Allman, B., Kimmons, R., Dickson-Deane, C., Bozkurt, A., Warr, M., Stefaniak, J., Dash, M., & Bondah, F. E. (2024). EdTechnica: A vision of an educational publishing community of practice that is accessible, flexible, and just. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00466-1
Open Educational Resources (OER) and Open Educational Practices (OEP) have the potential to transform and positively impact individuals, institutions, and society. As educators, we have a unique responsibility to explore opportunities and possibilities afforded by openness enabled by current technologies to reimagine and reshape current educational reality and provide a more hopeful and equitable future for all. EdTechnica is an openly licensed living encyclopedia that provides background information on central topics and theories in the field of educational technology. As an OER, EdTechnica extends the 5Rs of openness—retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute by also attending to the 3Rs of social justice—recognition, representation, and redistribution—bringing about a responsive product that reimagines what encyclopedias should be. Additionally, the governing board enacts principles of openness in its practice, striving for OEP in all its activities. This article explores how EdTechnica promotes knowledge creation and academic discourse by attending to key principles of openness in terms of ensuring accessibility, flexibility, justice, and sustainable generosity. Specific examples of OER/P in the EdTechnica context offer an insight into our practices and ambitions to improve the current educational landscape, illustrating what is possible at the intersection of justice, hope, and educational technology when we strive for openness and are guided by the values of sustainable generosity and sustainable improvement.
Warr, M., Pivovarova, M., Mishra, P., & Oster, N. J. (2024). Is ChatGPT racially biased? The case of evaluating student writing. In Social Science Research Network.
We present experimental proof of racial bias in ChatGPT’s evaluation of student writing. By manipulating racial descriptors in prompts, we assessed differences in scores given by two ChatGPT models. Our findings indicate that descriptions of students as Black or White lead to significantly higher scores compared to race-neutral or Hispanic descriptors. This suggests that ChatGPT’s outputs are influenced by racial information, which raises concerns about its application in educational settings. The study highlights the need for transparent and bias-tested AI tools in education to prevent the perpetuation of existing inequities and suggests implications for educators, administrators, and policy makers.
Warr, M. (2024). Beat bias? Personalization, bias, and generative AI. In J. Cohen & G. Solano (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1481–1488). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Media and technology companies have claimed that advances in AI, particularly generative AI (GenAI) such as large language models (LLMs), will enable powerful individualized and personalized learning applications enabled by methods such as intelligent tutoring systems. However, efforts to personalize interactions with technologies in other fields, such as advertising and social networks, have resulted in negative consequences on users, and applying similar principles to education must be done with caution. To limit unintended consequences, teachers must think critically about AI and carefully evaluate appropriate use. In this paper, I review research in personalized learning and critical media studies on the impact of technological customization. I then present an empirical study of three LLM models that illustrates how bias might unexpectedly present itself in educational use of these tools. I conclude by…
Warr, M. (2024). Blending generative AI, critical pedagogy, and teacher education to expose and challenge automated inequality. In R. Blankenship & T. Cherner (Eds.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education. AACE.
Warr, M., Oster, N., & Isaac, R. (2024). Implicit bias in large language models: Experimental proof and implications for education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 0(0), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2024.2395295
We provide experimental evidence of implicit racial bias in a large language model (specifically ChatGPT 3.5) in the context of an educational task and discuss implications for the use of these tools in educational contexts. Specifically, we presented ChatGPT with identical student writing passages alongside various descriptions of student demographics, including race, socioeconomic status, and school type. Results indicate that when directly prompted to consider race, the model produced higher overall scores than responses to a control prompt, but scores given to student descriptors of Black and White were not significantly different. However, this result belied a subtler form of prejudice that was statistically significant when racial indicators were implied rather than explicitly stated. Additionally, our investigation uncovered subtle sequence effects that suggest the model is more likely to illustrate bias when variables change within a single chat. The evidence indicates that despite the implementation of guardrails by developers, biases are profoundly embedded in ChatGPT, reflective of both the training data and societal biases at large. While overt biases can be addressed to some extent, the more ingrained implicit biases present a greater challenge for the application of these technologies in education. It is critical to develop an understanding of the bias embedded in these models and how this bias presents itself in educational contexts before using LLMs to develop personalized learning tools.
