![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Kopcha, T.J., Schmidt, M.M. and McKenney, S. (2015). Editorial 31(5) Special issue on educational design research (EDR) in post-secondary learning environments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(5), i-ix.
I am interested in reading about and around the Twente Educational Model (TEM/TOM). Searching for literature online, I found the first of the articles in this special issue as well as the editorial, which mentions it. While I am chiefly interested in the first article, reading the editorial has made me quite keen to read a few of the others.
The editors begin their editorial with a definition of EDR: “EDR is an intervention and process-oriented approach that uses a variety of methods to examine the development and implementation of instructional solutions to current educational problems” (p. i). They give three reasons for the need of this issue, (1) There is some justified concern in the quality of EDR research, so “transparent examples of EDR are needed to fuel the discourse about the practical and scientific value of this approach” (p. ii), (2) he nature of EDR projects to span iterations and contexts and to involve a great deal of data can make it difficult to publish anything process related in the traditional literature and (3) the need for good examples has increased, particularly ones which show variation and testing across multiple iterations.
The editors impose a structure of three EDR phases into which the six papers in the special issue fit. The phases are analysis and exploration, design and construction, and evaluation and reflection. The authors of the papers situate their work within these phases, we are told. Below, I very briefly provde a few words on each of the articles, as described in the editorial:
The editors conclude their discussion of the articles with a closing article which looks at all six contributions and finds commonalities as well as unique contributions. The concluding author argues for EDR researchers to have a shared and long term agenda in order to achieve significant impact.
I have a PhD student engaged in EDR. I shall manage the temptation to be distracted from my TEM/TOM focus by recommending this special issue to her attention (if she has not already found it; she probably has).
Do not treat this blog entry as a replacement for reading the paper. This blog post represents the understanding and opinions of Torquetum only and could contain errors, misunderstandings or subjective views.
I am interested in reading about and around the Twente Educational Model (TEM/TOM). Searching for literature online, I found the first of the articles in this special issue as well as the editorial, which mentions it. While I am chiefly interested in the first article, reading the editorial has made me quite keen to read a few of the others.
The editors begin their editorial with a definition of EDR: “EDR is an intervention and process-oriented approach that uses a variety of methods to examine the development and implementation of instructional solutions to current educational problems” (p. i). They give three reasons for the need of this issue, (1) There is some justified concern in the quality of EDR research, so “transparent examples of EDR are needed to fuel the discourse about the practical and scientific value of this approach” (p. ii), (2) he nature of EDR projects to span iterations and contexts and to involve a great deal of data can make it difficult to publish anything process related in the traditional literature and (3) the need for good examples has increased, particularly ones which show variation and testing across multiple iterations.
The editors impose a structure of three EDR phases into which the six papers in the special issue fit. The phases are analysis and exploration, design and construction, and evaluation and reflection. The authors of the papers situate their work within these phases, we are told. Below, I very briefly provde a few words on each of the articles, as described in the editorial:
- 2 articles which discuss projects early in the EDR process
- In search of design principles for developing digital learning and performance support for a student design task; second year psychology students; data-driven approach; Twente Educational Model (TOM/TEM); an outcome is three design principles which can inform further iterations
- Re-designing university courses to support collaborative knowledge creation practices; literature-driven approach; design principles established and then integrated into carefully chosen courses.
- 3 articles that span cycles and are located in the middle of the ADR implementation spectrum
- Exploring college students’ online help-seeking behaviour in a flipped classroom with a web-based help-seeking tool; four design principles identified from the literature; three EDR cycles; mixed methods. The editors particularly praise this article for the clarity with which the authors connect theory and design; they recommend this article for anyone seeking to develop their own EDR manuscript.
- Professional learning in higher education: Understanding how academics interpret student feedback and access resources to improve their teaching; three phases of design-based research on an interactive online environment providing resources and support to faculty based on student evaluations of teaching; concludes with a return to the theory on which the tool was built.
- R-NEST: Design-based research for technology enhanced reflective practice in initial teacher education; digital storytelling to enhance reflective practice; 6 years and three cycles; scales from prototype to full-scale implementation.
- 1 article that is to the mature end of the EDR spectrum
- Conjecture mapping to optimize the educational design research process; “establishes a set of design principles from data collected across multiple iterations and across multiple contexts” (p. v). Multiple phases, two contexts, 5 years; adult learners transitioning to online learning; a conjecture map [sounds intriguing]; not only development of design principles, but example of how comparisons across contexts and iterations can enable analytic generalisation and inform theory.
The editors conclude their discussion of the articles with a closing article which looks at all six contributions and finds commonalities as well as unique contributions. The concluding author argues for EDR researchers to have a shared and long term agenda in order to achieve significant impact.
I have a PhD student engaged in EDR. I shall manage the temptation to be distracted from my TEM/TOM focus by recommending this special issue to her attention (if she has not already found it; she probably has).
Do not treat this blog entry as a replacement for reading the paper. This blog post represents the understanding and opinions of Torquetum only and could contain errors, misunderstandings or subjective views.
