scholarly journals Design-Based Research: A Methodology to Extend and Enrich Biology Education Research

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. es11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily E. Scott ◽  
Mary Pat Wenderoth ◽  
Jennifer H. Doherty

Design-based research from the learning sciences is a compelling methodology for investigating the mechanisms by which students to develop sophisticated ideas about biology. It fosters research collaborations across disciplines, develops and tests theory-based instructional tools, and draws on mixed methods to examine how students learn.

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. rm5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdi-Rizak M. Warfa

Educational research often requires mixing different research methodologies to strengthen findings, better contextualize or explain results, or minimize the weaknesses of a single method. This article provides practical guidelines on how to conduct such research in biology education, with a focus on mixed-methods research (MMR) that uses both quantitative and qualitative inquiries. Specifically, the paper provides an overview of mixed-methods design typologies most relevant in biology education research. It also discusses common methodological issues that may arise in mixed-methods studies and ways to address them. The paper concludes with recommendations on how to report and write about MMR.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. es11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Peffer ◽  
Maggie Renken

Rather than pursue questions related to learning in biology from separate camps, recent calls highlight the necessity of interdisciplinary research agendas. Interdisciplinary collaborations allow for a complicated and expanded approach to questions about learning within specific science domains, such as biology. Despite its benefits, interdisciplinary work inevitably involves challenges. Some such challenges originate from differences in theoretical and methodological approaches across lines of work. Thus, aims at developing successful interdisciplinary research programs raise important considerations regarding methodologies for studying biology learning, strategies for approaching collaborations, and training of early-career scientists. Our goal here is to describe two fields important to understanding learning in biology, discipline-based education research and the learning sciences. We discuss differences between each discipline’s approach to biology education research and the benefits and challenges associated with incorporating these perspectives in a single research program. We then propose strategies for building productive interdisciplinary collaboration.


2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 352-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
April Cordero Maskiewicz ◽  
Jennifer Evarts Lineback

At the close of the Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research conference in July 2012, one of the organizers made the comment: “Misconceptions are so yesterday.” Within the community of learning sciences, misconceptions are yesterday's news, because the term has been aligned with eradication and/or replacement of conceptions, and our knowledge about how people learn has progressed past this idea. This essay provides an overview of the discussion within the learning sciences community surrounding the term “misconceptions” and how the education community's thinking has evolved with respect to students’ conceptions. Using examples of students’ incorrect ideas about evolution and ecology, we show that students’ naïve ideas can provide the resources from which to build scientific understanding. We conclude by advocating that biology education researchers use one or more appropriate alternatives in place of the term misconception whenever possible.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kam Cheong Li ◽  
Billy Tak-Ming Wong

Purpose This paper aims to present a comprehensive review of the present state and trends of smart education research. It addresses the need to have a systematic review of smart education to depict its research landscape in view of the growing volume of related publications. Design/methodology/approach A bibliometric analysis of publications on smart education published in 2011 to 2020 was conducted, covering their patterns and trends in terms of collaboration, key publications, major topics and trends. A total of 1,317 publications with 29,317 cited references were collected from the Web of Science and Scopus for the bibliometric analysis. Findings Research on smart education has been widely published in various sources. The most frequently cited references are all theoretical or discussion articles. Researchers in the USA, China, South Korea, India and Russia have been most active in research collaborations. However, international collaborations have remained infrequent except for those involving the USA. The research on smart education broadly covered smart technologies as well as teaching and learning. The emerging topics have addressed areas such as the Internet of Things, big data, flipped learning and gamification. Originality/value This study depicts the intellectual landscape of smart education research, and illustrated the evolution and emerging trends in the field. The results highlight its latest developments and research needs, and suggest future work related to research collaborations on a larger scale and more studies on smart pedagogies.


