This chapter reviews four projects that reflect the principles of design-based implementation research (DBIR) in an effort to highlight a range of relevant theoretical and methodological perspectives and tools that can inform future work associated with DBIR.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbelmanC., ElmoreR., EvenJ., KenyonS., & MarshallJ. (1999). When accountability knocks, will anyone answer?. CPRE Research Report Series RR-42. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education.
2.
AdlerP. S., & KwonS. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.
3.
ArgyrisC., & SchönD. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
ArgyrisC., & SchönD. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
5.
BaileyT., JeongD. W., & ChoS. W. (2010). Referral, enrollment, and completion in developmental education sequences in community colleges. Economics of Education Review, 29(2), 255–270.
6.
BallD. L., SleepL., BoerstT., & BassH. (2009). Combining the development of practice and the practice of development in teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 458–474.
7.
BarronB. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning. Human Development, 49, 193–224.
8.
BarronB. (2010). Conceptualizing and tracing learning pathways over time and setting. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 109(1), 113–127.
9.
BeachK. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. In Iran-NejadA. & PearsonP. D. (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 101–139). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
10.
BeckerM. C. (2004). Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(4), 643–677.
11.
BerwickD. M. (2008). The science of improvement. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299(10), 1182–1184.
12.
BoatmanA., & LongB. T. (2010). Does remediation work for all students? How the effects of postsecondary remedial and developmental courses vary by level of academic preparation (NCPR working paper). New York, NY: National Center for Postsecondary Research.
13.
BostonM. D. (2012). Assessing the quality of mathematics instruction. Elementary School Journal, 113(1), 76–104.
14.
BowkerG. C., & StarS. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
BrykA. (2009). Support a science of performance improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(8), 597–600.
16.
BrykA. S., GomezL. M., & GrunowA. (2011). Getting ideas into action: Building networked improvement communities in education. In HallinanM. (Ed.), Frontiers in sociology of education (pp. 127–162). New York, NY: Springer.
17.
BrykA. S., & SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
18.
BrykA. S., SebringP. B., AllensworthE., LuppescoS., & EastonJ. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19.
CalcagnoJ. C., & LongB. T. (2008). The impact of postsecondary remediation using a regression discontinuity approach: Addressing endogenous sorting and noncompliance (NBER Working Paper No. 14194). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
20.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2012a). Carnegie pathways mean success for developmental math students (Press release). Palo Alto, CA: Author.
CastrechiniS., & ArdoinN. M. (2011). Youth resource mapping: Partnering with service providers and youth to understand the supply and demand for youth services in a local context. Perspectives on Urban Education, 8(2), 3–11.
23.
CityE. A., ElmoreR., FiarmanS. E., & TeitelL. (2009). Instructional rounds in education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
CobbP., & JacksonK. (2011). Towards an empirically grounded theory of action for improving the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13(1), 6–33.
26.
CobbP., JacksonK., SmithT., SorumM., & HenrickE. (2013). Design research with educational systems: Investigating and supporting improvements in the quality of mathematics teaching and learning at scale. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 112(2), 320–349.
27.
CobbP., McClainK., LambergT., & DeanC. (2003). Situating teachers’ instructional practices in the institutional setting of the school and district. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 13–24.
28.
CoburnC. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170.
29.
CoburnC. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12.
30.
CoburnC. E., BaeS., & TurnerE. O. (2008). Authority, status, and the dynamics of insider-outsider partnerships at the district level. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(3), 364–399.
31.
CoburnC. E., & RussellJ. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203–235.
32.
CoburnC. E., RussellJ. L., KaufmanJ. & SteinM. K. (2012). How teacher social capital shapes the implementation of innovative standards-based mathematics curricula. American Journal of Education, 119(1), 137–182.
33.
CoburnC. E., & SteinM. K. (Eds.). (2010). Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield.
34.
CoburnC. E., & TalbertJ. E. (2006). Conceptions of evidence-based practice in school districts: Mapping the terrain. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 469–496.
