Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.5555/2483716.2483728dlproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesaus-ceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free access

Models and methods for computing education research

Published: 31 January 2012 Publication History

Abstract

We have been engaged in computing education research for close to two decades. One characteristic of the field has been a preponderance of exploratory research, Marco Polo papers as Valentine termed them. Even considering the entire research corpus it is hard to discern a clear trend in terms of models and methods for conducting research. While some prominent researchers, such as Fincher, have established a tradition of mixed method research and multi-institutional studies, these approaches form a branch of the discipline and do not constitute a dominant paradigm. Indeed computing education research demonstrates an observable eclecticism in relation to method, combining as it does approaches from a range of qualitative and quantitative research traditions. A consequence of this is that we have spent time on thinking about the research area as a whole. We believe that a key defining feature of computing education research is the focus on learning in the discipline. The point of departure for much computing education research is consequently a need to address educational challenges in the discipline, rather than a standpoint in an educational tradition. This places the research objective, or question, in focus and makes the choice of method a secondary concern for many computing education researchers. In this article we discuss the nature of a broader emerging paradigm for conducting educational research, and a framework which can scaffold working within this paradigm.

References

[1]
Berglund, A., Daniels, M., and Pears, A. (2006) Qualitative research projects in computing education research: An overview, Australian Computer Science Communications, vol. 28, no. 5, 25--34.
[2]
Byram, M., Nichols, A., and Stevens, D. (red) (2001): Developing Intercultural Competence in Practice, Multilingual Matters Ltd., Clevedon, UK.
[3]
Cajander, Å. (2010) Usability -- who cares? The introduction of user-centred systems design in organisations. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 740, Uppsala.
[4]
Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1983) Becoming Critical: Knowing Through Action Research. Deakin University press, Melbourne.
[5]
Coppola, N., Hiltz, S., and Rotter, N. (2004) Building Trust in Virtual Teams, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol. 47, 95--104.
[6]
Crotty, M. (1998) The Foundations of Social Research, Sage publications, London.
[7]
Daniels, M. (2011) Developing and Assessing Professional Competencies: a Pipe Dream? Experiences from an Open-Ended Group Project Learning Environment, Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 808, Uppsala, Sweden.
[8]
Elden, M. and Chisholm, R. (1993) Emerging varieties of action research: Introduction to the special issue, Human relations, vol. 46, no. 2, 121--142.
[9]
Jarvenpaa, S., Knoll, K., and Leidner, D. (1998) Is Anybody Out There? Antecedents of Trust in Global Virtual Teams, Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 14, 29--64.
[10]
Laxer, C., Daniels, M., Cajander, Å., and Wollowski, M. (2009) Evolution of an International Collaborative Student Project, Australian Computer Science Communications, vol. 31, no. 5, 111--118.
[11]
Lewin, K. (1946) Action research and minority problems, Journal of social issues, vol. 2, no. 4, 34--46.
[12]
Maynard, M. (1994) Methods, practice, and epistemology: The debate about feminism and research, in Researching women's lives from a feminist perspective, eds. Maynard and Purvis, Taylor and Francis, London, 10--26.
[13]
McKay, J. and Marshall, P. (2001) The dual imperatives of action research, Information Technology and People, vol. 14, 46--59.
[14]
Panteli, N. and Duncan, E. (2004) Trust and temporary virtual teams: alternative explanations and dramaturgical relationships, Information Technology and People, vol. 17, 423--441.
[15]
Pears, A., Daniels, M., and Berglund, A. (2002) Describing Computer Science Education Research: An Ac Pears, A. and Daniels, M. (2003) Structuring CSEd research studies: Connecting the pieces, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 35, no. 3, 149--153.
[16]
Pears, A. and Daniels, M. (2003) Structuring CSEd research studies: Connecting the pieces, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 35, no. 3, 149--153.
[17]
Piaget, J. (1970) Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child, Orion.
[18]
Rasmussen, L. (2004) Action research -- Scandinavian experiences, AI and society, vol. 18. no. 1, 21--43.
[19]
Reason, P. (2006) Choice and quality in action research practice, Journal of management inquiry, vol. 15, no. 2, 187--203.
[20]
Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (2007) Handbook of action research, Sage, London.
[21]
Westlander, G. (2006) Researcher roles in action research, in Action an interactive research -- Beyond practice and theory, eds Nielsen and Svensson, Shaker, Maastricht, 45--62.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)A Systematic Literature Review of Empiricism and Norms of Reporting in Computing Education Research LiteratureACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/347065222:1(1-46)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2021
  • (2019)Research This! Questions that Computing Educators Most Want Computing Education Researchers to AnswerProceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3291279.3339402(259-267)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2019

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image DL Hosted proceedings
ACE '12: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 123
January 2012
214 pages
ISBN:9781921770043

Publisher

Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Australia

Publication History

Published: 31 January 2012

Author Tags

  1. educational research
  2. paradigm
  3. research framework

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Acceptance Rates

ACE '12 Paper Acceptance Rate 21 of 43 submissions, 49%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 161 of 359 submissions, 45%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)42
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 20 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)A Systematic Literature Review of Empiricism and Norms of Reporting in Computing Education Research LiteratureACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/347065222:1(1-46)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2021
  • (2019)Research This! Questions that Computing Educators Most Want Computing Education Researchers to AnswerProceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3291279.3339402(259-267)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2019

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media