Author(s):  
Michael Domínguez

Emerging in the learning sciences field in the early 1990s, qualitative design-based research (DBR) is a relatively new methodological approach to social science and education research. As its name implies, DBR is focused on the design of educational innovations, and the testing of these innovations in the complex and interconnected venue of naturalistic settings. As such, DBR is an explicitly interventionist approach to conducting research, situating the researcher as a part of the complex ecology in which learning and educational innovation takes place. With this in mind, DBR is distinct from more traditional methodologies, including laboratory experiments, ethnographic research, and large-scale implementation. Rather, the goal of DBR is not to prove the merits of any particular intervention, or to reflect passively on a context in which learning occurs, but to examine the practical application of theories of learning themselves in specific, situated contexts. By designing purposeful, naturalistic, and sustainable educational ecologies, researchers can test, extend, or modify their theories and innovations based on their pragmatic viability. This process offers the prospect of generating theory-developing, contextualized knowledge claims that can complement the claims produced by other forms of research. Because of this interventionist, naturalistic stance, DBR has also been the subject of ongoing debate concerning the rigor of its methodology. In many ways, these debates obscure the varied ways DBR has been practiced, the varied types of questions being asked, and the theoretical breadth of researchers who practice DBR. With this in mind, DBR research may involve a diverse range of methods as researchers from a variety of intellectual traditions within the learning sciences and education research design pragmatic innovations based on their theories of learning, and document these complex ecologies using the methodologies and tools most applicable to their questions, focuses, and academic communities. DBR has gained increasing interest in recent years. While it remains a popular methodology for developmental and cognitive learning scientists seeking to explore theory in naturalistic settings, it has also grown in importance to cultural psychology and cultural studies researchers as a methodological approach that aligns in important ways with the participatory commitments of liberatory research. As such, internal tension within the DBR field has also emerged. Yet, though approaches vary, and have distinct genealogies and commitments, DBR might be seen as the broad methodological genre in which Change Laboratory, design-based implementation research (DBIR), social design-based experiments (SDBE), participatory design research (PDR), and research-practice partnerships might be categorized. These critically oriented iterations of DBR have important implications for educational research and educational innovation in historically marginalized settings and the Global South.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Köster ◽  
Holger Thünemann

Despite some pioneering studies, mixed-methods research approaches are uncommon in the German history education community, in contrast to the general increase in mixed-methods research in the educational and social sciences. Conversely, German history education research currently appears to favour quantitative methods as opposed to qualitative approaches – at least in larger research projects. In this paper, we argue for a more inclusive research approach combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Discussion of a pioneering study from the 1980s (Jeismann et al ., 1987) highlights implementation of this unusual approach to history education research in Germany. To illuminate the added value of such a mixed-methods research approach, we discuss two published German studies that respectively rely on quantitative (Trautwein et al ., 2017) and qualitative (Köster, 2013) research methods. A mixed-methods approach might have illuminated each study's 'blind spots'.


2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 244-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik E. Froehlich ◽  
Sara Van Waes ◽  
Hannah Schäfer

Social network analysis (SNA) is becoming a prevalent method in education research and practice. But criticism has been voiced against the heavy reliance on quantification within SNA. Recent work suggests combining quantitative and qualitative approaches in SNA—mixed methods social network analysis (MMSNA)—as a remedy. MMSNA is helpful for addressing research questions related to the formal or structural side of relationships and networks, but it also attends to more qualitative questions such as the meaning of interactions or the variability of social relationships. In this chapter, we describe how researchers have applied and presented MMSNA in publications from the perspective of general mixed methods research. Based on a systematic review, we summarize the different applications within the field of education and learning research, point to potential shortcomings of the methods and its presentation, and develop an agenda to support researchers in conducting future MMSNA research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. ar9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanley M. Lo ◽  
Grant E. Gardner ◽  
Joshua Reid ◽  
Velta Napoleon-Fanis ◽  
Penny Carroll ◽  
...  

Biology education research (BER) is a growing field, as evidenced by the increasing number of publications in CBE—Life Sciences Education ( LSE) and expanding participation at the Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research (SABER) annual meetings. To facilitate an introspective and reflective discussion on how research within LSE and at SABER has matured, we conducted a content analysis of LSE research articles ( n = 339, from 2002 to 2015) and SABER abstracts ( n = 652, from 2011 to 2015) to examine three related intraresearch parameters: research questions, study contexts, and methodologies. Qualitative data analysis took a combination of deductive and inductive approaches, followed by statistical analyses to determine the correlations among different parameters. We identified existing research questions, study contexts, and methodologies in LSE articles and SABER abstracts and then compared and contrasted these parameters between the two data sources. LSE articles were most commonly guided by descriptive research questions, whereas SABER abstracts were most commonly guided by causal research questions. Research published in LSE and presented at SABER both prioritize undergraduate classrooms as the study context and quantitative methodologies. In this paper, we examine these research trends longitudinally and discuss implications for the future of BER as a scholarly field.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document