The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Creating a Framework for Research on Systemic Technology Innovations
Abstract
This article examines why cognitively oriented technology innovations, designed to foster deep thinking and learning, have not become widespread in K−12 schools. We argue a key reason is that most design-based research does not explicitly address systemic issues of usability, scalability and sustainability. This limitation must be overcome if research is to create usable knowledge that addresses the challenges confronting technology innovations when implemented in real-world school contexts. This is especially important in an era when political forces push schools away from the cognitively rich, inquiry-oriented approaches espoused by the Learning Sciences. We suggest expanding our conception of design-based research to include research on innovations in the context of systemic reform as a potential solution to the problem. To that end, we introduce research questions and issues arising from our own experiences with a technology-rich innovation in the context of a systemic reform initiative as a starting point in the creation of an expanded design-based research agenda. These questions and issues have important implications for both the continued viability of research on technologies for learning and on the future of technology use in schools that stems from such research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform
Shulman, L. (1987) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 · Cited by 16,787
Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018001032 · Cited by 13,645 · cited 1×
“These innovations include technology as a core component, but are rooted in cognitive and constructivist learning theories (Bransford et al., 1999; J. S. Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).”
Background(1999) · Cited by 12,812
(1993) · Cited by 9,879
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(1979) · The Mathematics Teacher · doi:10.5951/mt.72.8.0637 · Cited by 8,499
Anderson, J. R. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9781315799438 · Cited by 6,761
Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems
Weick, K. E. (1976) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391875 · Cited by 5,142
What Makes Professional Development Effective? Results From a National Sample of Teachers
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312038004915 · Cited by 5,047
Brown, A. L. (1992) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2 · Cited by 4,000
Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139 · Cited by 3,594 · cited 1×
“Cognitivelyorientedusesof technologyoftenemploychallenging pedagogical approaches, such as project-based learning (Blumenfeld et al., 1991).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy, Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Cohen, D. K. (1988). Educational technology and school organization. In R. S. Nickerson & P. Zodhiates (Eds.), Technology in education: Looking toward 2020 (pp. 231-264). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Fishman, B. & Gomez, L. (2000). New technologies and the challenge for school leadership. In M. Honey & C. Shookhoff (Eds.), The Wingspread Conference on Technology's Role in Urban School Reform: Achieving Equity and Quality (pp. 13-21). Racine, WI: The Joyce Foundation, The Johnson Foundation, and the EDC Center for Children and Technology.
- Honey, M., Carrigg, F. & Hawkins, J. (1998). Union City Online: An architecture for networking and reform. In C. Dede (Ed.), Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1998 Yearbook: Learning and Technology (pp. 121-139). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
- Honey, M. & McMillan-Culp, K. (2000). Scale and localization: The challenge of implementing what works. In M. Honey & C. Shookhoff (Eds.), The Wingspread Conference on Technology's Role in Urban School Reform: Achieving Equity and Quality (pp. 41-46). Racine, WI: The Joyce Foundation, The Johnson Foundation, and the EDC Center for Children and Technology.
- Koedinger K. R., 1999, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 292
- McLaughlin M. W., 1990, Educational Researcher, 19, 11, 10.3102/0013189X019009011 · doi:10.3102/0013189x019009011 · Paper page
- Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
- Shrader, G., Fishman, B., Barab, S. A., O'Neill, K., Oden, G. & Suthers, D. D. (2002). Video cases for teacher learning: Issues of social and organizational design for use. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community (pp. 708-709). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. · doi:10.3115/1658616.1658799
- Snyder, J., Bolin, F. & Zumwalt, K. (1996). Curriculum implementation. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 402-435). New York: Macmillan.
- Supovitz J. A., 2000, Journal of Staff Development, 21, 24
- Williams, S. M., Burgess, K. L., Bray, M. H., Bransford, J. D., Goldman, S. R. & The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1998). Technology and learning in Schools For Thought classrooms. In C. Dede (Ed.), Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1998 Yearbook: Learning and Technology (pp. 97-119). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
- Zucker, A. & Marder, C. (1998). A case study of Montana's SSI (SIMMS), 1991-1996. In A. Zucker & P. Shields (Eds.), SSI case studies: Cohort 1: Connecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, and Montana (pp. 125-163). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Cited by
Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (2005) · The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816833.020 · Cited by 608
Self-citationGeier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay‐Chambers, J. (2008) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20248 · Cited by 423
Self-citationInquiry‐based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., & Tal, R. T. (2004) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20039 · Cited by 385
Self-citationFormative Interventions for Expansive Learning and Transformative Agency
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Lemos, M. (2016) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.2016.1204547 · Cited by 366
Connor, C. M., Dombek, J., Crowe, E. C., Spencer, M., Tighe, E. L., Coffinger, S., Zargar, E., Wood, T., & Petscher, Y. (2017) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000128 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E.
- Venue
- Journal of the Learning Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 43-76
- ISSN
- 1050-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7809
- OpenAlex
- W2001469931
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 69
- FWCI
- 33.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Creating a Framework for Research on Systemic Technology Innovations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_3
- The paper
- Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a Framework for Research on Systemic Technology Innovations. Journal of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
