The roles and uses of design principles for developing the trialogical approach on learning

In the present paper, the development and use of a specific set of pedagogical design principles in a large research and development project are analysed. The project (the Knowledge Practices Laboratory) developed technology and a pedagogical approach to support certain kinds of collaborative knowledge creation practices related to the ‘trialogical’ approach on learning. The design principles for trialogical learning are examined from three main developmental perspectives that were emphasised in the project: theory, pedagogy, and technology. As expected, the design principles had many different roles but not as straightforward or overarching as was planned. In their outer form they were more resistant to big changes than was expected but they were elaborated and specified during the process. How theories change in design-based research is discussed on the basis of the analysis. Design principles are usually seen as providing a bridge between theory and practice, but the present case showed that also complementary, more concrete frameworks are needed for bridging theory to practical pedagogical or technical design solutions. 10.1080/21567069.2011.624171

[1]  R. Sternberg.  What Is an “Expert Student?” , 2003 .

[2]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  INTRODUCTION: "Perspectives on the Object of Activity" , 2005 .

[3]  Yael Kali,et al.  The role of design-principles in designing courses that promote collaborative learning in higher-education , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[4]  H. V. D. Meer,et al.  Perspectives on knowledge creating inquiry in higher education , 2011 .

[5]  Christoph Richter,et al.  Driving Objectives and High-level Requirements for KP-Lab Technologies. , 2008 .

[6]  Philip Bell,et al.  Design-Based research in education , 2004 .

[7]  Gaëtan Bourmaud,et al.  From computer to instrument system: a developmental perspective , 2003, Interact. Comput..

[8]  Ilana Löwy,et al.  The Strength of Loose Concepts — Boundary Concepts, Federative Experimental Strategies and Disciplinary Growth: The Case of Immunology , 1992 .

[9]  Lone Dirckinck-Holmfeld,et al.  Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Practices , 2009 .

[10]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  The Three Cycle View of Design Science , 2007, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[11]  L. Lipponen,et al.  Models of Innovative Knowledge Communities and Three Metaphors of Learning , 2004 .

[12]  K. K. Cetina,et al.  The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory , 2001 .

[13]  Koeno Gravemeijer,et al.  Design research from a learning design perspective , 2006 .

[14]  Susan McKenney,et al.  Design research from a curriculum perspective , 2006 .

[15]  野中 郁次郎,et al.  The Knowledge-Creating Company: How , 1995 .

[16]  Yael Kali,et al.  Collaborative knowledge building using the Design Principles Database , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[17]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Perspectives on the object of activity , 2005 .

[18]  A. Sfard.  On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One , 1998 .

[19]  Paavola Sami,et al.  From meaning making to joint construction of knowledge practices and artefacts: a trialogical approach to CSCL , 2009 .

[20]  Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry , 2003 .

[21]  Christopher Alexander,et al.  The Timeless Way of Building , 1979 .

[22]  K. Hakkarainen,et al.  The Knowledge Creation Metaphor – An Emergent Epistemological Approach to Learning , 2005 .

[23]  K. Hakkarainen,et al.  Communities of Networked Expertise: Professional and Educational Perspectives , 2004 .

[24]  Jan Borchers,et al.  Interaction Design Patterns: Twelve Theses , 2000 .

[25]  L. J. Johnston,et al.  Principles for a usability-oriented pattern language , 1998, Proceedings 1998 Australasian Computer Human Interaction Conference. OzCHI'98 (Cat. No.98EX234).

[26]  Carl Bereiter,et al.  Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age , 2002 .

[27]  Daniel C. Edelson.  Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage in Design , 2002 .

[28]  A NardiBonnie,et al.  Methods & tools: The activity checklist , 1999 .

[29]  Yrjö Engeström,et al.  From design experiments to formative interventions , 2008, ICLS.

[30]  M. Scardamalia.  Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge , 2002 .

[31]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Methods & tools: The activity checklist: a tool for representing the “space” of context , 1999, INTR.

[32]  Lakkala Minna,et al.  Main functionalities of the knowledge practices environment (KPE) affording knowledge creation practices in education , 2009 .

[33]  P.H.M. Sins,et al.  D8.3 Next research report: summary of research on knowledge practices in education supported by KP-Lab technology , 2009 .