Through Design (RTD): Qualitätsstandards für RTD in der Hochschuldidaktik

Der Fokus des Beitrags liegt auf der Deutung von Design-Based Research (DBR) als eigenes Forschungsparadigma. Ich möchte zeigen, inwiefern DBR als Research Through Design (RTD) paradigmatischen Charakter hat und sich in dieser Form besonders für hochschuldidaktische Forschung eignet. Darauf aufbauend werde ich Qualitätsstandards vorschlagen, die spezifisch für DBR als RTD sind[1]. In meinem Vorgehen hin zu diesem Ziel spielt die designwissenschaftliche Forschung und deren Auseinandersetzung mit verschiedenen Formen des Forschens einschließlich Fragen der Qualität eine zentrale Rolle. Auch in den Designwissenschaften existieren verschiedene Vorstellungen davon, welche Rolle Design in der Forschung spielen kann; RTD ist hier ebenfalls nur eine davon. In Verbindung mit der Auffassung, dass das Lehren (an Hochschulen) als Design bzw. Entwurfshandeln verstanden werden kann, hat die designwissenschaftliche Debatte um RTD, so die diesem Text zugrundeliegende These, nicht nur analoge, sondern auch direkte Relevanz für DBR in der Hochschuldidaktik. Mit dem resultierenden Vorschlag spezifizierter Qualitätsstandards für DBR als RTD in der Hochschuldidaktik möchte ich dazu beitragen, DBR in der Hochschulbildungsforschung zu etablieren, Forschenden in diesem Bereich eine Orientierung zu geben und DBR für den Kontext Hochschullehre besser lehrbar zu machen.Der Beitrag setzt sich mit Design-Based Research (DBR) als Research Through Design (RTD) auseinander. Unter Rückgriff auf designwissenschaftliche Literatur wird herausgearbeitet, inwiefern dies eine spezielle Deutung von DBR ist, die sich nicht ausschließlich, aber besonders für hochschuldidaktische Forschung eignet. Vorgeschlagen wird, DBR als RDT nicht als Variante der empirischen Bildungsforschung zu verstehen, sondern einen eigenen paradigmatischen Status zu geben. Folgt man diesem Vorschlag, ist es sinnvoll, eigene Qualitätsstandards für RTD zu bestimmen, was der Text für den Kontext der Hochschuldidaktik versucht. Der Beitrag führt die Arbeiten aus dem Special Issue von EDeR „Standards für DBR!? Eine Diskussion“ fort und postuliert fünf konsensfähige Kriterien für Wissenschaftlichkeit, die auf drei Dimensionen von RTD angewandt werden: die praktisch-verändernde, die empirisch-untersuchende und die theoretisch-ordnende Dimension. Design-Based Research (DBR) as Research Through Design (RTD) is the subject of this article. With reference to the literature on design research, it is argued that this is a special interpretation of DBR. It is not exclusively, but particularly, appropriate for research in higher education. It is suggested that DBR as RDT should not be understood as a variant of empirical educational research but should be recognized as a paradigm in its own right. Following this suggestion, it makes sense to establish separate quality standards for DBR. The text attempts to do this for the context of higher education. The article continues the work of the special issue of EDeR "Standards for DBR! A Discussion" and postulates five consensual criteria for research, applied to three dimensions of RTD: the practical-changing, the empirical-examining, and the theoretical-ordering dimension

Play Types, Design Principles and Participation in Play: How Is it Possible to Design for Participation in Play?

Many school-age children have difficulties participating in play and need support to find playmates, take the initiative and structure play. If children do not master these competencies, they risk ending up in a spiral in which they are not given the opportunity to practice playing and develop play competencies. The purpose of the present study is to investigate how design principles in three different play types can be formulated in order to support pedagogues (educators) in developing new play activities with significant potential for participation. In addition, how these design principles cover more general and generic principles are scrutinized. This paper is based on a three-year design-based research study in two Danish schools investigating three play types: creative play, role play and movement play. It also presents four design principles on each play type which were found to support the development of new play activities with inclusive potential. As a theoretical contribution, the design principles of each play type are meta-analysed with the goal of helping pedagogues generate play activities with different participation possibilities. The generic design principles are the essence of play, play practices, play materials and play opportunities for participation