Chatterjee, S., & Warr, M. (2024). Connecting theory and practice: Large language models as tools for PCK development in teacher education. In R. Blankenship & T. Cherner (Eds.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education. AACE.
Mishra, P., & Warr, M. (2024). Mapping the true nature of generative AI: Applications in educational research & practice. In J. Cohen & G. Solano (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 826–831). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
The rapid proliferation of generative AI (genAI) technologies, including chatbots, image generators, and creative tools, has received a lot of media and scholarly attention. That said, most discussions of this new technology lack depth and nuance. We argue that there are certain key attributes of generative AI that separate it from all other technologies that have come in the past. It is only by developing a better understanding of these attributes that we can best take advantage of the possibilities for transformational learning that these tools can provide. Specifically, we argue that the generative capacity enables unique outputs from identical inputs, bringing new dimensions of possibility and uncertainty. Meanwhile, the social quality fosters anthropomorphism and relationships between users and agents. Together, these attributes have the potential to disrupt established practices around learning, literacy, creativity, and…
Macgregor-Mendoz, P., Gherardi, S., Allred, T., Collins, A., Goss, R., Hermanson, L., & Warr, M. (2024). R.I.S.E. peer observation framework.
Clausen, J. M., Rutledge, D., Borthwick, A. C., Driscoll, S., Jin, Y., Sprague, D. R., Warr, M., & Williams, M. K. (2024). Four pillars of technology infusion: Using Q methodology to examine candidate perspectives on their preparation to use technology. In J. Cohen & G. Solano (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2477–2486). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Technology infusion has been proposed as essential in preparing teacher education candidates to use technology within their own instructional practices. Foulger (2020) articulated four pillars needed for technology infusion. These include the educator preparation program (EPP) curriculum, candidate beliefs and efficacy, how technology has been modeled by faculty, and whether candidates have had opportunities to critically think about and use technology throughout their preparation including within clinical practice. This study examines teacher education candidates’ perspectives about their preparation to use technology within their EPPs. Candidates from seven institutions provided their perspectives about technology infusion within their respective programs. Q methodology and factor analysis were used to identify how candidates characterized their preparation as aligned with the four pillars of technology…
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2023). Exploring Technological Contextual Knowing. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2506–2509.
Although present in the canonical TPACK figure, context is often not considered in research that draws upon TPACK. In this presentation, we bring together TPACK with contextual knowing, a flexible understanding related to actors in a context (generally teachers and students) and across multiple scales (classrooms, schools, and the broader social, political, and cultural milieu). We discuss Technological Context Knowledge (TXKg) and propose key questions for consideration in technology and teacher education. An emphasis on context and its interaction with technology can encourage deeper reflection on diversity, equity, and inclusion in technology and education.
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2023). Learning to see complexity: Teachers designing amidst indeterminacy. Professional Development in Education, 49(6), 1036–1052. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2023.2253821
Warr, M. (2023). EdTechnica: Open Educational Resource and Open Educational Practice. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 456–457.
EdTechnica is an open educational resource (OER) that provides background information on central topics and theories in educational technology. As an OER, the resource is freely available to retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute. The editorial board of EdTechnica also strives to embody principles of an Open Educational Practice (OEP). In this paper, we explore EdTechnica both as an OER and OEP, emphasizing principles of accessibility, diversity, and flexibility. We also consider what it might mean for the scholarly field of technology and teacher education to embrace principles of OEP.
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2023, August 22). The five spaces for design in education. The European Conference on Educational Research, Glasgow, Scotland.
Mishra, P., Warr, M., & Islam, R. (2023). TPACK in the age of ChatGPT and Generative AI. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 39(4), 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2023.2247480
The educational impact of Generative AI (GenAI) technologies, such as ChatGPT, has received significant attention. We use the TPACK framework to discuss the types of knowledge teachers require to effectively use GenAI tools. We highlight the qualities of GenAI that make it like other digital technologies (they are protean, opaque, and unstable) as well as qualities that make it revolutionary (namely, they are generative and social). We describe how these traits affect specific knowledge domains (TK, TPK, TCK, XK, and TPACK) and explore implications for educators. Finally, we argue for a more expansive description of Contextual Knowledge (XK), going beyond the immediate context to include considerations of how GenAI will change individuals, society and, through that, the broader educational context.
Warr, M., Close, K., & Mishra, P. (2023). What is is not what has to be: The five spaces framework as a lens for (re)design in education. In B. Hokanson, M. Schmidt, M. E. Exter, A. A. Tawfik, & Y. Earnshaw (Eds.), Design thinking, growth mindset and community (pp. 305–315). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41950-8_24
Warr, M., Driskell, S. O. S., Langran, E., Mouza, C., & Schmidt-Crawford, D. A. (2023). Curriculum Design for Technology Infusion: A Continuous Collaborative Process. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 23(1), 1–1.
In this article, the authors discuss technology integration curriculum in teacher preparation programs, focusing on key elements of both the curriculum and curriculum development process. Specifically, they highlight the need to develop a coherent teacher preparation program founded on shared values and practices and responsive to change. When considering technology in the teacher preparation curriculum, this means integrating technology content and practices throughout the program. Research is discussed on the efficacy of touchpoints, or opportunities for integrating technology in the teacher preparation curriculum, including technology-focused and subject-specific courses and opportunities for practicing teaching with technology in field experiences. Finally, key elements of a technology infusion approach are highlighted and program design incorporating a continuous, collaborative process is suggested to support ongoing improvements to effective technology infusion.
Close, K., Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2023). The ethical consequences, contestations, and possibilities of designs in educational systems. TechTrends : For Leaders in Education & Training. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00900-7
Emerging technologies present new possibilities for schools, but also present ethical issues for designers. Ethical issues arising from the design, accessibility, adoption, and implementation of emerging technologies in schools are intertwined with existing power dynamics, hierarchies, and decision-making norms that perpetuate entrenched systems. Using a framework called the fives spaces for design in education framework as an analytical lens, we explore the ethical implications of two emerging artificial intelligence technologies in education: remote proctoring software and large language models. We find that designers adopting and implementing these emerging technologies must attend to the consequences of past design decisions and recognize that emerging technologies also create places for resistance and contestations. Lastly, by recognizing the wide scope of what can be redesigned, designers can start to see possibilities for redesigning in ways that are inclusive, equitable, and ethically conscious. Ultimately, we hope to begin a critical conversation about the two technologies by thinking about the sites of consequence, contestation, and possibilities in the designed cultures, systems, experiences, processes, and artifacts of schooling.
Borthwick, A., Foulger, T. S., Graziano, K. J., Jin, Y., Sprague, D. R., Warr, M., & Williams, M. K. (2023). A Deep Dive into the Four Pillars of Technology-Infused Teacher Preparation Programs. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 1112–1116.
Panelists for this session worked together with a larger group of educational technology faculty and PK-12 professional developers to take a “deep dive” into the research and practice-based literature related to the four pillars that support a technology-infused teacher preparation program design:(1) technology integration curriculum,(2) experiences that model innovative uses of technology,(3) practice with reflection, and (4) development of technology self-efficacy for technology integration. Panelists will provide a summary of overarching design guidelines for the four pillars and discuss selected specific design criteria. The last half of the session will facilitate attendee discussion about how the four pillars and design criteria can be used by methods faculty and department chairs as they participate in program redesign and related action planning. A comprehensive set of references and tables listing criteria and/or …
Warr, M., & Wakefield, W. (2023). Supporting teachers in designing for intersectionality. In B. Hokanson, M. Exter, M. Schmidt, & A. Tawfik (Eds.), Toward Inclusive Learning Design: Social Justice, Equity, and Community (pp. 171–181). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37697-9_14
Crawford, D., Driskell, S., Graziano, K., Langran, E., Mouza, C., & Warr, M. (2023, June 24). Designing your teacher preparation program curriculum for technology infusion. ISTELive 23, Virtual.
Keenan-Lechel, S. F., Warr, M., Richardson, C., Mishra, P., Mehta, R., Henriksen, D., & Gruber, N. (2023). A decade of rethinking creativity, technology and learning: Reflections with the Deep-Play Research Group. TechTrends. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00817-7
Warr, M., Mishra, P., Henriksen, D., & Woo, L. J. (2023). A chat about GPT3 (and other forms of alien intelligence) with Chris Dede. TechTrends. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00843-z
Warr, M. (2023, August 24). Learning to see complexity: A case study of teachers designing in diverse contexts. The European Conference on Educational Research. The European Conference on Educational Research, Glasgow, Scotland.
