方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 参与式基于设计的研 (PDBR) 是一种迭代的教育研究方法，在这种方法中，从业者× | 项目评估× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 田野方法 | 田野方法 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | Early 2000s (building on DBR foundations from 1992) | 1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971) |
| 提出者≠ | Ann Brown, Allan Collins; participatory extension developed by Penuel, Roschelle, and collaborators | Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi |
| 类型≠ | Iterative collaborative design methodology | Applied evaluation methodology |
| 开创性文献≠ | Penuel, W. R., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). Designing formative assessment software with teachers: An analysis of the co-design process. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 51–74. DOI ↗ | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944 |
| 别名 | Participatory DBR, co-design research, collaborative design-based research, participatory educational design research | evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation |
| 相关≠ | 6 | 3 |
| 摘要≠ | Participatory design-based research (PDBR) is an iterative educational research methodology in which practitioners — teachers, students, or community members — serve as genuine co-designers of interventions alongside researchers. Rooted in design-based research (DBR), PDBR adds explicit mechanisms for shared ownership, distributed decision-making, and practitioner voice across all design cycles, making it especially suited to developing contextually responsive educational solutions. | Program evaluation is a systematic, empirically grounded process of collecting and analyzing information about a program to determine its merit, worth, or significance. Applied across education, public health, social services, and policy, it addresses questions such as whether a program is reaching its target population, whether it is being implemented as designed, and whether it is producing the intended outcomes. It draws on both quantitative and qualitative methods and serves accountability, improvement, or knowledge-generation purposes. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|