You are here:

Design-based research and doctoral students: Guidelines for preparing a dissertation proposal
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Wollongong, Australia ; , University of Twente, Netherlands ; , University of Georgia, United States ; , Edith Cowan University, Australia

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vancouver, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-62-4 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

At first glance, design-based research may appear to be such a long-term and intensive approach to educational inquiry that doctoral students, most of whom expect to complete their Ph.D. degree in 4-5 years, should not attempt to adopt this approach for their doctoral dissertations. In this paper, we argue that design-based research is feasible for doctoral students, and that candidates should be encouraged to engage in it. More specifically, we describe the components of a dissertation proposal or prospectus that utilizes design-based research methods in the context of educational technology research.

Citation

Herrington, J., McKenney, S., Reeves, T. & Oliver, R. (2007). Design-based research and doctoral students: Guidelines for preparing a dissertation proposal. In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2007--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 4089-4097). Vancouver, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 24, 2023 from .

© 2007 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 21-24.
  2. Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13 (1), 1-14.
  3. Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18-20.
  4. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.
  5. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
  6. Edelson, D.C. (2006). Balancing innovation and risk: Assessing design research proposals. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney& N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 100-106). London: Routledge.
  7. Gay, L.R. (1992). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (4th ed.). New York: Merrill.
  8. Herrington, J. (1997). Authentic learning in interactive multimedia environments. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Edith Cowan University.
  9. Krathwohl, D. (1993). Methods of educational and social science research: An integrated approach. New York: Longman.
  10. Linn, M., Davis, E. & Bell, P. (2004). Internet Environments for Science Education. London: Lawrence E arlbaum Associates.
  11. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  12. McKenney, S. (2001). Computer-based support for science education materials developers in Africa: Exploring potentials. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, The Netherlands.
  13. McMahon, M., & Oliver, R. (2004). Design experiments as a research methodology for innovation in ICT. L. Cantoni& C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2004: World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia& Telecommunications (pp. 3251-3257). Norfolk, VA: AACE.
  14. Miles, M. & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage.
  15. Phillips, D.C. (2006). Assessing the quality of design research proposals: Some philosophical perspectives. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney& N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 93-99). London: Routledge.
  16. Reeves, T.C. (1999). A research agenda for interactive learning in the new millennium. In P. Kommers& G. Richards (Eds.), World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 1999 (pp. 15-20). Norfolk, VA: AACE.
  17. Reeves, T.C. (2000). Socially responsible educational research. Educational Technology, 40(6), 19-28.
  18. Reeves, T.C. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney& N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52-66). London: Routledge.
  19. Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004). A development research agenda for online collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research& Development, 52 (4), 53-65.
  20. Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 97-116.
  21. Shulman, L., Golde, C., Bueschel, A. & Garabedian, K. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorate: A critique and proposal. Educational Researcher, 33 (3), 25-33.
  22. Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. Van den Akker, N. Nieveen, R.M. Branch, K.L. Gustafson& T. Plomp (Eds.), Design methodology and developmental research in education and training (pp. 1-14). The
  23. Wang, S-K, & Reeves, T.C. (2006). The effects of a Web-based learning environment on student motivation in a high school earth science course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(6), 597-621.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections