Skip to main content

Roles and Competencies of Educational Design Researchers: One Framework and Seven Guidelines

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Learning, Design, and Technology

Abstract

Design research is a genre of inquiry in which the iterative development of solutions to problems in practice provides the setting for scientific inquiry. Design researchers and practitioners collaborate to analyze the problems being tackled and to develop and refine solutions, which are informed by (formative) evaluation along the way. In these studies, the function of the investigator is typically multifaceted, including the roles of consultant, designer, and researcher. While most design researchers are afforded formal opportunities to develop their research skills (e.g., through seminars and courses on research design, interview techniques, data analysis, etc.), the consultant and designer skills receive far less explicit attention and tend to be learned informally, at best. If design research is to realize its potential contribution to the field of learning and instruction, then explicit attention must be given to holistically developing design researcher capacity. This chapter first discusses design research, with attention to the goals, nature, and processes of this approach, how each role is relevant to each process, and foundational competencies that are required to enact the roles. Then, the chapter turns toward developing design researcher capacity. First, a framework for design researcher learning is introduced, followed by consideration of how that learning takes place, and culminating in guidelines for developing design researcher learning trajectories. The chapter concludes with discussion of these ideas in light of educational research capacity in general.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakah, M., Voogt, J., & Pieters, J. (2012). Advancing perspectives of sustainability and large-scale implementation of design teams in Ghana’s polytechnics: Issues and opportunities. International Journal of Educational Development, 32, 787–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S., Dodge, T., Thomas, M., Jackson, C. & Tuzun, H. (2007). Our designs and the social agendas they carry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(2), 263–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (2002). Design research for sustained innovation. Cognitive Studies, Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science. Society, 9(3), 321–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschman, F., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2014). Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 393–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I., & Vermetten, Y. (2005). Information problem solving by experts and novices: Analysis of a complex cognitive skill. Computers in Human Behaviour, 21, 487–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., Mosberg, S., Copland, M., Honig, M., Nelson, H., Gawel, D., & Vye, N. (2010). Adaptive people and adaptive systems: Issues of learning and design. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational change (pp. 825–856). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkley-Etzkorn, K. E., Schumann, D., White, B., & Smith, T. (2016). Designing an evaluation of instructional consultation in a higher education context. To Improve the Academy, 35, 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt, H. (2009). On strategic design. Educational Designer, 1(3), 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt, H., & Schoenfeld, A. (2003). Improving educational research: Toward a more useful more influential and better-funded enterprise. Educational Researcher, 32(9), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canas, J., Quesada, J., Antolí, A., & Fajardo, I. (2003). Cognitive flexibility and adaptability to environmental changes in dynamic complex problem-solving tasks. Ergonomics, 46(5), 482–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cundill, G., Cumming, G. S., Biggs, D., & Fabricius, C. (2012). Soft systems thinking and social learning for adaptive management. Conservation Biology, 26(1), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01755.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DBRC. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of qinuiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3&4), 391–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRC. (2001). Postgraduate training guidelines (3rd ed.). Swindon: ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council).

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, R. S., Philippot, P., & Custrini, R. J. (1991). Social competence and nonverbal behavior.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frerejean, J., Van Strien, J. L. H., Kirschner, P. A., & Brand-Gruwel, S. (2016). Completion strategy or emphasis manipulation? Task support for teaching information problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 90–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, S. K. (2008). “What's too much and what's too little?” the process of becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 326–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golde, C. M. (2007). Signature pedagogies in doctoral education: Are they adaptable for the preparation of education researchers? Educational Researcher, 36(6), 344–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Outline of a method for design research in mathematics education. In J. V. D. Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 17–51). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halberstadt, A. G., Denham, S. A., & Dunsmore, J. C. (2001). Affective social competence. Social Development, 10(1), 79–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handley, K., Clark, T., Fincham, R., & Sturdy, A. (2007). Researching situated learning: Participation, identity and practices in client-consultant relationships. Management Learning, 38(2), 173–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoadley, C. (2004). Methodological alignment in design-based research. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 203–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoadley, C., & Cox, C. (2009). What is design knowledge and how do we teach it? In C. Digiano, S. Goodman, & M. Chorost (Eds.), Educating learning technology designers: Guiding and inspiring creators of innovative educational tools (pp. 19–35). New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hostetler, K. (2012). What is "good" educational research? Educational Researcher, 34(6), 16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jongstra, W., Pauw, I. & McKenney, S. (2016). Ontwerpgericht onderzoek in de master: Hoe faciliteren we dat? Presented at the Onderwijs Research Dagen [Educational Research Days], May 26–27: Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongstra, W., Pauw, I., & McKenney, S. (2017). Competenties ontwikkelen voor ontwerpgericht onderzoek; Richtlijnen voor de HBO masteropleiding. Tijdschrift voor Lerarenopleiders, 38(4), 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kali, Y. (2006). Collaborative knowledge building using the design principles database. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-8993-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(7), 865–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kicken, W., Brand-Gruwel, S., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Slot, W. (2009a). Design and evaluation of a development portfolio: How to improve Students' self-directed learning skills. Instructional Science, 37, 453–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kicken, W., Brand-Gruwel, S., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Slot, W. (2009b). The effects of portfolio-based advice on the development of self-directed learning skills in secondary vocational education. Educational, Technology, Research & Development, 57, 439–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschenbaum, R. J., Armstrong, D. C., & Landrum, M. S. (1999). Resource consultation model in gifted education to support talent development in today’s inclusive schools. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 39–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall/Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kouprie, M., & Visser, F. S. (2009). A framework for empathy in design: Stepping into and out of the user's life. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 437–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krabbe-Sillasen, M., & Valero, P. (2013). Municipal consultants’ participation in building networks to support science teachers’ work. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, 595–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamblin, P. & Etienne, C. (2010). Skills and competencies needed in the research field: Objectives 2020. Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex, France: Deloitte & Apec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, B. (2013). To know is not enough: Research knowledge and its use. Review of Education, 1(1), 2–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, X., Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. (2007). Intercultural adaptive expertise: Explicit and implicit lessons from Dr. Hatano. Human Development, 50(1), 65–72.

