Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Design-based research in mathematics education: trends, challenges and potential

  • Manuscript
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Originating from the learning sciences community, design-based research (DBR) is attracting interest from many educational researchers including those focused on mathematics. Beyond its research role, it is being seen as a collaborative way to engage teachers in deep professional development leading not only to changes in skill but also in purpose. Previous reviews of the approach, however, have offered only cautious optimism for the capacity of DBR to support widespread or scalable change. This paper will use methods drawn from the digital humanities and social sciences to explore patterns relating to regional differences, theoretical underpinnings, practical implementation and methodological choice in recent DBR research in the domain of mathematics education. The findings suggest that much of the work presented as DBR might be better characterized as ‘implementation studies’ as they contain only limited commitment to theoretical development capable of supporting the scaling of innovation. The exceptions appear to occur in settings with well-developed research capacity which recognizes the need for ontological innovation of theory whilst iteratively and comprehensively exploring the complexities of authentic learning interventions. An example of a rich mathematical research study using DBR is provided to point to the potential for this methodology to achieve its overarching aims more fully.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Coding available from https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14594847

References

  • Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x11428813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A., & van Eerde, D. (2015). An introduction to design-based research with an example from statistics education. In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs, C. Knipping, & N. Presmeg (Eds.). Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: Examples of Methodology and Methods (pp. 429–466). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_16

  • Bannen, M. (2018). Just a tool? John Dewey’s pragmatic instrumentalism and educational technology University of Kansas]. http://hdl.handle.net/1808/27543

  • Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy, 33, Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315634319

  • Biesta, G. (2017). Education, measurement and the professions: Reclaiming a space for democratic professionality in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(4), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2015.1048665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G., Filippakou, O., Wainwright, E., & Aldridge, D. (2019). Why educational research should not just solve problems, but should cause them as well. British Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea. New Directions in Educational Technology Berlin, Heidelberg.

  • Confrey, J. (2019). Leading a design-based research team using agile methodologies to build learner-centered software. In K. R. Leatham (Ed.). Designing, Conducting, and Publishing Quality Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 123–142). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23505-5_9

  • Confrey, J., & Maloney, A. (2015). A design research study of a curriculum and diagnostic assessment system for a learning trajectory on equipartitioning. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 47(6), 919–932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0699-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crain-Dorough, M., & Elder, A. C. (2021). Absorptive capacity as a means of understanding and addressing the disconnects between research and practice. Review of Research in Education, 45(1), 67–100. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x21990614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, C. (2021). Spatial reasoning and the development of early fraction understanding. In Y. H. Leong, B., Kaur, B. H. Choy, J.B.W. Yeo & S.L. Chin, Excellence in mathematics education: Foundations and pathways (Proceedings of the 43rd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia), Singapore.

  • Dalby, D., & Swan, M. (2019). Using digital technology to enhance formative assessment in mathematics classrooms. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 832–845. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. Minton, Balch.

  • Dewey, J., Poulos, K., Nagal, E., & Boydston, J. A. (2008). The later works, 1925–1953. Southern Illinois University Press.

  • diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, R., Hattie, J., & Bowles, T. (2019). Exploring the experiences of teachers undertaking Educational Design Research (EDR) as a form of teacher professional learning. Professional Development in Education, 45(1), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2018.1500389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterday, M. W., Rees Lewis, D. G., & Gerber, E. M. (2018). The logic of design research. Learning: Research and Practice, 4(2), 131–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1286367

  • Fiedler, S. H. D. (2012). Emancipating and developing learning activity: Systemic intervention and reinstrumentation in higher education. Painosalama.

  • Fowler, S., Cutting, C., Kennedy, J., Leonard, S. N., Gabriel, F., & Jaeschke, W. (2021). Technology enhanced learning environments and the potential for enhancing spatial reasoning: a mixed methods study. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00368-9

  • Fowler, S., & Leonard, S. (2021). Using Design Based Research to shift perspectives: A model for sustainable professional development for the innovative use of digital tools. Professional Development in Education, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1955732

  • Geiger, V., Stillman, G., Brown, J., Galbriath, P., & Niss, M. (2018). Using mathematics to solve real world problems: The role of enablers. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0217-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getenet, S. (2019). Using design-based research to bring partnership between researchers and practitioners. Educational Research, 61(4), 482–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1677168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glade, M., & Prediger, S. (2017). Students’ individual schematization pathways - Empirical reconstructions for the case of part-of-part determination for fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 94(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9716-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gough, D. (2021). Appraising evidence claims. Review of Research in Education, 45(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x20985072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravemeijer, K. (1994). Developing realistic mathematics education. Freudenthal Institute.

  • Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from a learning design perspective. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design Research (pp. 17–51). Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, T. (2020). Bridging practice and theory: The emerging potential of design-based research (DBR) for digital innovation in education. Education Research Perspectives in education, 47(1).