Scholars have called for considering professional learning (PL) through the lens of complexity. One lens for operating amidst complexity is design. Designers thrive in complexity because of the responsive nature of their work; a designer develops their practice in response to a particular situation, adapting as it changes. Thus, a design lens is useful for navigating complexity in teacher learning and practice. As a designer, a teacher learns and practices in a classroom amidst complex nested systems. Design calls for seeing beyond traditional, linear practice; experimenting with new approaches; and adjusting those approaches in response to the situation?s feedback loops. In this article, we illustrate the relationship among complexity, design, and PL through examples from four teachers who participated in a design-centred PL program before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program aimed to support teachers in a creative design approach to address a problem of practice. Analysis highlighted that when teachers needed to learn and practice amidst complexity, it was difficult to see possibilities outside of traditional practice and to perceive feedback from the situation. Our analysis suggests that a focus on finding non-traditional approaches and listening to disruptive feedback might support teachers to learn and practice amidst complexity.
Warr, M. (2022). Design and technology integration: Making it concrete. Association for Educational Communications & Technologies, Las Vegas, NV.
Warr, M. (2022). A (new-to-design) process for supporting generative design critiques. Association for Educational Communications & Technologies, Las Vegas, NV.
Warr, M., Butler, A., & Hatfield, T. (2022). Mixing It Up: Technology Integration Through Creative Learning Design. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 1327–1331.
In this paper, we share a process for creative learning design with technology. The process draws on combinatorial creativity and backwards design to support creative uses of technologies. After describing the process, two teachers share their experiences with applying the approach to high school English and elementary school science. We also discuss challenges with the approach and future areas for exploration.
Mishra, P., Warr, M., & Scragg, B. (2022). Two possible futures of online learning. In S. P. McKenzie, L. Arulkadacham, J. Chung, & Z. Aziz (Eds.), The future of online education: Advancements in learning and instruction. Nova.
Warr, M., Jungkind, E., & Mishra, P. (2022). Participatory creativity and maker empowerment: A conversation with Edward Clapp, ed.D. TechTrends : For Leaders in Education & Training, 66(1), 12–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00687-5
Warr, M., & Hatfield, T. (2022). Thinking creatively with transmedia about matter: Developing TPACK through multimodal design. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference.
Warr, M., Mishra, P., Scragg, B., Powers, J., & Wong, L.-S. (2022). Complicating design thinking. In K. L. Sanzo & J. P. Scribner (Eds.), Design thinking: Research, implementation, and innovation (pp. 187–210). Information Age Publishing.
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2022). TPACK. EdTechnica, 253–259. https://doi.org/10.59668/371.9034
The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Framework describes the types of knowledge required by teachers for the successful and effective integration of technology in teaching. The most current representation of the framework is in the form of a three-circle Venn diagram within a larger circle. At the center are three partially overlapping circles representing three key knowledge domains: Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) and Technological Knowledge (TK). The fourth circle (typically shown as a dotted line) encompasses the three overlapping circles and represents Contextual Knowledge (XK). Most importantly, the TPACK framework proposes that effective integration of technology in teaching requires the integration of the four TPACK knowledge domains—a form of knowledge greater than the knowledge of each of these domains in isolation. It is, instead, a recognition and deep understanding that these knowledge domains exist in tension with each other and that effective technology integration requires finding the right balance that connects the affordances of the technology with the requirements of the content and the pedagogical approaches given a particular educational context.
Blankenship, R., Mourlam, D., Berson, I., Berson, M., Lee, C.-Y., Peng, L.-W., Jin, Y., Lyublinskaya, I., Du, X., Warr, M., Mishra, P., Williams, M., & Hatfield, T. (2022). Reimagining practical applications of the TPACK framework in the new digital era. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2198–2203.
The purpose of this symposium is to disseminate current research on the best practices for implementing and developing educators’ TPACK. The goal of this symposium is to engage the TPACK community in dialogue regarding how best to leverage and develop TPACK and its subdomains in practice. Specifically, we focus on how the iterative evolution of digital technologies has fundamentally changed the practical application of TPACK in teaching subject-specific content. The symposium will begin with a brief introductory presentation by the session facilitators followed by a brief overview from…
Butler, A., & Warr, M. (2022). Utilizing Your Resources: The Diversification of Learning Through Shifts in the Teacher Planning Process. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2290–2293.
