Design experiments

Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 193-205

  Schoenfeld, Alan H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85084540606     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203874769-16     Document Type: Chapter

References (48)

1. Bereiter, C.,& Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361-392). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
2. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141-178.
3. Brown, A. L., Campione, J., Webber, L., & McGilley, K. (1992). Interactive learning environments–Anew look at learning and assessment. In B. R. Gifford & M. C. O’Connor (Eds.), Future assessment: Changing views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 121-211). Boston: Academic.
4. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289-325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Bush, V. (1990). Science, the endless frontier: A report to the President on a program for postwar scientific research. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
6. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
7. Cobb, R (2000). Conducting teaching experiments in collaboration with teachers. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds) Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 307-333). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
8. Cobb, P. (2001). Supporting the improvement of learning and teaching in social and institutional context. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 455-478). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaurn Associates, Inc.
9. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003) Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher; 52(1), 9-13.
10. Cobb, P., & Steffe, L. P. (1983). The constructivist researcher as teacher and model builder. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 83-94.
11. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project. Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
12. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). Berlin: Springer.
13. Collins, A. (1999). The changing infrastructure of educational research. In E. Lagemann & L. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 289-298). New York: Jossey-Bass.
14. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
15. Confrey, J., & Lachance, A. (2000). Transformative reading experiments through conjecture-driven research design. In A. E. Kelly & A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 231-266). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
16. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher; 32(1), 5-8.
17. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Goldman, S., Moschkovich, J., & the Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Team. (1995). Environments forcollaborating mathematically: The Middle-School Mathematics Through Applications Project. In J. L. Scnase & E. L. Cunnius (Eds.), CSCL '95: The first international conference on computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 1-4). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
19. Gravemeijer, K. (1994). Educational development and developmental research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 443–471.
20. Greeno, J. G. (2003). Situative research relevant to standards for school mathematics. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (pp. 304-332). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
21. Greeno, J., & the Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Project Group. (1997). Theories and practices of thinking and learning to think. American Journal of Education, 106, 85-126
22. Greeno, J., & the Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Project Group. (1998). The situativ-ity of cognition, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5-26.
23. Greeno, J. G., Pearson, P. D., & Schoenfeld, A. H. (1997). Implications for the National Assessment of Educational Progress of Research on Learning and Cognition. In Assessment in transition: Monitoring the nation’s educational progress, background studies (pp. 152-215). Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education.
24. High Performance Learning Communities Project. (2003). Retrieved August 9, 2003, from http:llwww.lrdc.pitt.edu/hplc/
25. Kelly, A. E., & Lesh, R. A. (2000). Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
26. LeCompte, M., Millroy, W., & Preissle, J. (Eds.). (1992). Handbook of qualitative research in education. New York: Academic.
27. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). Modeling in mathematics and science. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Educational design and cognitive science (pp. 101-159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
28. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29. National Academy of Education. (1999). Recommendations regarding research priorities: An advisory report to the National Education Research Policy and Priorities Board. New York: National Academy of Education.
30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
31. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2003). A research companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
32. National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.
36. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 37-68.
37. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In K. McGilley (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 201-228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., & Hamilton, H. (Eds.). (2001). The handbook of discourse analysis. London: Blackwell.
39. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1979a). Can heuristics be taught? The elements of a theory, and a report on the teaching of general mathematical problem solving skills. In J. Lochhead & J. Clement (Eds.), Cognitive process instruction (pp. 315-338). Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press.
40. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1979b). Explicit heuristic training as a variable in problem solving performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 10, 173-187.
41. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1982). Measures of problem solving performance and of problem solving instruction. Journal for Research in Muthemutics Education, 13, 31-49.
42. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic.
43. Silver, E. (1996). Moving beyond learning alone and in silence: Observations from the QUASAR project concerning communication in mathematics classrooms. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 127-159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
44. Simon, M. A. (2000). Research on the development of mathematics teachers: The teacher development experiment. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 335-359). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
45. Steffe, P., & Thompson, P. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In A. E. Kelley & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267-306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
46. Stein, M. K., Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematics reform and teacher development: A community of practice perspective. In J. G. Greeno & S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 17-52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
47. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technical innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings.
48. U. S. Department of Education. (2003). Strategic plan for 2002-2007. Retrieved April 2, 2003, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/stratplan2002-07/index.html