Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T19:39:17.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

32 - Learning Sciences and Policy

A Decade of Mutual Engagement

from Part VI - Moving Learning Sciences Research into the Classroom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

By
William R. Penuel ,
James P. Spillane  and
Min Sun
Edited by
R. Keith Sawyer
R. Keith Sawyer
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Get access

Summary

This chapter describes three strategies for learning scientists to contribute to policymaking and implementation. First, educational systems design and redesign – where all aspects of school systems (curriculum, assessment, teacher professional development, school leadership, resources to coordinate and maintain instructional quality) are designed to improve instructional quality and redress educational inequities. Second, formative implementation research that studies both micro- and macro-levels of systems including classrooms and schools, local administrative offices, and regional education agencies as well as community organizations and cultural institutions. Third, family- and community-centered organizing to pursue systematic societal transformation, such as shifting power relations and addressing systemic oppression in society.

Keywords

policycurriculumsystemsdesign-based implementation research (DBIR)community-based design research (CBDR)
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences , pp. 638 - 657
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, C. W., de Los Santos, E. X., Bodbyl, S., et al. (2018). Designing educational systems to support enactment of the Next Generation Science Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 1026–1052. doi:10.1002/tea.21484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bang, M., Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A., & Soto, C. (2016). Community-based design research: Learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(6), 28–41. doi:10.1080/10749039.2015.1087572Google Scholar
Bang, M., Medin, D., Washinawatok, K., & Chapman, S. (2010). Innovations in culturally based science education through partnerships and community. In Khine, M. S. & Saleh, M. I. (Eds.), New science of learning: Cognition, computers, and collaboration in education (pp. 569–592). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bang, M., & Vossoughi, S. (2016). Participatory design research and educational justice: Studying learning and relations within social change making. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 173–193.Google Scholar
Barajas-López, F., & Ishimaru, A. M. (2020). “Darles el lugar”: A place for nondominant family knowing in educational equity. Urban Education, 55(1), 38–65. doi:10.1177/0042085916652179Google Scholar
Booker, A., & Goldman, S. V. (2016). Participatory design research as a practice for systemic repair: Doing hand-in-hand math research with families. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 223–235. doi:10.1080/07370008.2016.1179535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boudett, K. P., City, E. A., & Murnane, R. J. (2013). Data Wise: A step-by-step guide to using assessment results to improve teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (2008). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
Campano, G., Ghiso, M. P., & Welch, B. (2015). Ethical and professional norms in community-based research. Harvard Educational Review, 85(1), 29–49.Google Scholar
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.Google Scholar
Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (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.Google Scholar
Cobb, P. A., Jackson, K., Smith, T., Sorum, M., & Henrick, E. C. (2013). Design research with educational systems: Investigating and supporting improvements in the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. In Fishman, B. J., Penuel, W. R., Allen, A.-R., & Cheng, B. H. (Eds.), Design-based implementation research: Theories, methods, and exemplars (National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, Vol. 112(2), pp. 320–349). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203–235. doi:10.3102/0162373708321829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. K., & Moffitt, S. L. (2010). The ordeal of equality: Did federal regulation fix the schools? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 1–24. doi:10.3102/01623737025002119Google Scholar
Cohen, D. K., Spillane, J. P., & Peurach, D. J. (2018). The dilemmas of educational reform. Educational Researcher, 47(3), 204–212. doi:10.3102/0013189X17743488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, M., & Packer, M. J. (2016). Design-based intervention research as the science of the doubly artificial. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 503–530. doi:10.1080/10508406.2016.1187148Google Scholar
Conaway, C., Keesler, V. A., & Schwartz, N. L. (2015). What research do State Education Agencies really need? The promise and limitations of state longitudinal data systems. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(1S), 16S–28S. doi:10.3102/0162373715576073Google Scholar
Contandriopoulos, D., Lemire, M., Denis, J.-L., & Tremblay, E. (2010). Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: A narrative systematic review of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 88(4), 444–483. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00608.xGoogle Scholar