In this paper, we will share a process for utilizing the combination of a few tools available when planning for inclusive and transformative lessons and/or curriculum. The tool combination process draws from the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) guidelines, both 2.0 and 2.2 versions, in order to complete a unique planning template for educators wishing to incorporate more diversity in their classrooms. This template provides straightforward and accessible points of reference for creating and/or choosing differentiated options for content presentation, activities, products, and learning environment, when planning. This paper will explain UDL, its efficacy, and its contribution to our planning design tool, followed by an example of the final product.
Warr, M., & Starrett, E. (2021). Exploring technology adoption amidst uncertainty. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 801–810.
Mishra, P., & Warr, M. (2021). Contextualizing TPACK within systems and cultures of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 117(April 2021).
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2021). Why design thinking sucks (in education). Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 1035–1040.
In this paper, we describe design and popularized descriptions of design thinking. We claim that design thinking is often presented in a way that oversimplifies design and devalues expertise. The result is an incomplete model that, although valuable, should be considered just one way of thinking of design.
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2021). Integrating the discourse on teachers and design: An analysis of ten years of scholarship. Teaching and Teacher Education, 99(March 2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103274
This article presents a content and network analysis of a decade (2007–2017) of highly-cited literature on teachers and design. Constructs and definitions were compared in an interpretive content analysis, resulting in 10 strands, each a cluster of literature that frames teaching and design in a particular way. A citation network analysis provided insight into how the strands are conceptually related. Further analysis highlighted how each strand described what, when, and how teachers design, and the value of considering teachers as designers. The results suggest that teaching not only includes design activities, but could be considered a design profession. This perspective has implications for teacher education, specifically the development of professional knowledge.
Warr, M. (2021). Teachers as designers: Epistemic diversity and sensemaking amidst indeterminacy (Punyashloke Mishra, Ed.) [PhD, Arizona State University].
In this three-article dissertation, I explore what it means for teachers to be designers in three different ways. Each article can stand on its own, but taken together, they paint a rich and nuanced picture of the relationship between teachers and design.The first article is an analysis of a decade of literature on teachers and design seeking to answer the question, “What does it mean for a teacher to be described as a designer, or for the act of teaching to be considered an act of design?” The analysis combined an interpretive content analysis of central terms and constructs with a network analysis of co-authorship and citation practices. The results highlighted 10 strands of literature around teachers and design, each describing a different perspective on what, how, when, and why teachers design.The second article focuses on a design-based professional development (PD) program I conducted with four teachers in a rural junior high school. The program was designed to support teachers in approaching problems of practice in designerly ways, including exploring problems using various epistemic perspectives. Using an embedded case analysis approach, I found that although each teacher interpreted the program differently, all described outcomes related to coming to know in new ways, developing a deeper understanding of students, and being impacted at a personal level. These outcomes could be interpreted as a type of sensemaking, where teachers came to re-interpret the past and present in ways that allowed them to shape the future. Sensemaking was supported through epistemic diversity and the acts of framing common in design practice.The third article is a scholarly essay arguing that the PD program and its implementation suggest design is not only about creating things but is also about seeing and addressing the indeterminacy inherent in complex situations of practice. Designers interact with this indeterminacy through imposing a frame on the situation and interpreting the results. When teachers are designers, they are empowered to integrate their personal and professional selves with the design situation, all while maintaining a form of skeptical optimism within complex and shifting contexts.
Donner, J., Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2020). Collaboration, creation, and community: A virtual community of practice for teacher educators. 2020 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Virtual Conference.
