<![CDATA[his conceptual-critical article examines how Research and Development (R&D) in educational research hasfrequently been reduced to producing, validating, and assessing the feasibility of instructional products.Drawing on primary methodological literature and six illustrative chemistry education development studiesfrom Indonesia, it argues that ADDIE, 4D, Borg and Gall, and related instructional or software developmentmodels should not be considered complete educational research methodologies merely because they specifydesign procedures. The article distinguishes product validity from didactic validity: an artefact does notbecome an educational intervention simply by receiving favourable expert ratings. Defensible educationalclaims require coherent learning experiences, implementation in authentic contexts, evidence of learning, andinsight into why a design works. The six studies illustrate different evidential bases from expert validation aloneto a quasi-experimental comparison yet often culminate in similar claims about product feasibility oreffectiveness. Design-Based Research (DBR) and Educational Design Research (EDR) are discussed asmethodological approaches for moving beyond product-oriented development and toward iterative didacticdesign. The resulting repositioning framework distinguishes five elements: product validity, didactic validity,contextual implementation, learning evidence, and design principles. This framework helps researchers alignthe strength of their claims with the evidence collected and clarifies how instructional products can contributeto transferable knowledge in chemistry education.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
