EDISYS: A Tool for Enhancing Design Inquiry

Abstract

At the 2012 AECT Research Symposium for which chapters in this volume were drafted, I began my presentation with a poll regarding current circumstances in education. I asked participants to raise their hands if they felt the following statements were true: (1) There has been adequate innovation in education to meet current and future challenges. No hands were raised. (2) Educational innovation is guided sufficiently by research. No hands were raised. (3) Design has great potential for contributing to educational innovation. All hands were raised.

Exploring the Challenges and Potentials of Working Design-Based in Educational Research

“…Similar concerns regarding the shortcomings or potential for the growth of DBR as a research approach have previously been raised (Dede, 2004;Dede, 2005;Rowland. 2007; Easterday, Lewis & Gerber, 2017). Especially concerning the latter hypothesis, Rowland (2007) points to the apparently missing competencies of the designer in DBR projects. In his view, the DBR literature either does not recognise the importance of design competence or implies that it is a natural possession of researchers.…”

“…In contrast to the claim in the historical overview put forward by Rowland (2007) that researchers of DBR consider design skills as an inherent capability, researcher B lists a series of pivotal design actions that are not incorporated in his own practice. Therefore, he is reluctant to claim that he has designed an intervention, but would instead use a lesser design-heavy term such a 'pedagogical intervention research'.…”

“…Along with the growing popularity, reviews exclusively analysing DBR literature began to pop up at the beginning of the past decade (Rowland, 2007;Anderson & Shattuck, 2012;Zheng, 2015). Anderson and Shattuck (2012) aimed at assessing DBR and the trends within this particular field during the period 2002-2012.…”

“…Zheng (2015) reviewed research papers related to DBR from 2004 to 2013. The review carried out by Rowland (2007) has a more philosophical approach, bringing together strands from DBR and other sources. In relation to this study, it excels in focusing sharply on the relation between design and research in DBR.…”

“…A careful conclusion on the back of this might suggest that the initial strive for more grounded theory and empirically based improvements of practice are pursued, but that the design efforts set in motion to achieve this goal to some degree remain unaccounted for. Rowland (2007) raises quite a few salient issues concerning the nature of DBR. One point in particular concerning the partnership between practitioners and researchers in DBR studies is worth highlighting when pursuing what might constitute design-based activities in DBR.…”