Singha, S., Warr, M., Mishra, P., Henriksen, D., & Deep-Play Research Group. (2020). Playing with creativity across the lifespan: A conversation with Dr. Sandra Russ. TechTrends, 64, 550–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00514-3
Donner, Jodie, Warr, M., Leahy, S. M., & Mishra, P. (2020). Embracing failure in a first-year technology course. Revista de Tecnologia Educativa, 1(3), 68. https://doi.org/10.17345/ute.2020.3.2873
Although students might expect a technology literacy course to provide them with tool-driven educational experiences, first year students in a teachers college at a large public university in the United States discovered, instead, a course that would move them beyond technology use to reflective development and understanding. The course designers used Dewey’s natural impulses for learning to create a course with a range of innovative assignments and pedagogical approaches. The resulting experience immersed future educators in exploration, scaffolded learning, provided multiple opportunities, and allowed for intellectual and personal growth. In this paper, we will describe the conceptual structure of the course, provide examples of assignments and activities, and describe the use of technology both for pedagogy and instructor interaction and design. We will include samples of students’ work and a description of their experiences based on their reflections.
Warr, M., & Close, K. (2020). Designing culture for learning. 2020 AECT International Convention. 2020 AECT International Convention.
Warr, M., & West, R. E. (2020). Bridging academic disciplines with interdisciplinary project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28590
This article describes the implementation of an interdisciplinary design studio as a means to teach creative problem-solving through project-based learning. “Learning and Innovation Skills” has been designated as a core skill that students need to be successful in today’s world, and project-based learning is one approach to helping students develop these skills. After describing the early genesis and development of the interdisciplinary design studio, the article describes results of initial research into the students’ experiences in studio courses. Students described courses as flexible and reported high levels of motivation stemming from the authenticity of the problems. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of the studio, some students described deepening disciplinary skills while at the same time being exposed to cross-disciplinary skills. They believed the courses helped develop interdisciplinary collaboration, creativity, and communication skills.
Weiner, S., Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2020). Fostering system-level perspective taking when designing for change in educational systems. TechTrends, 64, 779–788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00529-w
Warr, M., Mishra, P., & Scragg, B. (2020). Designing theory. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 601–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09746-9
Theoretical work is essential to the progress of any discipline. Theories, models, and frameworks are underdetermined representations of a phenomenon that help us understand and take action in a domain. However, the field of learning design and technology (LDT) has traditionally struggled with developing a solid theoretical foundation that is useful for both research and practice. We propose viewing theory building as an act of design might address these challenges. After defining key constructs and describing two approaches to theory development, we describe three design perspectives that might be useful for theory development: Lawson and Dorst’s (Design expertise, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2009) view of design as a combination of analytical (problem-based) and creative (solution-based) moves, Schön’s (The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action, Basic Books, New York, 1983) reflection-in-action, and design as dialogic interpretation (Snodgrass and Coyne in Des Issues 9(1):56–74, https://doi.org/10.2307/1511599, 1992). We use a case study to illustrate each perspective. We conclude with implications of a design approach to theory creation, including how design perspectives enable scholars to design possible futures.
Warr, M. (2020). Learning design for contextually-anchored professional development. 2020 AECT International Convention. 2020 AECT International Convention.
Warr, M., & Sampson, C. (2020). Achieving critical dialogue in online doctoral programs: An exploration of student perceptions and experiences with multiple modalities. TechTrends, 64(6), 860–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00499-z
Critical pedagogy employs dialogue that is embodied, reflective, and authentic with aims to promote action toward social justice. Although online learning is well suited to support several characteristics of critical dialogue (i.e., participant diversity, student discussions, emphasis on reflection), it can also be impersonal and disembodied. The purpose of this paper is to explore the experiences and perceptions of online doctoral students in a course designed to facilitate critical dialogue about education. The course experimented with three discussion formats aimed at achieving critical dialogue: (a) traditional, text-based discussion board; (b) asynchronous video (voice thread), and (c) recorded small-group, synchronous video discussions followed by asynchronous discussion board interactions. In this paper, we share results from student surveys of three semesters of the course (n = 22 of 46 students enrolled). The findings suggest that students preferred synchronous video chats and perceived this format as most supportive of critical dialogue. Students, on average, rated the discussion board format as the least enjoyable, least engaging, and least supportive of critical dialogue. Students’ open-ended comments emphasized that the discussion board and voice thread formats promoted reflection but were less supportive of interactive dialogue. We conclude by discussing implications regarding course design and student support for online instructors who aim to promote critical dialogue in online courses.
Mishra, P., & Warr, M. (2020). Foreward: A systems view of technology infusion. In A. C. Borthwick, T. S. Foulger, & K. J. Graziano (Eds.), Championing technology infusion in teacher preparation: A framework for supporting future educators. International Society for Technology in Education.
