Abstract
In this article we discuss some of the ethical dimensions of design-based research, which we believe should feature more prominently in CSCL scholarship. We begin by sketching out why it is important for CSCL researchers to articulate their visions of the good and how this can be accomplished in a systematic way. We then outline how ethical discourses can take shape at the various stages of design-based research and how the ethical and empirical dimensions of DBR can inspire and shape one another. These considerations can help CSCL researchers move closer to consider how sociopolitical issues feature in their work, as has been increasingly called on by scholars.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Change history
08 March 2023
Springer Nature’s version of this paper was updated to reflect the correct City for affiliation 1.
Notes
We use the terms moral and ethical interchangeably.
References
Alexander, H. (2015). Reimagining liberal education: Affiliation and inquiry in democratic schooling. Bloomsbury.
Bang, M., Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A., & Soto, C. (2016). Community-based design research: learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind Culture and Activity, 23(1), 28–41.
Bell, P. (2004). On the theoretical breadth of design-based research in education. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 243–253.
Bell, P., Hoadley, C., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 73–88). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bentham, J. (2000). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Batoche Books.
Chan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2018). Knowledge building: theory, design and analysis. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 295–307). Routledge.
Cohen, E., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2020). Text, Context, and knowledge building: creating, crisscrossing, and rising above jewish identity. Journal of Jewish Education, 86(4), 416–445.
Cohen, E., & Hod, Y. (2021). Enriching the informing cycle of Knowledge Building Communities by investigating students’ interpretations of design principles. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1966638.
Easterday, M. W., Lewis, D. G. R., & Gerber, E. M. (2017). The logic of design research. Learning: Research and Practice, 4(2), 131–160.
Frankena, W. K. (1973). Ethics (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall.
Gomez, K., Gomez, L. M., & Worsley, M. (2021). Interrogating the role of CSCL in diversity, equity, and inclusion. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International Handbook of Computer-Supported collaborative learning (pp. 103–119). Cham: Springer.
Gutiérrez, K. D., & Jurow, A. S. (2016). Social design experiments: toward equity by design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 565–598.
Gutiérrez, K. D., Jurow, A. S., & Vakil, S. (2020). Social design-based experiments: a utopian methodology for understanding new possibilities for learning. In N. S. Nasir, C. D. Lee, R. Pea, & de M. M. Royston (Eds.), Handbook of the Cultural Foundations of Learning (pp. 330–347). Routledge.
Kali, Y., & Hoadley, C. (2021). Design-based research methods in CSCL: calibrating our epistemologies and ontologies. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International Handbook of Computer-Supported collaborative learning (pp. 479–496). Cham: Springer.
Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals (A. W. Wood (ed. & trans.)).
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
MacIntyre, A. C. (1969). Hume on “is” and “ought.”. In W. D. Hudson (Ed.), The is/ought problem: a collection of papers on the central problem in moral philosophy (pp. 35–50). MacMillan.
Philip, T. M., Bang, M., & Jackson, K. (2018). Articulating the “How”, the “For What”, the “For Whom”, and the “With Whom” in concert: a call to broaden the benchmarks of our scholarship. Cognition and Instruction, 36(2), 83–88.
Plato. (1997). In J. M. Cooper (Ed.), Complete works. Hackett Publishing Company.
Puntambekar, S. (2018). Design-based research (DBR). In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), The international handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 383–392). Routledge.
Ramey, K., & Stevens, R. (2019). Girls as experts, helpers, organizers, and leaders: Designing for Equitable Access and participation in CSCL environments. In Lund, K., Niccolai, G. P., Lavoué, E., Gweon, C. H., and Baker, M. (Eds.), A wide lens: combining embodied, enactive, extended, and embedded learning in collaborative settings, Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2019, Volume 1 (pp. 368–375). Lyon, France: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Sandoval, W. (2014). Conjecture mapping: an approach to systematic educational design research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 18–36.
Sartre, J. P. (1963). Preface. In F. Fanon (Ed.), The Wretched of the Earth (pp. 7–31). Grove Press.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Open Court.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: a challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37–68.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 397–417). Cambridge University Press.
Uttamchandani, S., Bhimdiwala, A., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2020). Finding a place for equity in CSCL: ambitious learning practices as a lever for sustained educational change. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15(3), 373–382.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cohen, E., Ben-Zvi, D. & Hod, Y. Visions of the good in computer-supported collaborative learning: unpacking the ethical dimensions of design-based research. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 18, 135–143 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09384-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09384-2