About

David Perkins is a Professor of Education, Emeritus at Harvard Graduate School of Education. He is a founding member of Harvard Project Zero, a basic research project investigating human symbolic capacities and their development. Perkins has served as co-director and is now senior co-director and a member of the steering committee of the project. His research focuses on creativity in the arts and sciences, informal reasoning, problem solving, understanding, individual and organizational learning, and the teaching of thinking skills. He has participated in curriculum projects addressing thinking, understanding, and learning across various countries including Colombia, Israel, Venezuela, South Africa, Sweden, Holland, Australia, and the United States. Perkins was one of the principal developers of WIDE World, a distance learning model embedded in programs at HGSE. He has authored numerous publications, including fourteen books, with notable titles such as 'The Eureka Effect,' 'King Arthur’s Round Table,' 'Making Learning Whole,' and 'Future Wise,' which explore creativity, organizational intelligence, deepening education, and contemporary teaching priorities.

Research topics

• Medicine
• Psychology
• Nursing
• Computer science
• Business

Selected publications

• Correction: A taxonomy of the process in implementation science: the Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF)

  Implementation Science Communications · 2026-02-26

  articleOpen access
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• A taxonomy of the process in implementation science: the Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF)

  Implementation Science Communications · 2026-01-14 · 4 citations

  articleOpen access

  BACKGROUND: Despite growing global efforts to evaluate the impact of research, there remains a lack of practical, standardised tools to assess implementation in the real-world. AIM: This study introduces a comprehensive implementation taxonomy for use in impact evaluations based on onto-terminology principles. METHODS: This work is part of the Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) program. An international expert panel of 32 members developed the taxonomy using nominal group techniques and an iterative refinement process. The design was informed by the Technology Readiness Levels for Implementation Sciences (TRL-IS) to ensure its relevance and application across the life cycle of implementation. Case studies have been conducted in ten countries and the knowledge gained from practical experiences has been incorporated into the taxonomy. RESULTS: The GIAF taxonomy outlines 82 subdomains organised across 15 domains and three sequential implementation phases. The Initiation phase captures early preparatory steps before real-world use, including planning, engagement, and pre-readiness. The Maturity phase focuses on early implementation and real-world demonstration studies, covering the initiative's readiness (from demonstration to release), dissemination, usability, adoption, and uptake. The Evolution phase refers to later-stage activities once the intervention or tool is fully implemented, with domains encompassing sustainability, diffusion, prolongation, expansion, diversification, exporting, and de-implementation. The taxonomy is supported by tools including a glossary and practical checklists to guide consistent application. CONCLUSIONS: The GIAF taxonomy offers a structured, detailed, and flexible toolkit for evaluating implementation processes using mixed methods and across diverse projects and settings. It supports both quantitative scoring and qualitative insight to inform cross-context comparison and learning. By clearly defining and measuring these processes, it enhances the rigour, replicability, and comparability of implementation research and practice. The taxonomy also supports comparative effectiveness analyses of implementation strategies. This comprehensive approach addresses a critical gap in the implementation science field, contributing to stronger evidence-based practices, health and social care programs, and research globally. The GIAF toolkit provides researchers, evaluators, and other decision-makers with a practical resource for assessing implementation impact. It can also support planning processes and, through learnings from assessment results, help improve future implementation efforts.

  PublisherDOI

• A shared terminology for implementation research impact: Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) Glossary

  Implementation Science Communications · 2026-03-26

  articleOpen access

  BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, the growing number of theories, models and frameworks developed in implementation research has generated a significant problem of terminological variability. Evidence shows that implementation research has reached a point in time, when the absence of a common vocabulary and a related taxonomy is hampering the advancement of comparative research in impact analysis, particularly in the "process" or throughput phase. The Glossary of terms is part of the Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) Toolkit. AIM: This paper details the development of the GIAF Glossary for disambiguation of implementation research terms related to the process of impact analysis, and to document the development and adoption of agreed definitions within the GIAF Taxonomy (15 domains and 82 sub-domains) and Checklists. METHODS: We followed an ontoterminology approach and the Technology Readiness Level adapted to implementation sciences. The iterative and multiple steps involved a scoping review of the terminology and definitions in theories, models and frameworks related to the process domains of implementation research, followed by the development of an inventory of terms, assessment of the definitions for ambiguity and vagueness to develop the Alpha version. The GIAF Glossary was developed concurrently with the development of the GIAF Taxonomy and a Beta version created. Subsequently, an international expert panel (n = 32) critiqued, refined the Beta version and final definitions reached through consensus. Further testing of its usability in the real world occurred over 10 years across 35 project evaluations. RESULTS: The final comprehensive GIAF Glossary has n = 189 terms. Of these 72% of the definitions were developed during this study, 12% were adopted verbatim from a published source and 16% adapted from a published source. The completed GIAF Glossary is in Supplement 3. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that numerous existing definitions of terms used in research, evaluation and impact analysis of implementation processes are ambiguous or vague. We demonstrate the combined use of two important methodologies, that of ontoterminology and the Technology Readiness Level-IS. We introduce the GIAF Glossary, developed as part of the GIAF Toolkit which also includes the GIAF Taxonomy, Checklists and Ladders/Scales. The GIAF Glossary provides clear and consensus-based definitions that support consistent communication and understanding across international contexts for impact analysis and implementation research broadly. To our knowledge the GIAF Glossary is the most comprehensive Glossary for the impact analysis of implementation research and science.