Covitt, B. A., Thomas, C. M., Lin, Q., de los Santos, E., & Anderson, C. W. (2020). Carbon TIME classroom discourse and its connections to student learning. Paper presented at the NARST Annual International Conference, Portland, OR. [conference canceled].Google Scholar
Davidson, K. L., & Penuel, W. R. (2019). How brokers negotiate joint work at the boundaries. In Malin, J. & Brown, C. (Eds.), The role of knowledge brokers in education: Connecting the dots between research and practice (pp. 154–167). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donovan, M. S., Wigdor, A. K., & Snow, C. E. (2003). Strategic education research partnership. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
Doss, C., Fahle, E. M., Loeb, S., & York, B. N. (2019). More than just a nudge supporting kindergarten parents with differentiated and personalized text messages. Journal of Human Resources, 54(3), 567–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishman, B. J., Penuel, W. R., Allen, A.-R., Cheng, B. H., & Sabelli, N. (2013). Design-based implementation research: An emerging model for transforming the relationship of research and practice. In Fishman, B. J., Penuel, W. R., Allen, A.-R., & Cheng, B. H. (Eds.), Design-based implementation research: Theories, methods, and exemplars (National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, Vol. 112(2), pp. 136–156). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Frank, K. A., Zhao, Y., & Borman, K. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: Application to the implementation of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77(2), 148–171. doi:10.1177/003804070407700203Google Scholar
Gobert, J. D., Sao Pedro, M., Raziuddin, J., & Baker, R. S. (2013). From log files to assessment metrics: Measuring students’ science inquiry skills using educational data mining. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(4), 521–563. doi:10.1080/10508406.2013.837391Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, K. D., & Jurow, A. S. (2016). Social design experiments: Toward equity by design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 565–598. doi:10.1080/10508406.2016.1204548Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, K. D., & Jurow, A. S. (2020). Social design-based experiments: A utopian methodology for understanding new possibilities for learning. In Nasir, N. S., Lee, C. D., Pea, R. D., & McKinney de Royston, M. (Eds.), Handbook of the cultural foundations of learning (pp. 330–347). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, K. D., & Vossoughi, S. (2010). Lifting off the ground to return anew: Mediated praxis, transformative learning, and social design experiments. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 100–117. doi:10.1177/0022487109347877Google Scholar
Handelzalts, A., Nieveen, N., & Van den Akker, J. (2019). Teacher design teams for school-wide curriculum development: Reflections on an early study. In Pieters, J. M., Voogt, J. M., & Roblin, N. N. P. (Eds.), Collaborative curriculum design for sustainable innovation and teacher learning (pp. 55–82). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Henrick, E. C., Klafehn, A., & Cobb, P. A. (2018). Assessing the impact of partnership recommendations on district instructional improvement strategies. In Cobb, P., Jackson, K., Henrick, E., Smith, T. M., & the MIST Team (Eds.), Systems for instructional improvement: Creating coherence from the classroom to the district office (pp. 209–220). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
Honig, M. I., & Hatch, T. C. (2004). Crafting coherence: How schools strategically manage multiple, external demands. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 16–30. doi:10.3102/0013189X033008016Google Scholar
Hopkins, M., Spillane, J. P., Jakopovic, P., & Heaton, R. M. (2013). Infrastructure redesign and instructional reform in mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 114(2), 200–224. doi:10.1086/671935Google Scholar
Horn, I. S., & Kane, B. D. (2015). Opportunities for professional learning in mathematics teacher workgroup conversations: Relationships to instructional expertise. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(3), 373–418. doi:10.1080/10508406.2015.1034865Google Scholar
Horsford, S. D., Alemán Jr., E. A., & Smith, P. A. (2019). Our separate struggles are really one: Building political race coalitions for educational justice. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 18(2), 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ishimaru, A. M., & Bang, M. (2016, November). Toward a transformative research and practice agenda for racial equity in family engagement. University of Washington. Retrieved from https://familydesigncollab.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/FLDC-Convening-Report-Fin-033117.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ishimaru, A. M., & Takahashi, S. (2017). Disrupting racialized institutional scripts: Toward parent-teacher transformative agency for educational justice. Peabody Journal of Education, 92(3), 343–362. doi:10.1080/0161956X.2017.1324660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, K., Cobb, P., Wilson, J., Webster, M., Dunlap, C., & Appelgate, M. (2015). Investigating the development of mathematics leaders’ capacity to support teachers’ learning on a large scale. ZDM: The International Journal of Mathematics Education, 47(1), 93–104. doi:10.1007/s11858–014-0652-5Google Scholar
