Research methods for design knowledge: clarifying definitions, characteristics, and areas of confusion.
Saved in:
| Title: | Research methods for design knowledge: clarifying definitions, characteristics, and areas of confusion. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Moore, Stephanie L. (AUTHOR), Howard, Craig D. (AUTHOR), Boling, Elizabeth (AUTHOR), Leary, Heather (AUTHOR), Hodges, Charles B. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Educational Technology Research & Development. Oct2024, Vol. 72 Issue 5, p2679-2703. 25p. |
| Subjects: | Formative evaluation, Research personnel, Instructional systems design, Design research, Research methodology |
| Abstract: | In the field of educational technology and instructional design, research methods are emerging that aim to curate different forms of knowledge and insights beyond traditional research studies, or what Reigeluth and An (in Reigeluth and Carr-Chellman (eds) Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, 2009) refer to as "research to prove." As a result of evolving efforts in this area, editors of research journals in the field are receiving increased submissions employing these methods but have detected some persistent confusion among authors surrounding them. This has resulted in authors submitting articles with muddled methodologies and to outlets that may not be a fit for the work an author seeks to share. It can even be unclear whether authors intentionally employed a specific design-related method prior to reporting. In this piece, we will cover four methods—instructional design cases, case studies, design-based research, and formative evaluation of designs/products—to provide clarity for both graduate students and researchers. For each of these, we will provide definitions, discuss exemplars and features of exemplars, summarize key features that should be present in such a study and its reporting, and provide guidance on front-end intentional design and planning for research studies that employ these methodologies. Additional clarity on these methods can better support scholars and emerging scholars in their roles as researchers, authors, and reviewers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Educational Technology Research & Development is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | In the field of educational technology and instructional design, research methods are emerging that aim to curate different forms of knowledge and insights beyond traditional research studies, or what Reigeluth and An (in Reigeluth and Carr-Chellman (eds) Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, 2009) refer to as "research to prove." As a result of evolving efforts in this area, editors of research journals in the field are receiving increased submissions employing these methods but have detected some persistent confusion among authors surrounding them. This has resulted in authors submitting articles with muddled methodologies and to outlets that may not be a fit for the work an author seeks to share. It can even be unclear whether authors intentionally employed a specific design-related method prior to reporting. In this piece, we will cover four methods—instructional design cases, case studies, design-based research, and formative evaluation of designs/products—to provide clarity for both graduate students and researchers. For each of these, we will provide definitions, discuss exemplars and features of exemplars, summarize key features that should be present in such a study and its reporting, and provide guidance on front-end intentional design and planning for research studies that employ these methodologies. Additional clarity on these methods can better support scholars and emerging scholars in their roles as researchers, authors, and reviewers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 10421629 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11423-023-10271-8 |
