Replace monolithic comprehensive studies with smaller, agile research cycles that test one conjecture at a time¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

This strategy directs researchers to break a single large empirical study into a sequence of smaller, rapid cycles, each testing a smaller conjecture. The report argues monolithic designs slow funding, IRB approval, and recruitment, and that "Conducting the exploratory research as agile cycles may lead to a more focused set of conjectures worth testing at scale." Smaller cycles also build trust with schools before requesting sensitive equity-relevant variables.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A clear conjecture or theory worth testing before extensive data are collected

Constraints¶

• The report notes peer reviewers appear to expect a single comprehensive study and may score agile sequences of studies lower

Target Learners¶

• K-12 and higher education students using digital learning platforms

Target Learning Goals¶

• Improving equity-relevant education research design and its impacts on practice

Related Strategies¶

• Conduct a smaller sequence of rapid-cycle studies that build on one another instead of planning a single large confirmatory study
• Focus equity-relevant research at the classroom and systems levels, treating teachers—not just technology—as drivers of change
• Shift from developing and confirming new interventions to elaborating and refining well-used resources to address equity issues

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Zacamy, J., & Roschelle, J. (2022, August). Navigating the tensions: How could equity-relevant research also be agile, open, and scalable? Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/159