ABSTRACT
Design researchers have been reluctant to abandon theory-construction altogether. P. Cobb et al. argue succinctly, “Design experiments are conducted to develop theories, not merely to empirically tune ‘what works’”. A design science of education must determine how different designs of learning environments contribute to learning, cooperation and motivation.” The Design-Based Research Collective cautioned that design researchers “regularly find themselves in the dual intellectual roles of advocate and critic”. Concerns about design studies’ validity and generalizability point to an inherent tension, however. Designing and testing new forms of social studies instruction long predates the formal articulation of design-based research methodology. The “Knowledge in Action” project employed a mixed-methods design. Disciplinary approaches also fall victim to the critique that they lack a true social purpose. E. Ellsworth recalls that when she would inform students of her desire to develop their capacity for “critical” analysis, they would often express confusion.
