Utilization of design principles for hybrid learning configurations by interprofessional design teams

Abstract

Educational design research yields design knowledge, often in the form of design principles or guidelines that provide the rationale or 'know-why' for the design of educational interventions. As such, design principles can be utilized by designers in contexts other than the research context in which they were generated. Although research has shown that quality support is important for design success, less is known about processes that promote utilization of design principles as the rationale for instructional design. In this study we therefore explored an intervention for promoting the utilization of a set of research-based design principles in educational practice. This intervention aimed to promote utilization through enhancing perceived usefulness of the design principles by design teams in various contexts. The set of design principles that was utilized by the design teams in this study underpins the design of so-called hybrid learning configurations that are situated at the interface between school and workplace. The intervention was developed from the perspective of boundary crossing theory and was conducted with four different design teams. It was evaluated by way of a questionnaire and a dialogue with members of the design teams. This boundary crossing intervention appeared to bring about the desired outcomes. Most of the design team members considered the set of design principles useful in several different ways and they expected that utilization of the principles would lead to an improved learning configuration. Keywords Design knowledge Á Design expertise Á Design principles Á Teacher as designer Á Curriculum design Á Hybrid learning configuration Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (

Reframing the future: the role of reflexivity in governance networks in sustainability transitions

“…Second we will focus on the role of change agents in social learning. In education for sustainability, understanding these dynamics is relevant in the current development of living labs and other hybrid learning contexts ( Malthouse et al 2014, Cremers et al 2016Oonk 2016).…”

Three cases of hybridity in learning spaces: Towards a design for a Zone of Possibility

“…Cremers, Wals, Wesselink, and Mulder (2017, p. 290) cite their own earlier work to define a hybrid learning configuration (HLC) as “a social practice around ill‐defined, authentic tasks or issues whose resolution requires transboundary learning by transcending disciplines, traditional structures and sectors, and forms of learning. In HLCs working and learning are integrated as students work on assignments from clients or other stakeholders in the community.” In work that has many parallels to our own, Cremers et al (2017) examine how a set of design principles that was utilised by the design teams in their study underpins the design of HLC configurations that are situated at the interface between school and workplace. The concept of boundary crossing was used as a theoretical framework for their work.…”

“…The work described in this paper similarly deploys design principles in design teams at interface between workplace, community action and Higher Education. Specifically, Cremers et al (2017, p. 292) successfully use a set of abstract, meta‐design principles which “can be perceived as a boundary object, as the principles cross the boundary from the research context in which they were generated to new design contexts in which they are utilized.” We extend the notion of HLCs to that of a Zone of Possibility where issues of power and control are in the foreground in networks that literally create “bridges” (see below for background literature and a definition). Further, in related work to our first case below, Lax, Scardamalia, Watt‐Watson, Hunter, and Bereiter (2010) have for some years examined Knowledge Building in the health sector in Canada and as such their work complements the work described in the first case.…”

Reflexively stumbling towards sustainability : understanding social learning in regional governance networks

“…Moreover, it seems that trust is both an antecedent and an outcome of social learning (Gubbins and Mac Curtain, 2008). In social learning processes challenges are experienced at the boundaries (Cremers et al, 2016;Akkerman and Bakker, 2011) of actors' frames and can trigger excitement and/or fear (Friedman, 1987). Trust, commitment and reframing are regarded as emergent and dynamic properties (Chapter 3), lubricating the permeability of existing frames of actors (Schön and Rein, 1994), and they are essential in triggering transformational change (Wals, 2007).…”

“…In fact, students had 'key boundary-spanning' roles (Cash et al, 2003) in the research and in the area. Boundary spanners can perform key boundary-spanning roles (Akkerman and Bakker, 2011;Cremers et al, 2016;Oonk, 2016;De Kraker, 2017 Overall, it can be concluded that lock-in situations are risky, in that they can slow down or lock in social learning. However, at the same time, the interventions to overcome them by using boundary spanners, change agents and facilitators can create and support ways forward: as new roles, knowledge, actions and relations are formed in the process of social learning.…”