Research Strategies and Methods for Different Phases of DBIR
(Note - many of these resources are on publisher’s web sites, and may require an account for access. Please check with your research library.)
Problem Identification and Negotiation
Papers
- Bang, M., Medin, D., Washinawatok, K., & Chapman, S. (2010). Innovations in culturally based science education through partnerships and community. In M. S. Khine & M. I. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning: Cognition, computers, and collaboration in education (pp. 569-592). New York, NY: Springer.
- Barab, S. A., Thomas, M. K., Dodge, T., Squire, K., & Newell, M. (2004). Critical design ethnography: Designing for change. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 35(2), 254-268.
- Beebe, J. (1995). Basic concepts and techniques of rapid appraisal. Human Organization, 54 (1), 42-51.
- Friedman, B., Kahn, P., & Borning, A. (2003). Value sensitive design: Theory and methods. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
- Friedman, V. J., Rothman, J., & Withers, B. (2006). The power of why: Engaging the goal paradox in program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 201-218.
- Millen, D. R. (2000). Rapid ethnography: Time deepening strategies for HCI field research. In Proceedings of the conference on designing interactive systems: Processes, practices, methods, and techniques (pp. 280-286). New York, NY: ACM Press.
- Penuel, W. R., Tatar, D., & Roschelle, J. (2004). The role of research on contexts of teaching practice in informing the design of handheld learning technologies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(4), 331-348.
- Simonsen, J. & Kensing, F. (1997). Using ethnography in contextual design. Communications of the ACM, 40(7), 82-88.
- Tatar, D. (2007). The design tensions framework. Human-Computer Interaction, 22(4), 413-451.
Centers, Research Groups, and Resources
Co-Design
Papers on Design Practices
- Fishman, B. J., & Krajcik, J. (2003). What does it mean to create sustainable science curriculum innovations? A commentary. Science Education, 87(4), 564-573.
- Friedman, B., & Hendry, D. G. (2012). The envisioning cards: A toolkit for catalyzing humanistic and technical imaginations. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1145-1148).
- Gutiérrez, K. D., & Vossoughi, S. (2010). Lifting off the ground to return anew: Mediated praxis, transformative learning, and social design experiments. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 100-117.
- Grudin, J., & Pruitt, J. (2002). Personas, participatory design, and product development: An infrastructure for engagement. In Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference (pp. 144-161). Palo Alto, CA: IEEE.
- Muller, M.J., Wildman, D.M., & White, E. (1993). Taxonomy of participatory design practices: A brief practitioner's guide. Communications of the ACM, 36(4), 26-28.
- Penuel, W. R., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). The WHIRL co-design process: Participant experiences. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 51-74.
- Yoo, D., Huldtgren, A. Woekfer, J. P., Hendry, D. G., & Friedman, B. (2013). A value sensitive action-reflection model: Evolving a co-design space with stakeholder and designer prompts. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 419-428). New York, NY: ACM.
Papers on Research Methods
- Falessi, D., Cantone, G., & Kruchten, P. (2008). Value-based design decision rationale documentation: Principles and empirical feasibility study. In Proceedings of Seventh Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (pp. 189-198). Los Alamitos, CA: ACM.
- Gajda, R. (2004). Using collaboration theory to evaluate strategic alliances. American Journal of Evaluation, 25(1), 65-77.
- O'Connor, Kevin, Hanny, Courtney, & Lewis, Cameron. (2011). Doing "business as usual": Dynamics of voice in community organizing talk. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 42(2), 154-171.
- Regli, W. C., Hu, X., Atwood, M., & Sun, W. (2000). A survey of design rationale systems: Approaches, representation, capture and retrieval. Engineering with Computers, 16(3-4), 209-235.
Centers, Research Groups, and Resources
- Change Laboratory Method
- Envisioning Cards
- d.school: Institute of Design at Stanford
- Method Cards for IDEO
- Participatory Design Conference
- Value-Sensitive Design
Early Implementation
Papers
- Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643-658.
- Harris, C. J., Phillips, R. S., & Penuel, W. R. (2012). Examining teachers’ instructional moves aimed at developing students' ideas and questions in learner-centered science classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 768-788.
- Matsumura, L. C., Garnier, H. E., Pascal, J., & Valdes, R. (2002). Measuring instructional quality in accountability systems: Classroom assignments and student achievement. Educational Assessment, 8(3), 207-229.
- Rowan, B., & Correnti, R. (2009). Studying reading instruction with teacher logs: Lessons from the study of instructional improvement. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 120-131.
Centers, Research Groups, and Resources
Still to come
Efficacy Studies
Research Papers
- Flay, B. R., Biglan, A., Boruch, R. F., Castro, F. G., Gottfredson, D., Kellam, Sheppard, . . . Ji, P. (2005). Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness, and dissemination. Prevention Science, 6(3), 151-175.
- Tatar, D., Roschelle, J., Knudsen, J., Shechtman, N., Kaput, J., & Hopkins, B. (2008). Scaling up innovative technology-based mathematics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(2), 248-286.
- Roschelle, J., Knudsen, J., & Hegedus, S. J. (2010). From new technological infrastructures to curricular activity systems: Advanced designs for teaching and learning. In M. J. Jacobson & P. Reimann (Eds.), Designs for learning environments of the future: International perspectives from the learning sciences (pp. 233-262). New York: Springer.
Centers, Research Groups, and Resources
Design and Analysis of Group Randomized Trials
Type II Translational and Improvement Research
Papers
- Coburn, C. E., Russell, J. L., Kaufman, J. H., Stein, M. K. (2012). Supporting sustainability: Teachers’ advice networks and ambitious instructional reform. American Journal of Education, 119 (1), 137-182.
- Fishman, B. J., Penuel, W. R., Hegedus, S., & Roschelle, J. (2011). What happens when the research ends? Factors related to the sustainability of a technology-infused mathematics curriculum. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 30(4), 329-353.
- Penuel, W. R., Gallagher, L. P., & Moorthy, S. (2011). Preparing teachers to design sequences of instruction in Earth science: A comparison of three professional development programs. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 996-1025.
- Scheirer, M. A. (2005). Is sustainability possible? A review and commentary on empirical studies of program sustainability. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(3), 320-347.
- Palinkas, L. A., & Soydan, H. (2012). Translation and implementation of evidence-based practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Centers, Research Groups, and Resources