Jackson, K., Horn, I. S., & Cobb, P. (2018). Overview of the teacher learning subsystem. In Cobb, P., Jackson, K., Henrick, E., Smith, T. M., & the MIST Team (Eds.), Systems for instructional improvement: Creating coherence from the classroom to the district office (pp. 65–76). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, K., Johnson, R. C., & Persico, C. (2016). The effects of school spending on educational and economic outcomes: Evidence from school finance reforms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(1), 157–218.Google Scholar
Jackson, K., Shahan, E. C., Gibbons, L. K., & Cobb, P. A. (2012). Launching complex tasks. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 18(1), 24–29. doi:0.5951/mathteacmiddscho.18.1.0024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kali, Y., Eylon, B.-S., McKenney, S. E., & Kidron, A. (2018). Design-centric research-practice partnerships: Three key lenses for building productive bridges between theory and practice. In Spector, M. J., Lockee, B. B., & Childress, M. D. (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy (pp. 1–30). Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature.Google Scholar
Krumm, A. E., Means, B., & Bienkowski, M. (2018). Learning analytics goes to school: A collaborative approach to improving education. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyza, E. A., & Nicolaidou, I. (2017). Co-designing reform-based online inquiry learning environments as a situated approach to teachers’ professional development. CoDesign, 13(4), 261–286. doi:10.1080/15710882.2016.1209528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laferrière, T., Allaire, S., Breuleux, A., et al. (2015). The Knowledge Building International Project (KBIP): Scaling up professional development using collaborative technology. In Looi, C.-K. & Teh, L. W. (Eds.), Scaling educational innovations (pp. 255–276). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
Lamon, M., Secules, T., Petrosino, A. J., Hackett, R., Bransford, J. D., & Goldman, S. R. (1996). Schools for Thought: Overview of the international project and lessons learned from one of the sites. In Schauble, L. & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Contributions of instructional innovation to understanding learning (pp. 243–288). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Law, N., & Liang, L. (2019). Sociotechnical co-evolution of an e-learning innovation network. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1340–1353. doi:10.1111/bjet.12768Google Scholar
Le Dantec, C. A., & Fox, S. (2015). Strangers at the gate: Gaining access, building rapport, and co-constructing community-based research. In Cosley, D., Forte, A., Ciolfi, L., & McDonald, D. (Eds.), CSCW ‘15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 1348–1358). Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Lin, Q., Frank, K. A., Anderson, C. W., Draney, K., Bathia, S., & Thomas, J. (2020). Assessing students’ learning from Carbon TIME in the large and diverse education system. Paper presented at the NARST Annual International Conference, Portland, OR. [conference canceled].Google Scholar
López, G., Yanagui, A., & Kutttner, P. (2016). What does partnership taste like? Reimagining family-school partnerships through participatory design research. Seattle, WA: Family Leadership Design Collaborative. Retrieved May 31, 2020 from http://familydesigncollab.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/FLDC-Paper_What-Does-Partnership-Taste-Like.pdfGoogle Scholar
Mazzoni, T. L. (1991). Analyzing state school policymaking: An arena model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13(2), 115–138.Google Scholar
McKenney, S. E. (2019). Developing the human, material, and structural aspects of infrastructure for collaborative curriculum design: Lessons learned. In Pieters, J. M., Voogt, J. M., & Roblin, N. N. P. (Eds.), Collaborative curriculum design for sustainable innovation and teacher learning (pp. 403–424). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Mohan, L., Chen, J., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Developing a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 675–698. doi:10.1002/tea.20314Google Scholar
Munter, C. (2014). Developing visions of high-quality mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(5), 584–635. doi:10.5951/jresematheduc.45.5.0584Google Scholar
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, I. A., London, R. A., & Strobel, K. R. (2015). Reinventing the role of the university researcher. Educational Researcher, 44(1), 17–26. doi:10.3102/0013189X15570387Google Scholar
Patel, L. (2015). Decolonizing educational research: From ownership to answerability. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penuel, W. R., & Gallagher, D. (2017). Creating research-practice partnerships in education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
Penuel, W. R., Riedy, R., Barber, M., Peurach, D. J., LeBouef, W. A., & Clark, T. L. (2020). Core principles of collaborative education research with stakeholders: Toward requirements for a new research and development infrastructure. Review of Educational Research, 90(5), 627–674.Google Scholar
Penuel, W. R., Riel, M., Joshi, A., Frank, K. A., Pearlman, L., & Kim, C. (2010). The alignment of the informal and formal organizational supports for reform: Implications for improving teaching in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 57–95. doi:10.1177/1094670509353180Google Scholar
Peurach, D. J., Cohen, D. K., Yurkofsky, M. M., & Spillane, J. P. (2019). From mass schooling to education systems: Changing patterns in the organization and management of instruction. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 32–67. doi:10.3102/0091732X18821131Google Scholar
Politics of Learning Writing Collective. (2017). The learning sciences in a new era of U.S. nationalism. Cognition and Instruction, 35(2), 91–102. doi:10.1080/07370008.2017.1282486Google Scholar
Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Spillane, J. P., & Anderson, L. (2014). The architecture of anticipation and novices’ emerging understandings of the principal position: Occupational sense making at the intersection of individual, organization, and institution. Teachers College Record, 116(7), 1–42.Google Scholar
Spillane, J. P., Morel, R. P., & Al-Fadala, A. (2019). Educational leadership: A multilevel distributed perspective. WISE, Qatar. Retrieved from www.wise-qatar.org/educational-leadership-a-multilevel-distributed-perspective/Google Scholar
Spillane, J. P., Peurach, D. J., & Cohen, D. K. (2019). Comparatively studying educational system (re)building cross-nationally: Another agenda for cross-national educational research? Educational Policy, 33(6), 916–945.Google Scholar
Spillane, J. P., Seelig, J. L., Blaushild, N. L., Cohen, D. K., & Peurach, D. J. (2019). Educational system building in a changing educational sector: Environment, organization, and the technical core. Educational Policy, 33(6), 846–881. doi:10.1177/0895904819866269Google Scholar
Sun, M., Liu, J., Zhu, J., & LeClair, Z. (2019). Using a text-as-data approach to understand reform processes: A deep exploration of school improvement strategies. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(4), 510–536.Google Scholar
Sun, M., Loeb, S., & Grissom, J. A. (2017). Building teacher teams: Evidence of positive spillovers from more effective colleagues. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 104–125. doi:10.3102/0162373716665698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, M., Penuel, W. R., Frank, K. A., Gallagher, H. A., & Youngs, P. (2013). Shaping professional development to promote the diffusion of instructional expertise among teachers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(3), 344–369. doi:10.3102/0162373713482763Google Scholar
Sun, M., Wilhelm, A. G., Larson, C. J., & Frank, K. A. (2014). Exploring colleagues’ professional influences on mathematics teachers’ learning. Teachers College Record, 116(4), 1–30.Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H. (2013). Counter-mapping the neighborhood: A social design experiment for spatial justice [Ph.D. dissertation]. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H. (2017). Learning along lines: Locative literacies for reading and writing the city. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(4), 533–574. doi:10.1080/10508406.2017.1307198Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H. (2020). Resuscitating (and refusing) Cartesian representations of daily life: When mobile and grid epistemologies of the city meet. Cognition and Instruction, 38(3), 407–426.Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H., & Hall, R. (2013). Counter-mapping the neighborhood on bicycles: Mobilizing youth to reimagine the city. Technology, Knowledge, and Learning, 18(1–2), 65–93. doi:10.1007/s10758–013-9201-5Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H., Silvis, D., & Bell, A. (2018). Dis-placing place-making: How African-American and immigrant youth realize their rights to the city. Learning, Media, and Technology, 43(4), 451–468. doi:10.1080/17439884.2018.1526804Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H., Silvis, D., Kalir, R., et al. (2019). Supporting public-facing education for youth: Spreading (not scaling) ways to learn data science with mobile and geospatial technologies. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19(3), 529–542.Google Scholar
Taylor, K. H., Takeuchi, L., & Stevens, R. (2017). Mapping the daily media round: Methodological innovations for understanding families’ mobile technology use. Learning, Media, & Technology, 43(1), 70–84.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. M., Covitt, B. A., Lin, Q., Hancock, J. B., Marshall, S., & Anderson, C. W. (2020, March). Carbon TIME teacher orientations and contexts: Making connections to classroom discourse and student learning. Paper scheduled for presentation at the Annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Portland, OR. (conference canceled).Google Scholar
Tsui, A. B. M., & Law, D. Y. K. (2007). Learning as boundary-crossing in school-university partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(8), 1289–1301. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.003Google Scholar
Voogt, J. M., Laferrière, T., Breuleux, A., Itow, R. C., Hickey, D. T., & McKenney, S. E. (2015). Collaborative design as a form of professional development. Instructional Science, 43(2), 259–282. doi:10.1007/s11251–014-9340-7Google Scholar
Wilhelm, A. G., Munter, C., & Jackson, K. (2017). Examining relations between teachers’ explanations of sources of students’ difficulty in mathematics and students’ opportunities to learn. The Elementary School Journal, 117(3), 345–370. doi:10.1086/690113Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. London, England: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
York, A. J., Valladares, S., Valladares, M. R., Garcia, M., & Snyder, J. D. (2020). Community research collaboratives. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center & Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×