35.
CoburnC. E., & TurnerE. O. (2012). The practice of data use: An introduction. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 99–111.
36.
CohenM. D., & BacdayanP. (1994). Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science, 5(4), 554–568.
37.
ColyvasJ. A. (2012). Performance metrics as formal structures through the lens of social mechanisms: When do they work and how do they influence?American Journal of Education, 118(2), 167–197.
38.
CoombsR., & MetcalfeS. (2000). Organizing for innovation: Co-ordinating distributed innovation capabilities. In FossN. & MahnkeV. (Eds.), Competence, governance and entrepreneurship: Advances in economic strategy research (pp. 209–231). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
39.
CyertR. M., & MarchJ. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
40.
DiMaggioP., & PowellP. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
41.
DolleJ. R., GomezL. M., RussellJ. L., & BrykA. S. (2013). More than a network: Building professional communities for educational improvement. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 112(2), 443–463.
42.
DonovanM. S. (2011, April). The SERP approach to research, design, and development: A different role for research and researchers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
43.
DonovanM. S., SnowC., & DaroP. (2013). The SERP approach to problem-solving research, development, and implementation. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 112(2), 400–425.
44.
DreierO. (2000). Psychotherapy in clients’ trajectories across contexts. In MattinglyC. & GarroL. C. (Eds.), Narrative and the cultural construction of illness and healing (pp. 237–258). Berkeley: University of California Press.
45.
DuckworthA. L., PetersonC., MatthewsM. D., & KellyD. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101.
46.
DweckC. S., WaltonG. M., & CohenG. L. (2011). Academic tenacity. White paper prepared for the Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA.
47.
ElmoreR. F. (2004). School reform from the inside out. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
48.
ElmoreR., FormanM., StosichE. L., & BocalaC. (2012). Organizational capacity for instructional improvement: The IC Framework and Assessment Protocol. Unpublished manuscript.
49.
EngelbartD. C. (2003, September). Improving our ability to improve: A call for investment in a new future. Paper presented at the IBM Co-Evolution Symposium, San Jose, CA.
50.
FarringtonC., RoderickM., AllensworthE., NagaokaJ., KeyesT. S., JohnsonD., & BeechumN. (2012). Teaching adolescents to become learners: The role of noncognitive factors in shaping school performance: A critical literature review. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.
51.
FeldmanM., & PentlandB. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–121.
52.
FeldmanM. S., & RafaeliA. (2002). Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3), 309–331.
53.
FirestoneW. A., & GonzalezR. A. (2007). Culture and processes affecting data use in school. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 106(1), 132–154.
54.
FrankK. A. (2009). Quasi-ties: Directing resources to members of a collective. American Behavioral Scientist, 52, 1613–1645.
55.
FrankK. A., ZhaoY., & BormanK. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: The case of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77(2), 148–171.
56.
GawandeA. (2007). Better: A surgeon's notes on performance. New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.
57.
GawandeA. (2009). Checklist manifesto: How to get things right. New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.
58.
GrossmanP., ComptonC., IgraD., RonfeldtM., ShahanE., & WilliamsonP. W. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100.
59.
GrossmanP., WineburgS., & WoolworthS. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 941–1012.
60.
HansenM. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.
61.
HeckmanJ. J., & KautzT. (2012). Hard evidence on soft skills. Labour Economics, 19(4), 451–464.
62.
HenrickE., CobbP., & JacksonK. (in press). Educational design research to support large-scale instructional improvement. In Bikner-AhsbahsA., KnippingC., & PresmegN. C. (Eds.), Doing (qualitative) research: Methodology and methods in mathematics education. New York, NY: Springer.
63.
HiebertJ., & GrouwsD. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In LesterF. K.Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
64.
HiebertJ., & WearneD. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second grad arithmetic. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 393–425.
65.
HillH. C., SchillingS. G., & BallD. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 11–30.
66.
HodgsonG. M. (1993), Economics and evolution. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
67.
