No abstract

No abstract

Design-based research (DBR) is a programme where researchers co-operate with practitioners to work out new solutions. In DBR researchers interfere in daily life and participate in practitioners’ working processes. One open question is: What kind of knowledge can be generated in these projects? My starting point here is a DBR project in vocational education and training in Germany which is used for an investigation of the epistemological background of this kind of research enterprise. The characteristics of DBR are reflected on the basis of phenomenological and hermeneutical approaches. The basic assumptions of these concepts are introduced and applied to the DBR approach to show how DBR generally works and how, specially, features of DBR like participation in daily life, co-operation with practitioners, gathering knowledge in the field a. s. o. can be handled. The line of argumentation in this contribution is a radical switch between practical questions in daily work in DBR on one hand and theoretical re-assurance on the other hand. For researchers, DBR is an enterprise in a new world. The analytical paradigm does not prepare the voyagers for this journey. Therefore the non-analytic continental tradition of philosophy has to be re-discovered.

We, the authors of the paper, have jointly conducted several design-based research (DBR) projects. The subject of this paper is a project lasting approximately 18 months, which dealt with the introduction of a new curriculum in a vocational college. We were involved in different roles: one as a representative of the research community and the other as a representative of the vocational college and thus of practice. In the project, different interests were considered: the research division wanted to generate knowledge while the practitioners were interested in implementing a curriculum and developing new forms of learning and teaching. It is not that we could always assign each of these two perspectives to exactly one of us, even though we were officially researchers and practitioners. We have always approached each other in our DBR projects. Both perspectives have been incorporated into the paper: One author is concerned with the genesis of knowledge—how knowledge is created in DBR projects, a partly methodological approach. The other author attempts to find theoretical points of reference and reassurances about the project work. This leads to very practical considerations. The project did not commence with an exactly defined problem; we began with broad concerns that had to be distilled into specific goals over the course of the project.. We had to conduct dialogical planning in our different roles and responsibilities. After each work phase and workshop, we reviewed and made a record of what had happened and how, the condition of the group and what it should work on in the next practical phase. This was supplemented with classroom visits and one-on-one discussions with various project participants. The information derived from these evaluations was subsequently used in the planning of the next cycle. Therefore, in the next cycle, the same project was not conducted, but a revised project was developed, which continued from where the previous cycle had ended. Thus, the problem definition continued evolving. In this paper, we have tried to concisely present how the work progressed in phases and cycles and roughly described the thought process and evaluations that shaped this project.  Perceived this way, this paper serves two different interests. First, it shows how a problem definition was developed and further sharpened and what concrete result was obtained in the process. This is indicated by the subtitle. Second, it explains how knowledge is created and defines the scope and specificity of this knowledge.

Objective: To describe the foundation studies element of the education for practice as a speech and language therapist in one Irish University, and how this element features in curriculum development and updating. Background: This paper addresses the question of how best to introduce students to the ever-increasing depth and range of knowledge regarding communication disorders. This foundation is the basis upon which to build the knowledge, skills and attitudes that lead ultimately to generating prerequisites for clinician scientists to provide services for people with communication and swallowing disabilities. Methods/Results: Since its institution as a university course, the course curriculum in our department at Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, has been subjected to regular revision and updating to be in line with educational, professional and service requirements. In this paper, we select elements of our most recent revision of the curriculum, incorporating the redefinition of the desirable characteristics of our graduates. This paper presents an overview of curriculum development, and focuses on the initial part of the education that sets the foundation for acquiring the knowledge that we consider to be a relevant, solid basis for entering clinical work. Conclusions: The current foundation stage of the curriculum encompasses elements that reflect increasing knowledge, trends in education practices, and the seeds of life-long learning.