    Article  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), 572–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLean, P., & Scott, B. (2011). Competencies for learning design: A review of the literature and a proposed framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 557–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, D. J., & Foster, J. (2005). A dynamic scaffolding model of teacher development: The gifted education consultant as catalyst for change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(3), 222–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S. (2017). Researcher-practitioner collaboration in educational design research: Processes, roles, values & expectations. In M. A. Evans, M. J. Packer, & K. Sawyer (Eds.), Reflections on the learning sciences (pp. 155–188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S., & Visscher-Voerman, I. (2013). Formal education of curriculum and instructional designers. Educational Designer, 2(6), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metz, M. H. (2001). Intellectual border crossing in graduate education: A report from the field. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G., Amio, J., Prilleltensky, I., & Nickels, P. (2000). Partnerships for implementing school and community prevention programs. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11(1), 121–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ormel, B., Pareja Roblin, N., McKenney, S., Voogt, J., & Pieters, J. (2012). Research-practice interactions as reported in recent design studies: Still promising, still hazy. Educational Technology Research & Development, 60(6), 967–986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prieto, L. P., Holenko Dlab, M., Gutiérrez, I., Abdulwahed, M., & Balid, W. (2011). Orchestrating technology enhanced learning: A literature review and a conceptual framework. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(6), 583–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1987). Lesson blueprints based on the elaboration theory of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories and models (pp. 245–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models. A new paradigm of instruction (pp. 425–453). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C. (1993/1994). Goal-based scenarios: A radical look at education. Journal of the Learning Sciences., 3, 429–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C., Fano, A., Bell, B., & Jona, M. (1994). The design of goal-based scenarios. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(4), 305–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunn, C. D. (2008). Engineering educational design. Educational Designer, 1(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S., Hinton-Smith, T., Härmä, V., & Broome, K. (2012). The reluctant researcher: Shyness in the field. Qualitative Research, 12(6), 715–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, R. J. (1988). Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains. Technical Report No. 441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toledo-Pereyra, L. H. (2012). Ten qualities of a good researcher. Journal of Investigative Surgery, 25, 201–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, M. W., & Boling, E. (2014). Preparing instructional designers: Traditional and emerging perspectives. In M. Spector, M. Merril, J. Elen, & M. Bischop (Eds.), In handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 653–660). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2008). Effects of studying sequences of process- oriented and product-oriented worked examples on troubleshooting transfer efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 18, 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Helvoort, J., Brand-Gruwel, S., Huysmans, F., & Sjoer, E. (2017). Reliability and validity test of a Scoring Rubric for Information Literacy. Journal of Documentation, 73(2), 305–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1997). Training complex cognitive skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Kester, L. (2008). Whole task models in education. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. van Merriënboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 441–456). New York/Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderlinde, R., & van Braak, J. (2010). The gap between educational research and practice: Views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers. British Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visscher-Voerman, I., & Gustafson, K. (2004). Paradigms in the theory and practice of education and training design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J. (1997). The unavoidable intervention of educational research: A framework for reconsidering researcher–practitioner cooperation. Educational Researcher, 26(7), 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanchar, S., & Hawkley, M. (2014). “There’s got to be a better way to do this”: A qualitative investigation of informal learning among instructional designers. Educational Technology Research & Development, 62, 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9336-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan McKenney .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

McKenney, S., Brand-Gruwel, S. (2018). Roles and Competencies of Educational Design Researchers: One Framework and Seven Guidelines. In: Spector, M., Lockee, B., Childress, M. (eds) Learning, Design, and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_123-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_123-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics