Educational Design Research and the notion of phronesis [1848] Home : Annual Conference 2017

Public Group Active 4 years, 1 month ago

Wed, Sep 6 2017, 10:40am – 12:00pm

Authors: Sebastian Fiedler

Room: Harold Wilson (2)

Theme: Wildcard

Type: 20-minute session

Description

In recent years “educational design research” (EDeR) – also called “design-based research” – has gained considerable prominence among contemporary approaches to educational technology research in higher education and beyond. Though EDeR researchers predominantly focus on interventions into contextualised practice settings, they often seemingly maintain an ideal of “scientific” rationale fundamentally geared towards universal knowledge claims and the notion of primacy of “theory”. Regardless of its focus on authentic practice problems, EDeR often seemingly maintains the view that social sciences should emulate the natural sciences (and the applied engineering branches) by trying to produce cumulative and predictive theory. Over the years various scholars have questioned the applicability of this notion of epistemic science to the study of human practice and the design of intentional interventions into systems of activity and their technological instrumentation and mediation.

Flyvbjerg (2005), for example, holds the view that social sciences should instead explore and promote value rationality, or in other words engage “in reflexive analysis and deliberation about values and interests” (Flyvbjerg 2005, p. 38) in the context of practice. In reference to Aristotele’s notion of the intellectual virtue of “phronesis” (prudence or practical wisdom) Flyvbjerg denotes his proposed re- conceptualisation “phronetic social science”. Seemingly, this notion has been deliberated and discussed only by a relatively small number of scholars in the field of educational design research (for some very recent examples, see Bardone & Bauters 2017; Reinmann,2017) and educational technology research (see for example, Inouye, Merrill & Swan 2005; Rourke & Friesen 2006; Willis, 2008).

This paper explores methodological blind spots within contemporary educational design research and its application in the field of educational technology in higher education. In addition, it reviews and discusses how the further conceptual development and emancipation of EDeR as a system of inquiry could gain from adopting core ideas of phronesis and addressing issues of value rationality within its methodological approach.

Format:

The session will raise core methodological issues within EDeR (12 min) and engage the audience in discussing potential sources of inspiration for its further development as a system of inquiry (8 min) in educational technology research.

References:

Bardone, E. & Bauters, M. (2017). A phronetic approach to educational design-based research: Issues and aspirations. EDeR – Educational Design Research, 1(1), 1-21. http://dx.doi. org/10.15460/eder.1.1.1025

Flyvbjerg, B. (2005). Social science that matters. European Foresight.http://flyvbjerg.plan.aau.dk/Publications2006/ForesightNo2PRINT.pdf

Inouye, D. K., Merrill, P. F., & Swan, R. H. (2005). Help: toward a new ethics-centered paradigm for instructional design and technology. ITD Record. http://www.indiana.edu/~idt/articles/documents/ethics.htm

Reinmann, G. (2017). EDeR – Design-based research on the way to mainstream research? Comments on the plea for phronesis by Bardone and Bauters. EDeR – Educational Design Research, 1(1), 1-5. http:// dx.doi.org/10.15460/eder.1.1.1050

Rourke, L., & Friesen, N. (2006). The learning sciences: the very idea. Educational Media International, 43(4), 271-284.

Willis, J. W. (2008). Qualitative research methods in education and educational technology. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Go Back