HustonL., & SakkabN. (2006). Connect and develop: Inside Procter & Gamble's new model for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 58–66.
68.
HutchinsE. (1995). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19(3), 265–288.
69.
JacksonK. (2011). Approaching participation in school-based mathematics as a cross-setting phenomenon. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(1), 111–150.
70.
John W. Gardner Center. (2011, June). Developing early warning indicators for the San Francisco Unified School District. Youth Data Archive Issue Brief. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
KazemiE., FrankeM. L., & LampertM. (2009). Developing pedagogies in teacher education to support novice teachers’ ability to enact ambitious instruction. In HunterR., BicknellB., & BurgessT. (Eds.), Crossing divides: Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 12–30). Palmerston North, New Zealand: MERGA.
73.
KnudsenT. (2002). The significance of tacit knowledge in the evolution of human language. Selection, 3, 93–112.
74.
LampertM. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems in teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
75.
LampertM., BeasleyH., GhousseiniH., KazemiE., & FrankeM. L. (2010). Using designed instructional activities to enable novices to manage ambitious mathematics teaching. In SteinM. K. & KucanL. (Eds.), Instructional explanations in the disciplines (pp. 129–141). New York, NY: Springer.
76.
LangleyG., MoenR., NolanK., NolanT., NormanC., & ProvostL. (2009). The improvement guide (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
77.
LangloisR. N. (1992). Transaction-cost economics in real time. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1, 99–127.
LinN. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
80.
LittleJ. W. (2012). Understanding data use practice among teachers: The contribution of micro-process studies. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 143–166.
81.
MarchJ., & SimonH. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.
82.
MassoudM. R., NielsenG. A., NolanK., NolanT., SchallM. W., & SevinC. (2006). A framework for spread: From local improvements to system-wide change (IHI Innovation Series white paper). Cambridge, MA: Institute for Healthcare Improvement.
83.
McLaughlinM., & LondonR. (2013). Taking a societal sector perspective on youth learning and development. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 112(2), 192–214.
84.
McLaughlinM., & O'Brien-StrainM. (2008). The Youth Data Archive: Integrating data to assess social settings in societal sector. In ShinnM. & YoshikawaH. (Eds.), Toward positive youth development: Transforming schools and community programs (pp. 313–332). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
85.
McLaughlinM., & TalbertJ. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
86.
MeansB., & HarrisC. (2013). Towards an evidence framework for design-based implementation research. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 112(2), 350–371.
87.
MeansB., PadillaC., DeBargerA., & BakiaM. (2009). Implementing data-informed decision making in schools: Teacher access, supports and use. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.
88.
MeansB., PadillaC., & GallagherL. (2010). Use of educational data at the local level: From accountability to instructional improvement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.
89.
MoolenaarN. M., & SleegersP. J. C. (2010). Social networks, trust, and innovation: The role of relationships in supporting an innovative climate in Dutch schools. In DalyA. J. (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 97–114). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
90.
MossP. A. (2012). Exploring the macro-micro dynamic in data use practice. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 223–232.
91.
NelsonR. R. (1994). Routines. In HodgsonG., SamuelsW., & ToolM. (Eds.), The Elgar companion to institutional and evolutionary economics (Vol. 2, pp. 249–253). Aldershot, England: Edward Elgar.
92.
NelsonR. R., & WinterS. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
93.
NelsonT. H., SlavitD., & DeuelA. (2012). Two dimensions of an inquiry stance toward student-learning data. Teachers College Record, 114, 1–42.
94.
NolanK., SchallM. W., ErbF., & NolanT. (2005). Using a framework for spread: The case of patient access in the Veterans Health Administration. Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 31(6), 339–347.
95.
PentlandB. T., & ReuterH, (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 488–510.
96.
PenuelW. R., FishmanB. J., ChengB. H., & SabelliN. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331–337.
97.
PenuelW. R., FrankK. A., & KrauseA. (2010). Between leaders and teachers: Using social network analysis to examine the effects of distributed leadership. In DalyA. J. (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 159–178). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
98.
