Incidence of Design-Based Research Methodology in Science Education Articles: A Bibliometric Analysis
Palavras-chave:DBR, Bibliometria, Cienciometria
The design-based research (DBR) methodology has been standing out in the field of educational research promising to adapt to different scenarios and boost the development of educational innovations. However, 17 years after the beginning of the use of this methodology, there are still doubts about its potentiality. Given this, it is necessary to ascertain in which contexts this methodology has been used and what are the educational advances related to it. Thus, bibliometric mapping was carried out in this paper to generate indicators of studies on DBR, to indicate its relationship with the field of Science Education and situate Brazilian production in the international context. The study identified the distribution of publications by year, according to the number of publications, the main journals where these articles were published, the authors nationality, the most cited articles, the main keywords, and the network collaboration between authors. Data showed that the last five years have been the most promising for DBR publications and the North Americans were those who published more about this methodology. Despite the growing number of publications, the field of Science Education still makes little use of this methodology. The main applications found in DBR were related to teacher education, student motivation, and the use of information and communication technologies on teaching and learning.
Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology and Society, 11(4), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/jeductechsoci.11.4.29
Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813
Andrade, D. F., Romanelli, J. P., & Pereira-Filho, E. R. (2019). Past and emerging topics related to electronic waste management: Top countries, trends, and perspectives. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(17), 17135–17151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05089-y
Assefa, S. G., & Rorissa, A. (2013). A bibliometric mapping of the structure of STEM education using co-word analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(12), 2513–2536. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22917
Baker, P. (2004). Querying Keywords Questions of Difference, Frequency, and Sense in Keywords Analysis. Journal of English Linguistics, 32(4), 346–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424204269894
Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2011). Transformational play: Using games to position person, content, and context. Educational Researcher, 39(7), 525–536. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10386593
Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1
Batagelj, V., & Cerinsek, M. (2013). On bibliographic networks. Scientometrics, 96, 845–864. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0940-1
Batista, R. F. M., & Silva, C. C. (2019). When Things Go Wrong - Implementing Historical-Investigative Activities in the Classroom. Science & Education, 28(9–10), 1153–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00071-z
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Collins, A. (1992). Towards a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15–22). Springer Verlag.
Davis, E. A., Palincsar, A. S., Arias, A. M., Bismack, A. S., Marulis, L. M., & Iwashyna, S. K. (2014). Designing educative curriculum materials: A theoretically and empirically driven process. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 24–52. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.g48488u230616264
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005
Diem, A., & Wolter, S. C. (2013). The use of bibliometrics to measure research performance in education sciences. Research in Higher Education, 54, 86–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-012-9264-5
diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.2307/1466933
Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of Immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_4
Elleggard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? Scientometrics, 105, 1809–1831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z
Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43–76. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_3
Garfield, E. (1990). KeyWords plus: ISI’s breakthrough retrieval method. Part 1. Expanding your searching power on current contents on diskette. Current Comments, 32, 3–7.
Garfield, E. (2007). The evolution of the Science Citation Index. International Microbiology, 10, 65–69. https://doi.org/10.2436/20.1501.01.10
Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the Future: Directions for Research in Teaching and Teacher Education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312906
Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer Science course for middle school students. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 199–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1033142
Holden, G., Rosenberg, G., & Barker, K. (2005). Tracing Thought Through Time and Space: A Selective Review of Bibliometrics in Social Work. Social Work in Health Care, 41(3–4), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1300/J010v41n03_01
Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: A selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics, 115(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2622-5
Looi, C., Sun, D., Wu, L., Seow, P., Chia, G., Wong, L., … & Norris, C. (2014). Implementing mobile learning curricula in a grade level: Empirical study of learning effectiveness at scale. Computers and Education, 77, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.011
Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_2
McNeill, K. L. (2011). Elementary students’ views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(7), 793–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20430
Narayan, V., Herrington, J., & Cochrane, T. (2019). Design principles for heutagogical learning: Implementing student-determined learning with mobile and social media tools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 86–101. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3941
Okubo, Y. (1997). Bibliometric indicators and analysis of research systems: methods and examples. OECD Publishing.
Plomp, T. (2013). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design Research — Part A: An introduction (pp. 10–51). Netherlands: SLO Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
Ravenscroft, A. (2007). Promoting thinking and conceptual change with digital dialogue games. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(6), 453–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00232.x
Razera, J. C. C. (2015). Un perfil cienciométrico de Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias (2004-2013). Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias 12(2), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2015.v12.i2.01
Reigeluth, C. M. & Frick, T. W. (1999). Formative research: A methodology for creating and improving design theories. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models (pp. 633–651). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Nelson, W. A. (2003). Development research: Studies of instructional design and development. In D. H. Jonassen & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1099–1130). Routledge.
Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Tucker-Raymond, E. (2016). Developing interpretive power in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(10), 1571–1600. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21267
Schwarz, C. (2009). Developing preservice elementary teachers’ knowledge and practices through modeling-centered scientific inquiry. Science Education, 93(4), 720–744. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20324
Seale, C., Charteris-Black, J., MacFarlane, A., & McPherson, A. (2010). Interviews and internet forums: A comparison of two sources of qualitative data. Qualitative Health Research, 20(5), 595–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309354094
Shareefa, M., & Moosa, V. (2020). The most-cited educational research publications on differentiated instruction: A bibliometric analysis. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.1.331
Tiberghien, A., Vince, J., & Gaidioz, P. (2009). Design-based research: Case of a teaching sequence on mechanics. International Journal of Science Education, 31(17), 2275–2314. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902874894
Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, R. M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design approaches and tools in education and training (pp. 1–14). Kluwer Academic.
Van Eck, P. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Van Eck, P. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). VOSviewer Manual. Leiden University.
Vanderlinde, R., & Van Braak, J. (2010). The gap between educational research and practice: Views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers. British Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902919257
Vesper, J. L., Herrington, J., Kartoglu, U., & Reeves, T. C. (2015). Initial design principles for establishing a learning community for public health professionals through authentic e-learning. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 25(2), 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCEELL.2015.069870
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 629–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
Wang, S. K., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). The effects of a web-based learning environment on student motivation in a high school earth science course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2), 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9016-3
Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93(4), 687–719. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20325
Zheng, L. (2015). A systematic literature review of design-based research from 2004 to 2013. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 399–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0036-z
Zhu, J., & Liu, W. (2020) A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123, 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8
Copyright (c) 2021 Luciana Natália Cividatti, Vagner Antonio Moralles, Amadeu Moura Bego
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os autores são responsáveis pela veracidade das informações prestadas e pelo conteúdo dos artigos.
Os autores que publicam neste periódico concordam plenamente com os seguintes termos:
- Os autores atestam que a contribuição é inédita, isto é, não foi publicada em outro periódico, atas de eventos ou equivalente.
- Os autores atestam que não submeteram a contribuição simultaneamente a outro periódico.
- Os autores mantêm os direitos autorais e concedem à RPBEC o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons Attribution que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial neste periódico.
- Os autores atestam que possuem os direitos autorais ou a autorização escrita de uso por parte dos detentores dos direitos autorais de figuras, tabelas, textos amplos etc. que forem incluídos no trabalho.
- Os autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (por exemplo, publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Os autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (por exemplo, em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) após a publicação visando aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado.
Em caso de identificação de plágio, republicação indevida e submissão simultânea, os autores autorizam a Editoria a tornar público o evento, informando a ocorrência aos editores dos periódicos envolvidos, aos eventuais autores plagiados e às suas instituições de origem.