Infrastructuring as a Practice of Design-Based Research for Supporting and Studying Equitable Implementation and Sustainability of Innovations

References

• Anderson, C. W., de Los Santos, E. X., Bodbyl, S., Covitt, B. A., Edwards, K., Hancock, B., … Welch, M. (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.21484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borman, G. D., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A., Madden, N. A., & Chambers, B. (2007). Final reading outcomes of the national randomized field trial of Success for All. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 701–731. doi:10.3102/0002831207306743
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowker, G., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bowker, G., & Star, S. L. (2001). Social theoretical issues in the design of collaboratories: Customized software for community support versus large-scale infrastructure. In G. M. Olson, T. W. Malone,  and J. B. Smith (Eds.), Coordination theory and collaboration technology (pp. 713–738). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
   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
• Chang, H.-H., Henriquez, A., Honey, M., Light, D., Moeller, B., & Ross, N. (1998). The Union City story: Education reform and technology – Students’ performance on standardized tests. New York, NY: Center for Children and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170. doi:10.3102/01623737023002145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E., & Penuel, W. R. (2016). Research-practice partnerships in education: Outcomes, dynamics, and open questions. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 48–54. doi:10.3102/0013189X16631750
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E., Penuel, W. R., & Geil, K. (2013). Research-practice partnerships at the district level: A new strategy for leveraging research for educational improvement. Berkeley, CA and Boulder, CO: University of California and University of Colorado.
   Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E., & Woulfin, S. L. (2012). Reading coaches and the relationship between policy and practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 5–30. doi:10.1002/RRQ.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, D. K., Peurach, D. J., Glazer, J. L., Gates, K., & Goldin, S. (2013). Improvement by design: The promise of better schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google 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:10.1080/10508406.2016.1187148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. A. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77–103. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1301_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donovan, M. S., & Snow, C. E. (2018). Sustaining research-practice partnerships: Benefits and challenges of a long-term research and development agenda. In B. Bevan & W. R. Penuel (Eds.), Connecting research and practice: New models for equity and ethics (pp. 33–50). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 105–121. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1997). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and instructional improvement in Community School District #2. New York, NY: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, C. C., Davidson, K. L., Repko-Erwin, M., Penuel, W. R., Quantz, M., Wong, H., … Brink, Z. (2018). A descriptive study of the IES Researcher–Practitioner Partnerships in Education Research program. Boulder, CO: National Center for Research in Policy and Practice.
   Google Scholar
• Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43–76. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1301_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman, B. J., Penuel, W. R., Hegedus, S., & Roschelle, J. (2011). What happens when the research ends? Factors related to the sustainability of a technology-infused mathematics curriculum. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 30(4), 329–353.
   Google Scholar
• Fogleman, J., McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Examining the effect of teachers’ adaptations of a middle school science inquiry-oriented curriculum unit on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 149–169. doi:10.1002/tea.v48.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forman, M. L., Stosich, E. L., & Bocala, C. (2017). The internal coherence framework: Creating the conditions for continuous improvement in schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrick, E. C., Jackson, K., Henrick, E., & Smith, T. M. (2018). Assessing the impact of partnership recommendations on district instructional improvement strategies. In P. Cobb, K. Jackson, E. Henrick, T. M. Smith, & T. M. 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
• Hopkins, M., & Spillane, J. P. (2015). Conceptualizing relations between instructional guidance infrastructure (IGI) and teachers’ beliefs about mathematics instruction: Regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive considerations. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 431–450. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9257-1
   Web of Science ®Google 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:10.1086/671935
