scholarly journals Understanding Collaborative Problem-Solving on the Move: A Design Science Research Journey

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Francisco ◽  
Amarolinda da Costa Zanela Klein
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Design Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Design Science Research ◽  
Collaborative Problem Solving ◽  
Collaborative Problem

Design Science Research to Produce Instrumental Knowledge for Evidence-Based Practice in OCD

2021 ◽  
pp. 225-242
Author(s):  
Joan Ernst van Aken
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Conceptual Knowledge ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Design Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Design Science Research ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Action Theories

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a promising approach to improve professional action. EBP is the use of the best available knowledge in professional problem-solving, in particular the best available knowledge produced by research. EBP has much promise for organizational change and development (OCD). However, for successful EBP, one needs a well-developed knowledge base of instrumental knowledge (i.e., knowledge-to-act). Unfortunately, academic OCD research is strong in developing conceptual knowledge (i.e., knowledge-to-understand) but rather weak in instrumental knowledge. In this chapter, design science research (DSR) is discussed: a research strategy to develop instrumental knowledge in the form of designs for effective interventions, processes, or systems to improve present practices. These designs are developed through experiential learning by executing a number of problem-solving projects in the messy “swamp of practice,” often executed in partnerships with professionals. Embedded-in-action theories can be powerful inputs for EBP, thus improving the practice of OCD.

Design Science Research to Produce Instrumental Knowledge for Evidence-Based Practice in OCD

2019 ◽  
pp. 93-110
Author(s):  
Joan Ernst van Aken
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Conceptual Knowledge ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Design Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Design Science Research ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Action Theories

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a promising approach to improve professional action. EBP is the use of the best available knowledge in professional problem-solving, in particular the best available knowledge produced by research. EBP has much promise for organizational change and development (OCD). However, for successful EBP, one needs a well-developed knowledge base of instrumental knowledge (i.e., knowledge-to-act). Unfortunately, academic OCD research is strong in developing conceptual knowledge (i.e., knowledge-to-understand) but rather weak in instrumental knowledge. In this chapter, design science research (DSR) is discussed: a research strategy to develop instrumental knowledge in the form of designs for effective interventions, processes, or systems to improve present practices. These designs are developed through experiential learning by executing a number of problem-solving projects in the messy “swamp of practice,” often executed in partnerships with professionals. Embedded-in-action theories can be powerful inputs for EBP, thus improving the practice of OCD.

scholarly journals What affordances do open-ended real-life tasks offer for sharing student agency in collaborative problem-solving?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juuso Henrik Nieminen ◽  
Man Ching Esther Chan ◽  
David Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Collaborative Problem Solving ◽  
Student Agency ◽  
Student Groups ◽  
Collaborative Problem ◽  
Mathematical Arguments ◽  
Life Tasks ◽  
Collaborative Construction

AbstractThe important role of student agency in collaborative problem-solving has been acknowledged in previous mathematics education research. However, what remains unknown are the processes of agency in open-ended tasks that draw on real-life contexts and demand argumentation beyond “mathematical”. In this study, we analyse a video recording of two student groups (each consisting of four students) taking part in collaborative problem-solving. We draw on the framework for collaborative construction of mathematical arguments and its interplay with student agency by Mueller et al. (2012). This original framework is supplemented by (i) testing and revising it in the context of open-ended real-life tasks, with (ii) student groups rather than pairs working on the tasks, and by (iii) offering a strengthened methodological pathway for analysing student agency in such a context. Based on our findings, we suggest that the framework suits this new context with some extensions. First, we note that differences in student agency were not only identified in terms of the discourse students drew on, but in how students were able to shift between various discourses, such as between “mathematical” and “non-mathematical” discourses. We identify a novel discourse reflecting student agency, invalidation discourse, which refers to denying other students’ agency by framing their contribution as invalid. Finally, we discuss the need to reframe “mathematical” arguments—and indeed student agency—while the task at hand is open-ended and concerns real-life contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document