Co-designing tools for workplace learning
Co-designing tools for workplace learning
复制标题
共同设计工作场所学习工具
DOI：
10.1108/ils-09-2019-0093
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Tobias Ley
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sebastian Maximilian Dennerlein;V. Tomberg;T. Treasure;Dieter Theiler;Stefanie N. Lindstaedt;Tobias Ley
目的
由于学习与工作场所实践紧密结合，因此在工作中引入技术提出了特殊的挑战。当前基于设计的研究（DBR）方法侧重于正式的学习背景，并且经常因缺乏产生可追溯的研究见解而受到质疑。本文旨在提出一种通过将工具理解为社会文化文物、共同设计可供性并系统地研究它们在实践中的采用来扩展 DBR 的方法。
设计/方法论/途径
以迭代实践为中心的方法允许在 DBR 中共同设计认知工具，使假设和设计决策可追溯，并通过一致分析如何使用可供性来构建收敛证据。这在医疗保健专业人员的非正式学习以及他们如何理解自己的经历的背景下得到了证明。作者报告了一项为期 18 个月的 DBR 案例研究，其中使用各种原型并通过各种数据收集手段与从业者一起测试设计。
研究结果
通过考虑拨款分析中的认知水平，作者了解了专业人员如何应对医疗保健领域的压力（领域洞察力）；具有具体设计决策的原型（设计洞察力）；以及理解当认知工具用于阐述非正式学习需求的表征时，记忆和意义建构过程如何相互作用（理论洞察力）。
研究局限性/影响
该方法在一项长期深入的案例研究中得到了验证。虽然这对于了解利益相关者的担忧、建立信任并在多次迭代中应用方法是必要的，但它也可能限制这一点。
原创性/价值
除了生成可追踪的研究见解外，所提出的 DBR 方法还可以为工作领域和实践设计技术增强的学习支持。该方法适用于其他领域和正式学习。
Purpose
Introducing technology at work presents a special challenge as learning is tightly integrated with workplace practices. Current design-based research (DBR) methods are focused on formal learning context and often questioned for a lack of yielding traceable research insights. This paper aims to propose a method that extends DBR by understanding tools as sociocultural artefacts, co-designing affordances and systematically studying their adoption in practice.
Design/methodology/approach
The iterative practice-centred method allows the co-design of cognitive tools in DBR, makes assumptions and design decisions traceable and builds convergent evidence by consistently analysing how affordances are appropriated. This is demonstrated in the context of health-care professionals’ informal learning, and how they make sense of their experiences. The authors report an 18-month DBR case study of using various prototypes and testing the designs with practitioners through various data collection means.
Findings
By considering the cognitive level in the analysis of appropriation, the authors came to an understanding of how professionals cope with pressure in the health-care domain (domain insight); a prototype with concrete design decisions (design insight); and an understanding of how memory and sensemaking processes interact when cognitive tools are used to elaborate representations of informal learning needs (theory insight).
Research limitations/implications
The method is validated in one long-term and in-depth case study. While this was necessary to gain an understanding of stakeholder concerns, build trust and apply methods over several iterations, it also potentially limits this.
Originality/value
Besides generating traceable research insights, the proposed DBR method allows to design technology-enhanced learning support for working domains and practices. The method is applicable in other domains and in formal learning.