1. Narra$ve ecology as a design
experiment
Kai Pata

2. Design experiment …
Allan Collins (1992)
• Describes design‐based research:
– Is carried out in a complex learning context
– explores how a technological innova$on affects
learning… and interac1on with the environment.
• The goal of design experiments is to engineer
innova1ve learning environments and
simultaneously understand salient aspects of
human cogni1on and learning involved with
those innova$ons.

3. Understanding aspects of human cogni1on
What?
We have different perspec$ves
to places but some$mes
perspec$ves overlap Narra$ves can be
geo‐loca$vely
embedded to the
urban places
We can experience
and share and
collaborate on
narra$ves in virtual
reality
Engineering innova1ve How?
learning environments for collabora1on

4. Characteris$cs of design experiments
• Design experiments are:
– Mediated by innova$ve technology,
– Embedded in everyday social contexts,
– Models that help to test new learning paradigms,
– Useful to create fundamental scien1fic understanding of
learning and knowledge‐building.
• Challenges of design experiments:
– Complexity of real‐world situa1ons and their resistance to
experimental control,
– Large amounts of data arising from a need to combine
ethnographic and quan$ta$ve analysis,
– Comparing across designs.

5. Data‐collec$on?
Can we How will
collaborate on other stories
Tools? stories? influence our
story?
Ques$ons?
Challenges…
What people think
when wri$ng their
own stories?
Are we aware of other stories?
Can mashing different data‐formats
What happens if tags from of my story bring our stories visible?
overlap with tags from other stories?
What is storytelling in hybrid ecologies?

6. Describing or changing reality?
• Cronbach and Suppes (1969) have dis$nguished
between two types of inquiry:
• ‘Conclusion‐oriented’ that describes the reality,
– Guides the theorists who iden1fy and give meaning
to the cause‐and‐effect mechanisms or flows of
events in the learning domain
• ‘Decision‐oriented’ that aims to change the
reality.
– Is common to the prac$$oners who need to develop
applica1ons that consider these theories and
principles in various teaching situa1ons.

7. Binding two aims of design research
• The research process related to the ‘decision‐ and
conclusion‐oriented’ instruc$onal designs follows
the opposite sequences.
‘Conclusion‐oriented’ strategy for tes1ng theories
(Cobb, 2001):
‐ Start from developing a theory,
‐ Con$nue with deriving some design principles from
the theory
‐ Translate these principles into concrete designs,
‐ Evaluate the designs in rela$on to the theory.

8. ‘Conclusion‐oriented’ strategy for
tes1ng theories
DEVELOPING DESIGN
1
WHY?
TESTING
DESIGN
THEORY
WHAT? HOW?
2
EVALUATING THEORY
How is storytelling in
What is our theory of
construc$ng narra$ves in hybrid reality performed
effec$vely?
hybrid ecologies?

9. Binding two aims of design research
• Cobb (2001): the strength of theories developed
through design research originates from their
explanatory power and their grounding in specific
experiences
• The prac$cal process of applying a theory to construct
a design naturally exposes inconsistencies in theory,
and is more effec$ve than analy$cal research (Edelson,
2002).
• Discovering that some instruc$onal designs are
superior to others can also provide insights into
human cogni1ve architecture that may otherwise be
difficult to achieve (Sweller, 2004).

10. ‘Decision‐oriented’ design‐research
• ‘Decision‐oriented strategy’ to develop systems &
methods (Reigeluth, 1999):
– Iden$fying the desired outcomes of learning.
– Iden$fying the circumstances under which learning
has to take place.
– Iden$fying sound theore1cal background for
instruc$onal‐designs under certain circumstances.
– Iden$fying the best theory driven instruc1onal‐
design methods for scaffolding the learning process.
– Iden$fying appropriate learning‐tools and artefacts
for applying certain instruc$onal‐design methods and
scaffolding.

11. ‘Decision‐oriented strategy’
to develop systems & methods
Which theories are applicable?
ACCOMMODATING
THEORY
PRACTICE WITH
THEORY
THEORY
WHY?
EVALUATING DESIGN
PRACTICE
WHAT? HOW?
What are desired outcomes
of wri$ng hybrid narra$ves
to people and Which tools and
environment? methods might work?

12. Con$nuous and recursive design
• The development of design framework is a
con1nuous process of tes$ng various methods,
explaining the results of tes$ng in the light of
theory and, if necessary, complemen1ng the
methods on the basis of findings and theore$cal
interpreta$ons (Reigeluth, 1999).
• Edelson (2002) emphasises, that an important
characteris$c of design research is that it is not
sequen$al but itera1ve movement between the
states of problem analysis and design solu1on

13. The design‐based research characteris$cs
Design‐Based Research Collec$ve (2003)
• The central goals of designing learning environments and
developing theories or “prototheories” of learning are
intertwined;
• Development and research take place through con1nuous
cycles of design, enactment, analysis, and redesign;
• Research on designs must lead to sharable theories that help
communicate relevant implica$ons to prac$$oners and other
educa$onal designers;
• Research must account for how designs func1on in authen1c
seFngs. It must not only document success or failure but also
focus on interac$ons that refine our understanding of the
learning issues involved;
• The development of such accounts relies on methods that can
document and connect processes of enactment to outcomes
of interest.

14. Design Research Paradigm (DRP)
• Is a strategy for developing and refining three
types of theories (Edelson, 2002) .
– ‘Domain theory’ characterises the challenges and
opportuni$es in a specific teaching and learning
context, describes the models how people learn in
this context and the desired outcomes of learning.
– ‘Design framework’ provides knowledge of the
proper$es of successful design solu$on.
– ‘Design methodology’ consists of concrete
guidelines for successful design procedure.

15. References
Cobb, P. (2001). Suppor$ng the improvement of learning and teaching in social and
•
ins$tu$onal context. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds) Cogni$on and instruc$on: 25
years of progress (pp. 455‐478). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
Collins,A. (1992). Toward a design science of educa$on. In E. Scanlon & T. O’ Shea
•
(Eds.), Newdirec(ons in educa(onal technology. Berlin: Springer‐Verlag, 1992.
Cronbach, L. J. & Suppes, P. (1969). Research for tomorrow's schools: Disciplined
•
inquiry for educa$on. London: Macmillan.
Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design.
•
The Journal of Learning Sciences 11, 105‐121.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is Instruc$onal‐Design Theory and how is it
•
changing? In C.M Reigeluth (Ed) Instruc$onal Design Theories and Models: A New
Paradigm of Instruc$onal Theory, Volume II (pp. 5‐29). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Sweller, J. (2004). Instruc$onal design consequences of an analogy between
•
evolu$on by natural selec$on and human cogni$ve architecture. Instruc$onal
Science 32, 9‐31
The Design‐Based Research Collec$ve (2003). Design‐Based Research: An Emerging
•
Paradigm for Educa$onal Inquiry Educa$onal Researcher, 32, 1, pp. 5–8.