Connecting Research and Practice: Teacher Inquiry and Design-Based Research
The relationship between research and practice presents challenges across the field of education including in the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Educators in the field often see research as being divorced from the reality of their daily practice. Teacher inquiry and design-based research offer opportunities to engage practitioners in research by making more direct links to their own practice. This chapter briefly introduces the broad range of opportunities and hurdles posed by technology integration in K-12 education, and then describes three crucial dimensions that influence the way educators perceive and handle technology use over time; these relate to teacher will, skill, and surrounding infrastructure. Thereafter, ways in which research-practice interactions might contribute to developing these dimensions are discussed, with specific attention to two kinds of interactions: teacher inquiry and design-based research. In addition to offering examples throughout the chapter, attention is also given to the fact that these two approaches used together can have productive synergies. The chapter concludes by pointing to new developments that hold potential implications for future work related to technology integration supported by teacher inquiry, or design-based research, or both.
KeywordsTeacher inquiry Design-based research Technology integration Research-practice interactions
- Bannan-Ritland, B., & Baek, J. (2008). Teacher design research: An emerging paradigm for teachers’ professional development. In A. Kelly, R. Lesh, & J. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching (pp. 246–262). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Carter, I., Rogers, M. P., Amador, J., Akerson, V., & Pongsanon, K. (2016). Utilizing an iterative research-based lesson study approach to support preservice teachers’ professional noticing. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 20(8), 1–25.Google Scholar
- Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2002). Instruments for assessing the impact of technology in education. Computers in the Schools, 18(2), 5–25.Google Scholar
- Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1993). Inside/outside. Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
- Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.Google Scholar
- Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
- Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2013). ARTI: An online tool to support teacher action research for technology integration. In R. Hartshorne, T. Heafner, & T. Petty (Eds.), Teacher education programs and online learning tools: Innovations in teacher preparation (pp. 375–391). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-1906-7.ch020.
- Enthoven, M., & de Bruijn, E. (2010). Beyond locality: The creation of public practice-based knowledge through practitioner research in professional learning communities and communities of practice. A review of three books on practitioner research and professional communities. Educational Action Research, 18(2), 289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Tondeur, J., Fives, H., & Gill, M. (2014). Teachers’ beliefs and uses of technology to support 21st-century teaching and learning. In International handbook of research on teacher beliefs (p. 403–418). New York:RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
- Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512.
- Kafyulilo, A. (2013). Collaborative design in teams to develop science and mathematics teachers’ technology integration knowledge and skills. PhD., University of Twente, Enschede.Google Scholar
- Kafyulilo, A., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2016). Teacher design in teams as a professional development arrangement for developing technology integration knowledge and skills of science teachers in Tanzania. Education and Information Technologies, 21(2), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9321-0.
- Kemmis, S., & Wilkinson, M. (1998). Participatory action research and the study of practice. In B. Atweh, S. Kemmis, & P. Weeks (Eds.), Action research in practice: Partnerships for social justice in education (pp. 21–36). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29(January), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005.
- Knezek, G., Christensen, R., & Fluke, R. (2003, April). Testing a will, skill, tool model of technology integration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
- Lim, C. P., Zhao, Y., Tondeur, J., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Bridging the gap: Technology trends and use of technology in schools. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 59–68.Google Scholar
- Long, B. T., & Hall, T. (2015). R-NEST: Design-based research for technology-enhanced reflective practice in initial teacher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(5), 572.Google Scholar
- Loughran, J. (2004). A history and context of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices. In J. Loughran, M. Hamilton, V. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 7–39). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Luckin, R., Clark, W., Avramides, K., Hunter, J., & Oliver, M. (2017). Using teacher inquiry to support technology-enhanced formative assessment: A review of the literature to inform a new method. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(1), 85–97.Google Scholar
- McKenney, S. (2013). Designing and researching technology enhanced learning for the zone of proximal implementation. Research in Learning Technology, 21, supplement 17374, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.17374.
- McKenney, S. (2016). Researcher-practitioner collaboration in educational design research: Processes, roles, values & expectations. In M. Evans, M. Packer, & K. Sawyer (Eds.), Reflections on the learning sciences (pp. 155–188). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- McKenney, S. (2017). Toerusting van STEM docenten: Ontwikkelen van bereidheid, vaardigheid, en infrastructuur [Equipping STEM teachers: Developing will, skill and infrastructure]. Inaugural address at the University of Twente, May 18, Enschede.Google Scholar
- McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Plomp, T., & Nieveen, N. (2014). Educational design research: Illustrative cases, 2. Enschede: SLO. Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development. http://international.slo.nl/publications/edr.
- Somekh, B. (2006). Action research: A methodology for change and development. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Swanwick, R. A., Clarke, P. J., & Kitchen, R. (2014). A design-based approach for research into deaf children’s reading comprehension. Hillary Place Papers, 1(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575.Google Scholar
- van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2006). Educational design research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Zeichner, K. M., & Nofke, S. (2001). Practitioner research. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 298–330). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar