Mitch's Memorandum #4 on A. Brown

Memorandum on	Mitch Bleier U ED 70300 Prof. K. Tobin Spring 2008 March 5, 2008
Brown, A. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.

In this very readable paper, Ann Brown discuses the development of Design Experiments as an approach to engineering “innovative educational environments and simultaneously conduct[ing] experimental studies of those innovations.” The methodologies associated with design experiments, which she discusses in some detail, address the complexity and the real-worldliness of actual classrooms. All members of the classroom community are involved in the development and investigation of research questions. The dynamic research that results is informed by and informs learning theory and results in changes that address the environment in which the classroom exists including all of the benefits and limitations contributed by available resources and by the social and political structures within which the learning environment is embedded (e.g., school, district, NCLB).

With an adept teacher, and perhaps even more so with a highly skilled teacher, expertise, experience, practicality and instinct drive professional practice. Among the purposes of design experiments seems to be (a) formalization of some of the organization and activity that occurs in a well-functioning classroom, and (b) distribution of expertise among more participants (notably the students) in the learning and teaching that occurs there.

As with other writers on this topic, Brown sees as a strength of this approach the ability to answer frequent demands for proof of rigor with small, often very traditionally quantitative experiments (along with the study of less-easily measured qualitative outcomes). In addition, Brown insists that, in order for her work to effectively inform practice, “we must always operate under the constraint that an effective intervention should be able to migrate from our experimental classroom to average classrooms operated by and for average students and teachers, supported by realistic technological and personal support” (p. 143). This sounds oddly positivistic in someone advocating work that is so responsive to learners and teachers. I understand that the amount of resources brought to bear in this type of research might not be fostered if all participants interests are not addressed, but isn’t it possible that a study can be mounted whose results may be generalizable merely to similar classrooms?