  • Honebein, P. C., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2021). To prove or improve, that is the question: The resurgence of comparative, confounded research between 2010 and 2019. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09988-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyles, C., & Noss, R. (2015). A computational lens on design research. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 47(6), 1039–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0731-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hußmann, S., Schacht, F., & Schindler, M. (2018). Tracing conceptual development in mathematics: Epistemology of webs of reasons. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31(2), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0245-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jannah, R. D., Putri, R. I. I., & Zulkardi, Z. (2019). Soft tennis and volleyball contexts in Asian games for Pisa-like mathematics problems. Journal on Mathematics Education, 10(1), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.10.1.5248.157-170

  • Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., & Doyle, W. (2015). Practicality studies: How to move from what works in principle to what works in practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(1), 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.954751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidron, A., & Kali, Y. (2017). Extending the applicability of design-based research through research-practice partnerships. EDeR. Educational Design Research, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.15460/eder.1.2.1157

  • Kitchin, R. (2014). The reframing of science, social science and humanities research In The Data Revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures & their consequences (pp. 128–148). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473909472

  • Lai, M. K., McNaughton, S., Jesson, R., & Wilson, A. (2020). Research-practice partnerships for school improvement: the learning schools model. Bingley, U.K. : Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781789735710

  • Lake, W., Wallin, M., Woolcott, G., Boyd, W., Foster, A., Markopoulos, C., & Boyd, W. (2017). Applying an alternative mathematics pedagogy for students with weak mathematics: Meta-analysis of alternative pedagogies. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(2), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2016.1245876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, S. N., & Fitzgerald, R. N. (2018). Holographic learning: A mixed reality trial of Microsoft HoloLens in an Australian secondary school. Research in Learning Technology, 26(2160), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.2160

  • Leonard, S. N., & Roberts, P. (2014). Performers and postulates: the role of evolving socio-historical contexts in shaping new teacher professional identities. Critical Studies in Education, 55(3), 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2014.904808

  • Leonard, S. N., & Westwell, M. (2020). Translating the science of learning through co-design: working with teachers to prioritise executive functioning skills in mathematics education. In A. Carroll, R. Cunnington, & A. Nugent (Eds.), Learning under the Lens – Applying findings from the Science of Learning to the Classroom. Routledge.

  • Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21, 289–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S. (2018). How can the learning sciences (better) impact policy and practice? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1404404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2014). Educational design research. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 131–140). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_11

  • Michel, J. B., Kui Shen, Y., Presser Aiden, A., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., Pickett, J. P., Hoiberg, D., Clancy, D., Norvig, P., Orwant, J., Pinker, S., Nowak, M. A., & Aiden, E. L. (2011). Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science, 331(6014), 176–182. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The, P. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, M. J., & Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Foundations of the learning sciences. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2 ed., pp. 21–43). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.004

  • Paniagua, A., & Istance, D. (2018). Teachers as designers of learning environments: The importance of innovative pedagogies Educational Research and Innovation, 1–204. https://doi.org/10.1787/g272b194c2-en

  • Paterson, B. L., Thorne, S. E., Canam, C., & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-Study of Qualitative Health Research. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck, F. A. (2020). Beyond rise over run: A learning trajectory for slope. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 51(4), 433–467. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc-2020-0045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plomp, T. (2013). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.). Educational Design Research part A: An introduction. Netherlands institure for curriculum development.

  • Prediger, S. (2019). Investigating and promoting teachers’ expertise for language-responsive mathematics teaching. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31(4), 367–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00258-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T., 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), 96–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02961476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. (2014). Conjecture mapping: An approach to systematic educational design research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.778204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2006). Design experiments. In J. L. Green, J. Green, G. Camilli, G. Camilli, P. B. Elmore, & P. Elmore (Eds.). Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203874769

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411

  • Smeyers, P., de Ruyter, D. J., Waghid, Y., & Strand, T. (2014). Publish yet perish: On the pitfalls of philosophy of education in an age of impact factors. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 33(6), 647–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-014-9404-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institutional Press.

  • Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Drijvers, P. (2020). Realistic mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 713–717). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_170

  • Welsh, R. O. (2021). Assessing the quality of education research through its relevance to practice: An integrative review of research-practice partnerships. Review of Research in Education, 45(1), 170–194. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x20985082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolcott, G., Le Tran, T., Mulligan, J., Davis, B., & Mitchelmore, M. (2020). Towards a framework for spatial reasoning and primary mathematics learning: An analytical synthesis of intervention studies. Mathematics Education Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00318-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, S. A., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2017). What do learning scientists do? A survey of the ISLS membership. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(2), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1279546

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

We acknowledge support from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Change and Complexity in Learning (C3L), University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia

    Samuel Fowler, Chelsea Cutting & Simon N. Leonard

  2. Nuertingen-Geislingen University, Nürtingen, Germany

    Sebastian H. D. Fiedler

Authors
  1. Samuel Fowler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chelsea Cutting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sebastian H. D. Fiedler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Simon N. Leonard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuel Fowler.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fowler, S., Cutting, C., Fiedler, S.H. et al. Design-based research in mathematics education: trends, challenges and potential. Math Ed Res J 35, 635–658 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00407-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00407-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation