Advertisement

Networked Professional Learning, Design Research and Social Innovation

  • Peter GoodyearEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Research in Networked Learning book series (RINL)

Abstract

This chapter uses a reading of the preceding chapters in the book to develop an argument about the benefits of acknowledging and strengthening some deep synergies within the field of networked professional learning. In particular, it identifies some lines of convergence between professional action, professional learning and the practices of research and design in networked learning. The chapter’s unifying constructs include service design, social innovation and (participatory) design research. While it is important to recognise that there can be important differences between the situations of professional action, learning and teaching and research and design, there are also substantial benefits to be obtained from working with their similarities. The chapter locates professional work in the broader context of the search for more sustainable ways of life. It introduces ideas about social innovation, collaborative forms of service design and participatory design research to prepare the ground for a reinterpretation of some common elements of professional work and networked professional learning.

Keywords

Service design Social innovation Design research Co-constructed services Co-producted services Wicked problems Collaborative activity Distributed systems Design knowledge 

References

  1. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baek, J. S., Kim, S., Pahk, Y., & Manzini, E. (2018). A sociotechnical framework for the design of collaborative services. Design Studies, 55, 54–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bang, M., & Vossoughi, S. (2016). Participatory design research and educational justice: Studying learning and relations within social change making. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 173–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Billett, S. (2014). Mimetic learning at work: Learning in the circumstances of practice. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (Eds.). (2014). The architecture of productive learning networks. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Cipolla, C., & Manzini, E. (2009). Relational services. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 22(1), 45–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dohn, N. (Ed.). (2018). Designing for learning in a networked world. Abingdon, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Edwards, A. (2010). Being an expert professional practitioner: The relational turn in expertise. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellis, R., & Goodyear, P. (2019). The education ecology of universities: Integrating strategy, learning and the academy. Abingdon, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Goodyear, P. (2011). Emerging methodological challenges for educational research. In L. Markauskaite, P. Freebody, & J. Irwin (Eds.), Methodological choice and design: Scholarship, policy and practice in social and educational research (pp. 253–266). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodyear, P. (2014). Productive learning networks: The evolution of research and practice. In L. Carvalho & P. Goodyear (Eds.), The architecture of productive learning networks. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Goodyear, P. (2015). Teaching as design. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 2, 27–50.Google Scholar
  13. Goodyear, P., Jones, C., & Thompson, K. (2013). Computer-supported collaborative learning: Instructional approaches, group processes and educational design. In J. M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 439–451). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Goodyear, P., & Markauskaite, L. (2019). The impact on work and practice of wicked problems and unpredictable futures. In J. Higgs, D. Horsfall, S. Cork, & A. Jones (Eds.), Practice futures for the common good. Leiden, The Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV.Google Scholar
  15. Hammer, D., Gouvea, J., & Watkins, J. (2018). Idiosyncratic cases and hopes for general validity: What education research might learn from ecology/Casos idiosincrásicos y expectativas de validez general: Lo que la investigación en educación puede aprender de la ecología. Infanciay Aprendizaje, 41, 1–49.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2018.1504887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hod, Y., Bielaczyc, K., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2018). Revisiting learning communities: Innovations in theory and practice. Instructional Science, 46(4), 489–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hodgson, V., McConnell, D., & Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2011). The theory, practice and pedagogy of networked learning. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning (pp. 291–305). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Illich, I. (1973). Deschooling society. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  19. Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., et al. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.Google Scholar
  20. Jandric, P., & Boras, D. (2015). Critical learning in digital networks. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones, C. R. (2015). Networked learning: An educational paradigm for the age of digital networks. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kafai, Y., & Peppler, K. (2011). Beyond small groups: New opportunities for research in computer-supported collective learning. Paper presented at the CSCL2011 conference, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  23. Kimbell, L. (2011). Designing for service as one way of designing services. International Journal of Design, 5(2), 41.Google Scholar
  24. Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., & Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences, 45(2), 123–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Epistemic fluency and professional education: Innovation, knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Manzini, E. (2009). New design knowledge. Design Studies, 30(1), 4–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Nelson, H., & Stolterman, E. (2014). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nussbaum, M., & Sen, A. (Eds.). (1993). The quality of life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Penuel, W., & Gallagher, D. (2017). Creating research-practice partnerships in education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rogoff, B. (2014). Learning by observing and pitching in to family and community endeavors: An orientation. Human Development, 57(2–3), 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schoenfeld, A. (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Sennett, R. (2012). Together: The rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Sterelny, K. (2003). Thought in a hostile world: The evolution of human cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  38. Sterelny, K. (2012). The evolved apprentice: How evolution made humans unique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sterelny, K. (2014). Constructing the cooperative niche. In G. Barker, E. Desjardins, & T. Pearce (Eds.), Entangled life: Organism and environment in the biological and social sciences (pp. 261–279). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stokes, D. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
  41. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & de Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Heerlen, The Netherlands: NLOU.Google Scholar
  43. Zavala, M. (2016). Design, participation, and social change: What design in grassroots spaces can teach learning scientists. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 236–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations