What is Design-based Learning (DBL)?
Design-based learning development draws on the iterative process of design based research (DBR) structure used by Brenda Bannan-Ritland and John Y. Baek (2008) in their recount of the Literacy Access Online (LAO) design research project (see Bannan-Ritland, 2003).
The research is workplace based and aligns with Fenwick and Gibb’s (2008) statement that “work learning is a cultural phenomenon: that is, it involves not just human change, but interconnections of humans and their actions with rules, tools and texts, cultural and material environments. The norms, routines, language, relationships and everyday objects/technologies of a particular professional community of practice or industry shape the generation of knowledge, as well as attitudes about what is considered useful to learn and what processes count as learning (Engeström, 2001; Sawchuk, 2003; Wenger, 1998)” (pp. 136-137).
Iterations are typically sequential and embedded in the ADDIE model. Subset bullets below identify standard DBL iterations:
- Investigate context
- Identify needs
- Generate alternatives
- Select alternative
Themes and topics cannot be effectively learned in silo. The very nature of the content is social and involves other people, HR policies and procedures, organization culture, values and work processes. Action-based learning, integrated with Design Based Curriculum development ensures consideration of the social. To facilitate this approach, DACUM sessions are conducted with SMEs as well as meetings with key stakeholders to access customer processes, systems and end-users.
Sources: Bannan-Ritland, B., & Baek, J. Y. (2008). Investigating the act of design in design research: The road taken. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching, pp. 299-319. New York, NY: Routledge.
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