aspects are referents of theory and research, and which are contributions personal
designers based on their Pedagogical Knowledge of Content.
In the DBR methodology, implementation is the part where TLS is applied in the
classroom. The evaluation stage of the DBR methodology involves an iterative
process that carries out tests throughout the design and redesign process. In our
proposal, the design of the TLSs is empirically validated, through two dimensions
(Nieveen 2009). In the first dimension, the quality of the sequence is analyzed, that
is, the ability of the teaching material to involve students in the task. In particular,
implementation difficulties are analyzed in relation to the students’ understanding
due to drafting problems of the activities. Implementation time problems and
difficulties in designing new content activities are evaluated. In the second dimension, the learning achieved by the students in relation to the defined objectives is
evaluated. This evaluation includes understanding concepts, laws and theoretical
models and, using the procedure of scientific activity to solve problems.
In this chapter, we will show two examples. First example of the design of the
DBR, that is, about the first phase of the DBR (design TLS) in the topic of DC
circuits for introductory physics courses. Second example is about testing the quality
of design by the redesigning of the activity.
13.3 Theoretical Informed Learning Goals of the Sequence
This section provides a general description of the design process, which shows how
the epistemological and cognitive analysis underpins the election of the design
learning aims. On the first place, we will show how general educational theories
underpin the design tools, which we use to carry out the “fine grain” analysis of the
specific contents which will be taught in the TLS during the first phased of the DBR.
The first step is focused in teaching context. In our case the context is the topic of the
“Fundamentals of DC circuits” addressed to Physics introductory courses at University. The aims of the syllabus are defined according to the educational level of
application.
Firstly, the contents of the curriculum set out in the standards for the chosen level
of education are taken into account. Secondly, we consider the need to justify the
sequence of contents of the program. In these first two steps, the epistemological
analysis of the content will help to justify the contents and laws included, as well as
their sequence. The epistemological analysis includes the historical development of
the topic, the difficulties that the scientific community had to overcome and the
arguments that were used to build new explanatory concepts and models. Epistemological analysis allows us to select the key aspects of the topic that contribute to
defining learning objectives. The epistemological analysis of the content is used as a
didactic tool to avoid definitions of the program based on the idiosyncrasies of the
designers or traditional curricular choices. Furthermore, the defined objectives can
be used to sequence the main problems that must be solved to learn the contents of
the program.
166
J. Guisasola et al.
designers based on their Pedagogical Knowledge of Content.
In the DBR methodology, implementation is the part where TLS is applied in the
classroom. The evaluation stage of the DBR methodology involves an iterative
process that carries out tests throughout the design and redesign process. In our
proposal, the design of the TLSs is empirically validated, through two dimensions
(Nieveen 2009). In the first dimension, the quality of the sequence is analyzed, that
is, the ability of the teaching material to involve students in the task. In particular,
implementation difficulties are analyzed in relation to the students’ understanding
due to drafting problems of the activities. Implementation time problems and
difficulties in designing new content activities are evaluated. In the second dimension, the learning achieved by the students in relation to the defined objectives is
evaluated. This evaluation includes understanding concepts, laws and theoretical
models and, using the procedure of scientific activity to solve problems.
In this chapter, we will show two examples. First example of the design of the
DBR, that is, about the first phase of the DBR (design TLS) in the topic of DC
circuits for introductory physics courses. Second example is about testing the quality
of design by the redesigning of the activity.
13.3 Theoretical Informed Learning Goals of the Sequence
This section provides a general description of the design process, which shows how
the epistemological and cognitive analysis underpins the election of the design
learning aims. On the first place, we will show how general educational theories
underpin the design tools, which we use to carry out the “fine grain” analysis of the
specific contents which will be taught in the TLS during the first phased of the DBR.
The first step is focused in teaching context. In our case the context is the topic of the
“Fundamentals of DC circuits” addressed to Physics introductory courses at University. The aims of the syllabus are defined according to the educational level of
application.
Firstly, the contents of the curriculum set out in the standards for the chosen level
of education are taken into account. Secondly, we consider the need to justify the
sequence of contents of the program. In these first two steps, the epistemological
analysis of the content will help to justify the contents and laws included, as well as
their sequence. The epistemological analysis includes the historical development of
the topic, the difficulties that the scientific community had to overcome and the
arguments that were used to build new explanatory concepts and models. Epistemological analysis allows us to select the key aspects of the topic that contribute to
defining learning objectives. The epistemological analysis of the content is used as a
didactic tool to avoid definitions of the program based on the idiosyncrasies of the
designers or traditional curricular choices. Furthermore, the defined objectives can
be used to sequence the main problems that must be solved to learn the contents of
the program.
166
J. Guisasola et al.