Abstract
One-size-fits-all educational innovations do not work because they ignore contextual factors that determine an intervention’s efficacy in a particular local situation. Identifying variables within the intervention’s setting that represent important conditions for success and summarizing the extent to which the impact of the intervention is attenuated by variation in them can provide prospective adopters of the innovation a better sense of what level of effectiveness they are likely to enjoy in their own particular circumstances. This study presents a research framework on how to conduct such an analysis and how to design educational innovations for scalability through enhancing their adaptability for effective usage in a wide variety of settings. The River City MUVE, a technology-based curriculum designed to enhance engagement and learning in middle school science, is presented as a case study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 60–108). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Campione, J. (1987). Metacognitive components of instructional research with problem learners. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 117–140). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clarke, J. (2006). Making learning meaningful: An exploratory study of using MUVEs to teach middle school science. Unpublished Qualifying Paper presented to the Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.
Clarke, J., Dede, C., Ketelhut, D., & Nelson, B. (2006). A design-based research strategy to promote scalability for educational innovations. Educational Technology, 46(3), 27–36.
Coalition for Evidence-based Policy. (2003). Identifying and implementing educational practices supported by rigorous evidence: A user-friendly guide. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Coburn, C. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dede, C. (2006). Scaling up: Evolving innovations beyond ideal settings to challenging contexts of practice. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 551–566). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Dede, C., Clarke, J., Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B., & Bowman, C. (2005). Fostering motivation, learning, and transfer in multi-user virtual environments. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, Montreal, Canada.
Dede, C., Honan, J., & Peters. L., (Eds). (2005). Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational innovation. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Dillashaw, F. G., & Okey, J. R. (1980). Test of integrated process skills for secondary science students. Science Education, 64(5), 601–608.
Fraser, B. (1981). TOSRA: Test of science related attitudes. Hawthorne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Ketelhut, D. (2004). Assessing science self-efficacy in a virtual environment: a measurement pilot. Unpublished Qualifying Paper presented to the Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.
Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke, J., Dede, C., Nelson, B., & Bowman, C. (2005). Inquiry teaching for depth and coverage via multi-user virtual environments. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, TX.
Light, R. J., Singer, J. D., & Willett, J.B. (1990). By design: Planning research on higher education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Means, B., & Penuel, W.R. (2005). Scaling up technology-based educational innovations. In C. Dede, J. Honan, & L. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational innovation. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E., & Gheen, M., et al. (2000). Manual for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS), Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
Moore, G. A. (1999). Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling high-tech products to mainstream customers. New York: HarperBusiness.
Nelson, B. (2005). Investigating the impact of individualized, reflective guidance on student learning in an educational multi-user virtual environment. Unpublished Dissertation, Harvard University.
Nelson, B., Ketelhut, D., Clarke, J., Bowman, C., & Dede, C. (2005). Design-based research strategies for developing a scientific inquiry curriculum in a multi-user virtual environment. Educational Technology, 45(1), 21–27.
Nelson, B., Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke, J., Dieterle, E., Dede, C., & Erlandson, B. (2007). Robust design strategies for scaling educational innovations: The River City case study. In B. E. Shelton & D. A. Wiley (Eds.), The educational design and use of computer simulation games (pp. 224–246). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Press.
Palincsar, A. S. (1986). Reciprocal teaching. In Teaching reading as thinking. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984): Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.
Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1985). Reciprocal teaching: Activities to promote read(ing) with your mind. In T.L. Harris & E.J. Cooper (Eds.), Reading, thinking and concept development: Strategies for the classroom. New York: The College Board.
Palincsar, A. S., Ranson, K., & Derber, S. (1989): Collaborative research and development of reciprocal teaching. Educational Leadership, 46(4), 37–40.
Pearson, P. D., Ferdig, R. E., Blomeyer Jr., R. L., & Moran, J. (2005). The effects of technology on reading performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Russell, M., Bebell, D., & O’Dwyer, L. (2003) Use, support, and effect of instructional technology study: An overview of the USEIT study and the participating districts. Boston, MA: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative. Retrieved August 29, 2004, from http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc/studies/USEIT/description.shtml.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992), Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, ed., NY: Macmillan, pp. 334–370.
Waxman, H. C., Lin, M.-F., & Michko, G. M. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of teaching and learning with technology on student outcomes. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–117.
Wiske, M. S., & Perkins, D. (2005). Dewey goes digital: Scaling up constructivist pedagogies and the promise of new technologies. In C. Dede, J. Honan, & L. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Acknowledgments
Our development of the scalability index would not be possible without the participation and insight of Dr. John Willett and Ms. Liane Moody at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Clarke, J., Dede, C. (2009). Robust Designs for Scalability. In: Moller, L., Huett, J., Harvey, D. (eds) Learning and Instructional Technologies for the 21st Century. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09667-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09667-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-09666-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-09667-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)