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopkins, M., & Woulfin, S. L. (2015). School system (re)design: Developing educational infrastructures to support school leadership and teaching practice. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 371–377. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9260-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaber, L. Z., & Hammer, D. (2016). Engaging in science: A feeling for the discipline. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 156–202. doi:10.1080/10508406.2015.1088441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jimenez-Alexandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792. doi:10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R., Severance, S., Penuel, W. R., & Leary, H. A. (2016). Teachers, tasks, and tensions: Lessons from a research-practice partnership. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19(2), 169–185. doi:10.1007/s10857-015-9338-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirp, D. L. (2013). Improbable scholars: The rebirth of a great American school system and a strategy for America’s schools. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kolodner, J. L. (2012, July). Envisioning the next generation classroom and the next generation of learning technologies. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Sydney, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• McKenney, S. E. (2018). How can the learning sciences (better) impact policy and practice? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(1), 1–7. doi:10.1080/10508406.2017.1404404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasir, N. S., & Hand, V. (2008). From the court to the classroom: Opportunities for engagement, learning, and identity in basketball and classroom mathematics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(2), 143–179. doi:10.1080/10508400801986108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, D. K. (2012). Designs that fly: What the history of aeronautics tells us about the future of design-based research in education. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 35(2), 119–140. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2012.683573
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, D. K. (2016). Understanding design research–Practice partnerships in context and time: Why learning sciences scholars should learn from cultural-historical activity theory approaches to design-based research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 497–502. doi:10.1080/10508406.2016.1226835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., Farrell, C. C., Allen, A.-R., Toyama, Y., & Coburn, C. E. (2018). What research district leaders find useful. Educational Policy, 32(4), 540–568. doi:10.1177/0895904816673580
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., Novak, M., McGill, T. A. W., Van Horne, K., & Reiser, B. J. (2017). How to define meaningful daily learning objectives for science investigations. Seattle, WA: Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, University of Washington.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., Reiser, B. J., Novak, M., McGill, T., Frumin, K., Van Horne, K., … Watkins, D. A. (2018). Using co-design to test and refine a model for three-dimensional science curriculum that connects to students’ interests and experiences. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., Van Horne, K., Jacobs, J., & Turner, M. (2018). Developing a validity argument for practical measures of student experience in project-based science classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., Van Horne, K., Severance, S., Quigley, D., & Sumner, T. (2016). Students’ responses to curricular activities as indicator of coherence in project-based science. In C.-K. Looi, J. L. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 855–858). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Peurach, D. J., & Neumerski, C. M. (2015). Mixing metaphors: Building infrastructure for large scale school turnaround. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 379–420. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9259-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiser, B. J., Michaels, S., Moon, J., Bell, T., Dyer, E., Edwards, K. D., … Park, A. (2017). Scaling up three-dimensional science learning through teacher-led study groups across a state. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(3), 280–298. doi:10.1177/0022487117699598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Severance, S., Penuel, W. R., Sumner, T., & Leary, H. (2016). Organizing for teacher agency in curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 531–564. doi:10.1080/10508406.2016.1207541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M., & O’Day, J. A. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S. H. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233–268). Bristol, PA: Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Spillane, J. P., & Hopkins, M. (2015). School-subject variation in educational infrastructures: A cautionary implementation tale. In J. A. Supovitz & J. P. Spillane (Eds.), Challenging standards: Navigating conflict and building capacity in the era of the Common Core (pp. 35–44). Lanham, NH: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Spillane, J. P., Parise, L. M., & Sherer, J. Z. (2011). Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: Policy, school administration, and the technical core. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 586–619. doi:10.3102/0002831210385102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 35, 601–617. doi:10.1177/0162243910377624
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 111–134. doi:10.1287/isre.7.1.111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzou, C. T., & Bell, P. (2010). Micros and Me: Leveraging home and community practices in formal science instruction. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 1135–1143). Chicago, IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Woulfin, S. L. (2015). Highway to reform: The coupling of district reading policy and instructional practice. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 535–557. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9261-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zivic, A., Smith, J. F., Reiser, B. J., Edwards, K. D., Novak, M., & McGill, T. A. W. (2018). Negotiating epistemic agency and target learning goals: Supporting coherence from the students’ perspective. In J. Kay & R. Luckin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 25–32). London, UK: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
   Google Scholar