Maximizing research and development resources: identifying and testing “load-bearing conditions” for educational technology innovations

Education innovations often have a complicated set of assumptions about the contexts in which they are implemented, which may not be explicit. Education technology innovations in particular may have additional technical and cultural assumptions. As a result, education technology research and development efforts as well as scaling efforts can be slowed or made less efficacious because some of these basic assumptions (called load bearing conditions) about the match and prerequisites for the innovation are not met. The assumptions-based planning model is adapted as a methodology to help identify the load-bearing conditions for innovations. The process and impact of its use with two cases of education technology-oriented research and development efforts is reported. The work demonstrates the potential value of this LBC process for recruiting, selecting, and supporting research sites, for innovation designers to target efforts that strengthen implementation and support of scaling. Recommendations are made for others engaged in partnerships with education providers around developing, implementing and testing new education technology based innovations in more effective ways.

[1]  Huey-tsyh Chen.  Theory-driven evaluations , 1990 .

[2]  William M. Hix,et al.  Assumption-Based Planning: A Planning Tool for Very Uncertain Times , 1995 .

[3]  A. Reynolds.  Confirmatory Program Evaluation: A Method for Strengthening Causal Inference , 1998 .

[4]  Toni Stokes Jones,et al.  Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study , 2000 .

[5]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[6]  A. Schoenfeld,et al.  Improving Educational Research:Toward a More Useful, More Influential, and Better-Funded Enterprise , 2003 .

[7]  E. Soloway,et al.  Creating a Framework for Research on Systemic Technology Innovations , 2004 .

[8]  J. Krajcik,et al.  Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning , 2005 .

[9]  Thomas A. Brush,et al.  Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research , 2007 .

[10]  J. Durlak,et al.  Implementation Matters: A Review of Research on the Influence of Implementation on Program Outcomes and the Factors Affecting Implementation , 2008, American journal of community psychology.

[11]  G. Boulet.  Rapid prototyping : an efficient way to collaboratively design and develop e-learning content , 2009 .

[12]  M. Stein,et al.  Research and Practice in Education: Building Alliances, Bridging the Divide , 2010 .

[13]  M. Stein,et al.  Key lessons about the relationship between research and practice , 2010 .

[14]  Patrick Wachira,et al.  Technology Integration Barriers: Urban School Mathematics Teachers Perspectives , 2011 .

[15]  Peggy A. Ertmer,et al.  Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[16]  Keith A. Nabb,et al.  A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration of Intrinsic Problems in Designing Inquiry Activities , 2013 .

[17]  Aaron M. Kessler,et al.  Conceptualizing Teacher's Practices in Supporting Students' Mathematical Learning in Computer- Directed Learning Environments , 2014, ICLS.

[18]  Yael Kovo.  Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) , 2016 .

[19]  John Y. Baek,et al.  Handbook Of Design Research Methods In Education: Innovations In Science, Technology, Engineering, And Mathematics Learning And Teaching , 2018 .