Warr, M., & Sampson, C. (2019). Critical dialogue: Can it happen online? Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Association for Educational Communications and Technology National Conference, Las Vegas, NV.
Although learning theories have guided important research in online learning, studies highlighting online critical discourse of students’ cultural and social contexts are sparse. In this presentation, we will invite participants to experience an online discussion modality and reflect on whether the modality might support critical dialogue. We will compare session participants’ conjectures with what we have found in our research of critical dialogue in an online graduate course and discuss implications for design and research.
Warr, M., Mishra, P., & Scragg, B. (2019). Beyond TPACK: Expanding technology and teacher education to systems and culture. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2233–2237.
Despite copious amounts of research on technology in education, many teachers still struggle to use technology effectively. Much research on technology integration focuses on teacher education and design. For example, the TPACK framework describes the type of knowledge teachers need to design effective uses of technologies in their classrooms. However, despite its prevalence, TPACK has not led to wide-spread change in educational technology use. We argue this is because we have not paid enough attention to how educational technology works at a systems and culture level. In this article, we present a new framework, the Five Discourses of Design, that can help us consider how educational technology impacts and is impacted by systems and culture. We provide examples of how the framework applies to teacher education.
Warr, M., Mishra, P., & Scragg, B. (2019). The five discourses of design: A model for systemic change in education. Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Association for Educational Communications and Technology National Conference, Las Vegas, NV.
As educational technologists, we often focus exclusively on designing artifacts. However, artifacts must work within systems and cultures, and when we don’t consider the systems and culture, our designs don’t perform as expected. In this session, we present a new model that supports systems thinking about educational technology: The Five Discourses of Design. This model helps us visualize how design works across spaces of work, supporting more effective design and lasting change.
Warr, M., Mishra, P., & Scragg, B. (2019). Designing design for education: Supporting creativity in studio courses. Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Association for Educational Communications and Technology National Conference, Las Vegas, NV.
Jordan, M., Wakefield, W., & Warr, M. (2019). Exploring models of responsive professional development: How might we help teachers negotiate identity and expand agency? Scholarly Consortium for Innovation Psychology in Education National Conference. Scholarly Consortium for Innovation Psychology in Education National Conference, Savannah, Georgia.
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2019). Teachers as designers: Many threads of meaning. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Canada.
Warr, M. (2019). Learning professional ways of being: A design approach to professional learning. Scholarly Consortium for Innovation Psychology in Education Conference, Savannah, GA.
Warr, M., & Mishra, P. (2019). Teachers and design: A literature review. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 949–956.
Many scholars have used a design lens to understand teachers and teacher education. Design is changing an existing situation to a desired one; it is the process of creating something new. The literature on teachers and design is broad and describes many ways of how teachers design. In particular, the push for integrating technology into classrooms has led many to consider how teachers design curriculum and learning experiences. This paper describes a literature review of teachers and design. The authors identified the 40 most-cited publications on teachers and design published from 2007 to 2017. Further analysis revealed ten primary strands of work around teachers and design. The paper describes how the strands are related and what the research reveals about how teachers design learning experiences and uses of educational technology.
Warr, M., Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & The Deep-Play Research Group. (2019). Creativity and expressive arts, performance, physicality and wellness: A conversation with Dr. Paula Thomson and Dr. Victoria Jaque. TechTrends, 63(2), 102–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00372-8
Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., Warr, M., & The Deep-Play Research Group. (2018). A cybernetic perspective on design and creativity: a conversation with Dr. Paul Pangaro. TechTrends, 62(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0232-y
Mishra, P., Scragg, B., & Warr, M. (2018). The 5 Discourses of Design in e-learning. Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, 1362–1365.
Zaugg, H., & Warr, M. C. (2018). Integrating a creativity, innovation, and design studio within an academic library. Library Management, 39(3/4), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-09-2017-0091
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe the efforts to set up a creativity, innovation, and design (CID) studio within an academic library. This paper will describe the reasons for creating a CID studio, assessment of the pilot study, and next steps. Design/methodology/approach The assessment used surveys, interviews, focus groups and observations of students and faculty to determine how well the CID fits into the library. Findings Initial findings indicate that the CID studio is a good fit within the library space as learning activities in it support collaboration, discovery, and integration of library services. However, noise issues, equipment needs, and expansion of space are key future needs. Research limitations/implications As libraries move from simple repositories of information to places of learning and collaboration, a CID studio space provides an opportunity to integrate learning opportunities with library services. Originality/value Through the first iteration, the CID has a unique and purposeful place within an academic library. It provides the opportunity for greater integration of library services. However, future iterations need to address key issues of space, equipment, and noise.
