A

Design-Based
Research
EDM 614
 By the end of this chapter, you
should be able to:

Clarify the characteristics of

design-based research
Use design-based research
(DBR) to design research
procedures
Identify the differences of DBR
and traditional empirical research
methods.

EDM 614
Main Learning Activities
1. Think about when one would do design research and how
to do a design-based research in educational technology.
Try to think of such an effort in the context of a specific
technology-based implementation.

2. After you learn the characters and process of DBR

(design-based research), please draw a mind map to
illustrate the relationships between the key steps of DBR.
Please discuss with your peers about the differences of DBR
and the traditional predictive research methods. When you
are carrying out educational technology research, what
methods will you use and why?
 Design-Based
Research
Design-based research is a systemic
approach to the planning and
implementing of innovations that
emphasize an iterative approach to design
with ongoing involvement and
collaboration with practitioners.
Introduction: The element of design in learning and educational research has been
There are two main types of educational research. The paid more attention recently. One of the traditional factors addressed
first is basic research, whichis also referred to as an is the extent to which an approach or design contributed to or
academic research approach. The second type is applied inhibited outcomes. Previously, that aspect was addressed by
formative evaluations. Recently, the quality of the design process
research (or contract research). Both of these research
itself has come under closer scrutiny. Design-based research and
types have different purposes which influence the nature design methodology are becoming more and more important for
of the respective research. educational technology research and educational product
development. The following sections will introduce the design-based
research in details.

The basis for educational research is the scientific method. The

scientific method uses directed questions and manipulation of
variables to systematically find information about the teaching
and learning process. This scenario questions are answered by
the analysis of data that are collected specifically for the purpose
to answer these questions. The two main types of data that are
used under this method are qualitative and
quantitative.Qualitative research uses data which are descriptive
in nature. Tools that educational researchers use in collecting
qualitative data include observations, conducting interviews,
conducting document analysis, and analyzing participant
products such as journals, diaries, images, or blogs. Quantitative
research uses data that are numerical and are based on the
assumption that the numbers will describe a single reality.
Statistics are often applied to find relationships between
variables. Both quantitative and qualitative research are/or can
be consistent with a basic or traditional scientific approach
aimed at uncovering the relationship between variables and
factors involved in an implementation and learning outcomes
 The Concept of Design-Based Research

2
3
1
BROWN & SPECTOR & YUEN, 2016 SPECTOR &
COLLINS 1992 YUEN, 2016
And now, it is a type of research methodology
commonly used by researchers in the learning
Design-based sciences. Design-based research is a systemic
research (DBR) was The solutions that result from educational design
approach to the planning and implementing of research can be educational products (e.g., a multi-
proposed as design innovations that emphasize an iterative approach to
experiments in their user virtual world learning game), processes (e.g., a
design with ongoing involvement collaboration with strategy for scaffolding student learning in online
articles practitioners. DBR goes beyond formative courses), programs (e.g., a series of workshops
evaluation research as the focus is on the rationale intended to help teachers develop more effective
for design decisions and changes in the design as a questioning strategies), or policies (e.g., year-round
technology-based learning effort evolves, although schooling). Researchers attempt to solve
DBR can still be considered a kind of formative
evaluation research significant real-world problems while at the same
time they seek to discover new knowledge that can
inform the work of others facing similar problems
 Key Characteristics of DBR
DESIGN-BASED RESEARCH EXHIBITS THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS: PRAGMATIC, GROUNDED, INTERVENTIONIST,
ITERATIVE, COLLABORATIVE, ADAPTIVE, AND THEORY-ORIENTED (COBB ET AL., 2003).

PRAGMATIC GROUNDED: INTERVENTIONIST: ITERATIVE:

it is concerned with generating usable it evolves through multiple cycles of

it uses theory, empirical findings, and it is undertaken to make a change
knowledge and usable solutions to design, development, testing, and
craft wisdom to guide the in a particular educational context.
problems in practice. revision.

COLLABORATIVE ADAPTIVE THEORY-ORIENTED

it requires the expertise of multi-

disciplinary partnerships,including the intervention design and sometimes it uses theory to ground design,
researchers and practitioners, but also the research design are often and the design and development
also often others (e.g., subject matter modified in accordance with emerging work is undertaken to contribute to
specialists, software programmers, or insights. a broader scientific understanding
facilitators).

!
The Process of Design-Based Research

Fig. 11.1 A generic model for conducting design-based research. Adapted from McKenney and Reeves (2012)
shows the generic model for conducting design-based research, and it contains these features (McKenney &
Reeves, 2012):
Three core phases in a flexible, iterative structure: analysis, design, and evaluation.
• Dual focus on theory and practice: integrated research and design processes; theoretical and practical
outcomes.
• Indications of being use-inspired: planning for implementation and spread; interaction with practice;
contextually responsive.
Analysis and
Exploration
BANNAN-RITLAND (2003):

The first phase of design-based research is the analysis and exploration, which includes problem
identification and diagnosis. As noted by Bannan-Ritland (2003): “The first phase of design-based research is
rooted in essential research steps of problem identification, literature survey, and problem definition” (p. 22).
In line with the exploratory nature of design research, driving questions should, therefore, be open in nature.
In this phase, people state problems through consultation with researchers and practitioners, analysis the
research questions, and do a literature review. The main products resulting from this phase are both practical
and theoretical. From the practical perspective, this phase generates a clear understanding of the problem
and its origins as well as specification of long-range goals. In addition, partial design requirements are
determined by exploring the opportunities and boundary conditions present; and initial design propositions
are generated based on contextual insights.

