Design-based research: A methodological toolkit for engineering change

The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 151-170

  Barab, Sasha ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84954163158     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139519526.011     Document Type: Chapter

References (48)

1. Abbott, A. (1992). What do cases do? Some notes on activity in sociological analysis. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring thefoundation of social inquiry (pp. 53-82). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
2. Barab, S. A., MaKinster, J., & Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing system dualities: Characterizing a web-supported teacher professional development community. Information Society, 19(3), 237-256.
3. Barab, S. A., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. TheJournalof the LearningSciences, 13(1), 1-14.
4. Barab, S. A., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Squire, K., & Newell, M. (2004). Critical design ethnography: Designing for change. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 35(2), 254-268.
5. Barrett, C. B. (2006). Food Aid’s Intended and Unintended Consequences. FAO. Agriculture and Economics Division. ESA Working paper № 06-05.
6. Beane, J. (1996). On the shoulders of giants! The case for curriculum integration. The Middle School Journal, 28, 6-11.
7. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
8. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2 (2), 141-178.
9. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
10. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1972). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.
11. Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator’s dilemma: The revolutionary book that will change the way you do business. New York: Harper Business.
12. Christensen, C. M., Baumann, H., Ruggles, R., & Sadtler, T. M. (2006). Disruptive innovation for social change. Harvard Business Review, 84 (12), 1-11.
13. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.
14. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). New York: Springer-Verlag.
15. Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the LearningSciences, 13(1), 15-42.
16. Connell, J. P. & Klem, A., M. (2000). You can’t get there from here: Using a theory of change approach to plan urban education reform. Journal of Educational Psychological Consulting, 11, 93-110.
17. Confrey, J. (2006). The evolution of design studies as a methodology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 135-151). New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Design-based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 5-8.
19. Dewey, J. (1915). Theschoolandsociety. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic, the theory of inquiry. New York: H. Holt and Co.
21. Engeström, Y. (2011). From design experiments to formative interventions. Theory & Psychology, 21(5), 598-628.
22. Gee, J. (2013). The anti-education era: Creating smarter students through digital learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
23. Geertz, C. (1976). From the native’s point of view: On the nature of anthropological understanding. In K. Basso & H. A. Selby (Eds.), Meaning in anthropology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
24. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). A discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
25. Gomez, L. (2005, April). The Learning Sciences: A consequential form of social science. Presented at the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, CA.
26. Kirshner, D., & Whitson, J. A. (Eds.). (1997). Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Lagemann, E. C., & Shulman, L. S. (1999). Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
28. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Lesh, R. A., & Kelly, A. E. (2000). Multitiered teaching experiments. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 197-230). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31. Levin, J. R., & O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). What to do about educational research’s credibility gaps? Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology, 5, 177-229.
32. MaKinster, J. G., Barab, S. A., Harwood, W., & Andersen, H. O. (2006). The effect of social context on the reflective practice of pre-service science teachers: Incorporating a web-supported community of teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 543-579.
33. Maxwell, J. (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. EducationalResearcher, 33(2), 3-11.
34. McKinsey & Co. (2004). Using Logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and action: Logic model development guide. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
35. McLaren, P. L. (1988). On ideology and education: Critical pedagogy and the politics of empowerment. Social Text, 19/20, pp. 153-185.
36. Messick, S. (1992). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13-23.
37. Mink, L. O., Fay, B., Golob, E. O., & Vann, R. T. (1987). Historical understanding. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
38. Penuel, W., Fishman, B., Cheng, B. H., & Sabelli, N. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40, 331-337.
39. Reeves, T. C., & Hedberg, J. G. (2003). Interactive learning systems evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
40. Salomon, G. (Ed.) (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
41. Shavelson, R. J., Phillips, D. C., Towne, L., & Feuer, M. J. (2003). On the science of education design studies. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 25-28.
42. Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
43. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
44. Stetsenko, A. (2005). Activity as object-related: Resolving the dichotomy of individual and collective planes of activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 70-88.
45. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
46. Torres, C. A. (1998). Education, power, and personal biography: Dialogues with critical educators. New York: Routledge.
47. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
48. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.