Warr, M., & Sampson, C. (2018). Designing for critical dialogue online: Challenges and opportunities. Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, 1303–1308.
Warr, M., Henriksen, D., & Mishra, P. (2018). What do we mean when we “design” e-learning solutions? An analysis of the discourses on education and design. Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, 717–722.
Warr, M., Henriksen, D., & Mishra, P. (2018). Creativity and flow in surgery, music, and cooking: An interview with neuroscientist Charles Limb. TechTrends, 62(2), 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0251-3
Warr, M., & Carter, N. (2017). Best practices in implementing an online learning program for elementary literacy intervention. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2017, pp. 718–723). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Educators face many challenges when integrating technology into school systems. During the 2015–2016 school year, a school district in the Pacific Northwest received a large technology grant to integrate new programs into its schools. The district chose to use Imagine Learning, an online language and literacy program, to support struggling readers and English Language Learners. The Imagine Learning research team studied the district’s implementation of the program through extensive interviews and observations. In this presentation, we share effective practices for implementation identified through interviews and observations. Specifically, teachers described practices related to classroom management, monitoring academic growth, and communicating and collaborating with others.
Warr, M., & West, R. (2017). How do I know it’s working? A teacher’s search for evidence. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1093–1098). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Most educators agree that educational efficacy increases when teachers use data to make instructional decisions. Teachers also develop experiential knowledge that assists in many of the day-to-day decisions made in the classroom. When teachers begin using adaptive online programs to deliver individualized instruction, the roles of data-driven decision making and personal practical knowledge shift. The online program can continually assess the needs of each student and deliver targeted instruction to meet these needs, diminishing teachers’ need to guide daily instruction. Teachers are left with the task of evaluating the online program, a task that calls for greater reliance on measurable evidence. In this paper, we present a summary of one teacher’s experience shifting from directing all instruction to searching for evidence that technology is meeting student needs. We then discuss implications for pre- and in-service teacher education.
Warr, M. (2016). Teachers’ adoption of learner-centered technology (R. E. West, Ed.) [Master of Science, Brigham Young University].
In this thesis, I describe research on teachers’ experiences with learner-centered technology. Specifically, this research investigated teachers’ experiences with adoption of the learner-centered tools available from Imagine Learning, an online elementary school literacy program. This thesis includes an extended literature review describing learner-centered classrooms, technology integration, and models of technology adoption, followed by a journal- ready article that describes teachers’ experiences throughout the process of adopting Imagine Learning. Finally, I provide a description my experiences throughout this project as well as a proposal for future areas of study.
Rich, P. J., West, R. E., & Warr, M. (2015). Innovating how we teach collaborative design through studio-based pedagogy. In M. Orey (Ed.), Educational Media and Technology Yearbook (pp. 147–163). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14188-6_11
Warr, M., Nelson, K. R., & West, R. E. (2014). Educational technology research journals: Cognition and Instruction, 2003-2012. Educational Technology, March-April, 26–31.
In this study, the authors examined the journal Cognition and Instruction to discover trends from the past decade (2003-2012). They looked at trends in article topics, research methods, authorship, and article citations by analyzing keyword frequencies, performing phrase counts of article abstracts, classifying studies according to various methods, and analyzing data generated by Google Scholar. The article provides evidence of the journal’s focus on the how of learning throughout the decade, particularly in K-16 settings, and highlights an increase in theoretical articles from 2008 to 2012. The authors conclude by comparing their findings with the stated aims and scope of the journal.
Warr, M. (2006). High school orchestra assessment. Utah American String Teacher Newsletter.
Warr, M. (2005). Re-establishing and Developing the BYU Chapter of the American String Teachers ’ Association. Journal of Undergraduate Research.
Warr, M. (2004). Paul Rolland’s spiral curriculum. American String Teacher, 54(4), 56–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/000313130405400414