From the theoretical perspective, this phase produces a descriptive and analytical understanding of the given
class of problems, as manifested in this case within a particular context.
Design and
Construction
BANNAN-RITLAND (2003):

The second phase is design and construction, which is a coherent process followed and documented to arrive
at a (tentative) solution to the problem. Unlike the other two main phases which follow empirical cycles based
on a research chain of reasoning, the microcycle of design and construction resembles that of creating (not
testing) a conceptual model. Design refers to generate potential solutions to the problem, develop draft
principles to guide the design of the intervention. Construction refers to the process of taking design ideas
and applying them to actually manufacture the solution. This generally takes place through a prototyping
approach, where successive approximations of the desired solution are (re-)created. The results of this
phase are a research proposal, which includes details of the methodology of the intervention, implementation,
and evaluation of the proposed solution, as it largely constitutes the data collection and analysis stages of the
study. From the practical perspective, the intervention is conceived and assembled. From a theoretical
perspective, the frameworks underpinning design as well as the justification for design decisions are
articulated.
Evaluation and
Reflection
BANNAN-RITLAND (2003):

The third phase is evaluation and reflection. Evaluation refers to the empirical testing that is done with a
design or a constructed intervention (that is, the embodiments of design in the initial, partial, or final form).
Reflection involves active and thoughtful consideration of what has come together in both research and
development (including theoretical inputs, empirical findings, and subjective reactions) with the aim of
producing theoretical understanding. Reflection is benefited most when approached through a combination
of systematic and organic techniques. The results of empirical findings, as well as critical reflection are then
used to accept, refine, or refute the conjectures, frameworks, or principles that are portrayed in design
documents (e.g., design frameworks) or embodied in actual (prototypes of) interventions.
McKenney and Reeves (2012) depicted the elements and outcome of three phases of DBR in Table 11.1
 Interaction with Practice:
Implementation and
Spread
The three core processes (analysis and exploration; design and
construction; and evaluation and reflection) are interacting with
practice through the (anticipation of) implementation and spread
of interventions. Researchers and practitioners jointly anticipate
and plan for it from the very first stage of analysis and exploration,
e.g., by tempering idealist goals with realistic assessments of what
is possible; by taking practitioner concerns seriously; and by
studying what intrinsic motives and natural opportunities are
already present in the target setting. This can include many kinds
of professionals whose work relates to educational practice, such
as teachers, administrators, teacher educators, examination
agencies, inspectorates, policy makers, and textbook publishers.
During analysis and exploration, this involvement is geared
primarily toward clarifying the problem and shaping and
understanding of constraints within which design will have to
operate
Two Main
Outputs
In design-based research generic model, there are two main outputs:
maturing interventions and theoretical understanding. Both outputs ripen
over time and can be more locally relevant or more broadly applicable.
The intervention itself contributes directly to practice (by addressing the
problem at hand) and indirectly to theoretical understanding (as one
example of how specific, articulated, design frameworks can be reified).
The theoretical understanding is produced through (usually several)
micro and/or mesocycles of design research. The empirical findings and
resulting conjectures provide important building blocks for theory, and
can also contribute indirectly to practice as these ideas may be shared
among professionals and used to build new interventions.
Dbr and Traditional Empirical Research
Reeves (2006) draws a clear line
between research conducted with
traditional empirical goals and that
inspired by development goals leading
to “design principles,” as shown in Fig.
11.2. The traditional empirical research
proposed the hypotheses based on
observation and existing theories, which
is tested by the design experiment.
Then, the theory is refined based on the
test results. Finally, practitioners apply
the refinement theory. The cycle of
traditional empirical research is the
specification of new hypotheses.

The design-based research is based on the

analysis of practical problems by
researchers and practitioners in
collaboration. Then, combine with the
existing design principles and technology
innovation to develop the solution, test and
refine solutions iteratively in practice. Last,
reflect the implementation of design
principles and solutions. Design-based
research is not for testing hypotheses, but
for refining of problems, solutions, methods,
and design principles.
CASE STUDY
The first case is conducted by Thomas et al. (2009),
with substantial funding from the National Science
Foundation and other sources. He put his efforts to
refine a theory of transformational play while at the
same time seeking to develop advanced forms of
interactive learning games. It contains three
qualitative studies focused on the challenges and
successes involved in implementing Quest Atlantis, a
3D multi-player virtual environment (MUVE), which
serves as the primary vehicle for instantiating Barab’s
transformational play learning theory and for allowing
it to be refined through iterative design-based
research
CASE STUDY
The second case is co-led by an at-the-time early
career assistant professor, Klopfer and Squire (2008),
with start-up funding from Microsoft and other
sources. It is a multi-year project to enhance student
learning related to environmental science through the
development and refinement of learning games that
are accessed with handheld devices such as PDAs and
smart phones. In addition to developing an array of
learning games, the project has sought to develop and
refine a theoretical framework called “augmented
reality educational gaming” that can be applied by
other game designers. Meanwhile, it focuses on
iterative design cycles based on five case studies
conducted in real high school classrooms.
CASE STUDY
The third case is carried out by Oh (2011), working with
one other doctoral student and a practitioner with no
funding beyond a graduate teaching assistantship. It
pursued two primary goals: (1) optimizing collaborative
group work in an online graduate-level course focused
on “E-Learning Evaluation,” and (2) developing a
refined model of group work in online courses and
identifying design principles for supporting online
collaborative group work among adult learners. Oh use
mixed methods to apply across several semester-
length iterations of an online course to yield multiple
distinct design principles for supporting group work by
adults.
Do you have
any questions?
Send it to us! We hope you
learned something new.
Technology is an
effective tool that can
make education more
meaningful and
engaging for teachers
and students alike.
“We need technology in every
classroom and in every student
and teacher’s hand, because it
is the pen and paper of our
time, and it is the lens through
which we experience much
of our world."
DAVID WARLICK
 Researcher no. 2

Researcher no.
1

THANK YOU FOR

LISTENING!!!