Abstract
This paper draws on an empirical work dedicated to discussing a theoretical model for design-based research. The context of our study is a research project for the design, the implementation and the analysis of Insectophagia, a digital role-play game implemented in secondary schools. The model presented in this paper aims at conceptualizing researchers’ and practitioners’ relationships with the notion that knowledge development takes place at a meta-didactical level when the participants develop a shared practice and a shared discourse on practice (a common praxeology). This is done through collaboration and teacher-centered design of innovative learning settings. This model emerges from a double approach: (1) a literature review on collaborative research in education and, (2) an analysis of the verbal interactions of practitioners and researchers involved in the project. The study emphasizes the development of knowledge among participants. It also emphasizes the importance of knowledge brokering for filling the gap between research and practice and thus, for the adoption of digital technology by practitioners.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Aldon, G., Arzarello, F., Cusi, A., Garuti, R., Martignone, F., Robutti, O., Soury-Lavergne, S. (2013). The meta-didactical transposition: A model for analysing teachers education programs. Paper presented at the 37th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education. - mathematics learning across the life span, Kiel, Germany.
Aldon, G., Cusi, A., Morselli, F., Panero, M., Sabena, C. (2017). Formative assessment and technology: Reflections developed through the collaboration between teachers and researchers. In G. Aldon, F. Hitt, L. Bazzini, & U. Gellert (Eds.), Mathematics and Technology A C.I.E.A.E.M. Sourcebook (pp. 551-578): Springer.
Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29–40.
Artigue, M. (1992). Didactic engineering. In R. Douady & A. Mercier (Eds.), Research in Didactique of mathematics. Selected papers (pp. 41–66). Paris: La Pensée Sauvage Editions.
Bargal, D. (2006). Personal and intellectual influences leading to Lewin’s paradigm of action research. SAGE Publications, (4), 367–388. doi:10.1177/1476750306070101.
Brougère, G. (2000). Jeu et éducation. Paris: L'Harmattan.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
Chevallard, Y. (1982). Sur L’ingénierie Didactique. Paper presented at the 2e école d’été de didactique des mathématiques Olivet.
Chevallard, Y. (1999). L’analyse des pratiques enseignantes en théorie anthropologique du didactique. Recherches en didactique des mathématiques, 2(19), 221–266.
Cobb, P. (2001). Supporting the improvement of learning and teaching in social and institutional context. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: 25 years of progress (pp. 455–478). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9–13.
Corey, S. (1953). Action research education. Journal of Educational Research, 47, 375–380.
Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Design for Classroom Orchestration. Journal of Computers in Education., 69, 485–492.
Firth, A. (Ed.). (1995). The discourse of negotiation. Studies of language in the workplace. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J., & Shaffer, D. (2010). Looking where the light is bad; video games and the future of assessment. Edge, 6(1), 3–19.
Hevner, A., March, S., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.
Highsmith, J. (2002). Agile software development ecosystems. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Professional.
Jouneau-Sion, C. (2015). Une plateforme collaborative pour le jeu Insectophagia. Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, Lyon: Master Thesis.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2004). Analyse des conversations et négociations conversationnelles. In M. Grosjean & L. Mondada (Eds.), La négociation au travail (pp. 17–41). Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2005). Le discours en interaction. Paris: A. Colin.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34–46.
Maynard, D. (1984). Inside plea bargaining. The language of negotiation. New York/London: Plenum Press.
Maynard, D. (2009). Demur, defer, and deter: Concrete actual practices for negotiation in interaction. Negotiation Journal(26), 125-143.
Meyer, M. (2010). The rise of the knowledge broker. Science Communication, 32(1), 118-127
Norman, D., Draper, S. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives in Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum associates.
OECD. (2015). Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, Retrieved from doi:10.1787/9789264239555-en.
Rasmussen, C., Zandieh, M., & Wawro, M. (2009). How do you know which way the arrows go? The emergence and brokering of a classroom mathematics practice. In W. Roth (Ed.), Mathematical representations at the interface of the body and culture (pp. 171–218). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Reeves, T. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52–66). New York: Routledge.
Reigeluth, C., & Frick, T. W. (1999). Formative research: A methodology for creating and improving design theories. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models (Vol. Vol. II, pp. 633-651). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Richey, R., & Klein, J. (2007). Design and development research: Methods, strategies and issues. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Sanchez, E. (2017). Competition and collaboration for game-based learning: a case study. In P. Wouters, & H. van Oostendorp (Eds.), Instructional Techniques to Facilitate Learning and Motivation of Serious Games (pp. 161–184). Heidelberg: Springer.
Sanchez, E., Emin, V. (2014). Toward a model of play: an empirical study. In C. Busch (Ed.), The 8th European Conference on Games Based Learning, (Vol 2, pp. 503-512). Berlin: Germany.
Sanchez, E., & Monod-Ansaldi, R. (2015). Recherche collaborative orientée par la conception. Un paradigme méthodologique pour prendre en compte la complexité des situations d’enseignement-apprentissage. Education & Didactique, 9(2), 73–94.
Sanchez, E., Piau-Toffolon, C., Oubahssi, L., Serna, A., Marfisi-Schottman, I., Loup, G., George, S. (2016). Toward a play management system for game-based learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science series, 9891, 484–489.
Sensevy, G., Forest, D., Quilio, S., & Morales, G. (2013). Cooperative engineering as a specific design-based research. ZDM, the International Journal of Mathematics Education, 45(7), 1031–1043.
Shaffer, D. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers and Education, 46(3), 223–234.
Traverso, V. (2005). Cristallisation des désaccords et mise en place de négociations dans l'interaction : des variations situationnelles. In M. Grosjean & L. Mondada (Eds.), Les négociations au travail (pp. 43–68). Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.
Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, N. Nieveen, R. Branch, K. Gustafson, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design methodology and developmental research in education and training (pp. 1–14). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23.
Acknowledgments
This study belongs to the JEN.lab project funded by the French Research agency (ANR). We also thank all the teachers who participated in the project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sanchez, E., Monod-Ansaldi, R., Vincent, C. et al. A praxeological perspective for the design and implementation of a digital role-play game. Educ Inf Technol 22, 2805–2824 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9624-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9624-z