PenuelW. R., RielM., KrauseA., & FrankK. A. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional interactions in a school as social capital: A social network approach. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 124–163.
99.
PortesA. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.
100.
ProvanK. G., & MilwardH.B. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1–33.
101.
ReagansR., & McEvilyB. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240–267.
102.
RowanB. (2002). The ecology of school improvement: Notes on the school improvement industry in the United States. Journal of Educational Change, 3, 283–314.
103.
ScottW. R., DeschenesS., HopkinsK., NewmanA., & McLaughlinM. (2006). Advocacy organizations and the field of youth services: Ongoing efforts to restructure a field. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(4), 697–714.
104.
ShererJ. Z., & SpillaneJ. P. (2011). Constancy and change in school work practice: Exploring the role of organizational routines. Teachers College Record, 113(3), 611–657.
SnowC., LawrenceJ., & WhiteC. (2009). Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 325–344.
107.
SnowC. E., & LawrenceJ. F. (2011). Word Generation in Boston Public Schools: Natural history of a literacy intervention. The senior urban education research fellowship series (Vol. 3). Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.
108.
SnowC., UccelliP., & WhiteC. (in press). The conditions for and significance of children's acquisition of academic language. In RosebrockC. & Bertschi-KauffmanA. (Eds.), Capturing literacy: Educationally, culturally, and individually. Weinhelm, Germany: Beltz Juventa.
109.
SpillaneJ. P. (2012). Data in practice: Conceptualizing the data-based decision-making phenomena. American Journal of Education, 118(2), 113–141.
110.
SpillaneJ., GomezL., & MesslerL. (2009). Notes on reframing the role of organizations in policy implementation: Resources for practice, in practice. In SykesG., SchneiderB., & PlankD. N. (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 409–425). New York, NY: Routledge.
111.
StarS. L., & GriesemerJ. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.
112.
SteinM. K., GroverB. W., & HenningsenM. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.
113.
SteinM. K., & LaneS. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50–80.
114.
StevensR., SatwiczT., & McCarthyL. (2008). In-game, in-room, in-world: Reconnecting video game play to the rest of kids’ lives. In SalenK. (Ed.), The ecology of games (pp. 41–66). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
115.
StiglerJ., & HiebertJ. I. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: Free Press.
116.
Strategic Education Research Partnership. (2012). Building coherence within schools Retrieved from http://ic.serpmedia.org/
117.
SunM., & FrankK. (2011, April). Peer's influence on teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching and instructional practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
118.
ThomsonA. M., & PerryJ. L. (2006). Collaboration processes: Inside the black box. Public Administration Review, 66 (s1), 20–32.
119.
ThomsonA., PerryJ. L., & MillerJ. K. (2007). Conceptualizing and measuring collaboration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 23–56.
120.
ToughP. (2012). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
121.
TyreM. J., & OrlikowskiW. J. (1996). The episodic process of learning by using. International Journal of Technology Management, 11, 790–798.
122.
UzziB., & LancasterR. (2003). Relational embeddedness and learning: The case of bank loan managers and their clients. Management Science, 49(4), 383–399.
123.
WeickK. E., & RobertsK. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357–381.
124.
WeitzmanB. C., SilverD., & BrazillC. (2006). Efforts to improve public policy and programs through improved data practices: Experiences in 15 distressed American cities. Public Administration Review, 6(3), 386–399.
125.
WengerE. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
126.
WorthamS. (2006). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
127.
YeagerD. (2012a, April). Practical measurement in action: Designing a new measure of community college student motivation and engagement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
128.
YeagerD. (2012, March). Productive persistence: Tenacity + good strategies. Presentation at the Achieving the Dream Annual Meeting on Student Success, Dallas, TX.
129.
YeagerD. S., & WaltonG. (2011). Social-psychological interventions in education: They're not magic. Review of Educational Research, 81, 267–301.