  PublisherDOI

• From Challenges to Change: Reflections on Integrated Care and Australian Rural Mental Health

  2025-01-01

  book-chapterSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Outcomes of Adopting a Higher Versus Lower Concentration of Hemodialysate Magnesium as a Center-Wide Policy (Dial-Mag): A Clinical Research Protocol of a Pragmatic, Registry-Based, Cluster Randomized Trial

  Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2025-12-01

  articleOpen access

  Background: In individuals receiving hemodialysis, lower serum magnesium concentrations are associated with a higher risk of death and cardiovascular disease and more discomfort from muscle cramps. Small trials suggest that increasing serum magnesium by using a higher concentration of dialysate magnesium may be beneficial. This protocol outlines a large, randomized trial examining the effects of adopting a high versus low concentration of dialysate magnesium as a hemodialysis center-wide policy on the risk of mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and the burden of muscle cramps. Objective: To determine whether implementing a dialysate magnesium concentration of 0.75 mmol/L versus ≤ 0.5 mmol/L as a hemodialysis center-wide policy, for up to 4 years, affects (1) the rate of all-cause mortality or major cardiovascular-related hospitalizations or (2) the level of discomfort individuals experience from muscle cramps. Design: Pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, 2-sided superiority cluster randomized trial. Hemodialysis centers were randomly allocated (1:1) to one of the 2 arms. The assignment was constrained by five center-level prognostic factors and stratified by province. Setting: 137 hemodialysis centers in four Canadian provinces-Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba. The trial period is from April 4, 2022, to March 31, 2026. Outcomes will be analyzed after March 31, 2026, using provincial health care databases and self-reported questionnaires. Participants: Individuals who received maintenance hemodialysis at participating centers during the trial period. Intervention: Use of a dialysate magnesium concentration of either 0.75 mmol/L or ≤ 0.5 mmol/L as a center-wide policy during the trial period. Measurements: The two primary outcomes are (1) a composite of all-cause mortality or major cardiovascular-related hospitalization (a hospital admission with myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or ischemic stroke) recorded in large health care databases and (2) self-reported muscle cramps collected from questionnaires. Methods: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the intervention effect on the instantaneous rate of the primary composite outcome will be analyzed using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model accounting for center-level clustering. The observation time will be censored for provincial emigration or the trial end date. Self-reported muscle cramps will be analyzed using a cumulative link (proportional odds) model. All models will be stratified by province and adjusted for the covariates used to constrain randomization. Limitations: The trial start date was delayed in some centers due to post-pandemic supply disruptions (including discontinued dialysate formulations); however, all centers secured dialysate concentrates in alignment with the trial-allocated magnesium level. Conclusions: The results of this pragmatic trial will inform center-wide policy on the optimal dialysate magnesium concentration for patient health. Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT04079582.

  PublisherDOI

• From Challenges to Change: Reflections on Integrated Care and Australian Rural Mental Health

  2025-01-01

  book-chapterSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• International declaration on rural mental health research: 10 guiding principles and standards

  Australian Journal of Rural Health · 2024-08-01 · 2 citations

  editorialOpen access

  Rural communities have unique mental health needs and challenges which are often related to the uniqueness of the community itself. On a per-capita basis, the investment in rural mental health research is far less than that in urban communities. Added to this, rural communities are often at risk of researchers, based in large urban universities, visiting, conducting the research with minimal engagement with local stakeholders and limited understanding of the community's social-service-environmental context. Often this research leaves no visible benefit to the community with respect to increased knowledge, resources or community capacity. This commentary is based on the insights of a panel of authors from 9 countries, each with extensive experience of rural mental health research and work. And it seeks to stimulate the discourse on responsible rural mental health practice. The aim of this commentary is to provide a reference on research practice for novice and experienced researchers on rural mental health research and practice, to assist policymakers, government and funding bodies to establish appropriate standards and guidelines for rural mental health research, and support rural communities to advocate for equity of funding and sustainable research as they engage with researchers, funders and governments. The 10 standards in this declaration will help guide researchers toward research that is beneficial to rural communities and also help develop the local community's research capability, which ultimately will serve to enhance the mental health and well-being of rural communities.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Improving the mental health of rural Australians: a review

  Figshare · 2024-01-01 · 7 citations

  review

  This report summarises insights from research undertaken to understand how to improve help for rural Australians, in addressing their mental health and wellbeing needs.

  DOI

• Co-creating community wellbeing initiatives: What is the evidence and how do they work?

  Research Square · 2024-05-03 · 1 citations

  preprintOpen accessSenior author
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Co-creating community wellbeing initiatives: what is the evidence and how do they work?

  International Journal of Mental Health Systems · 2024-08-05 · 22 citations

  reviewOpen accessSenior author

  BACKGROUND: Addressing wellbeing at the community level, using a public health approach may build wellbeing and protective factors for all. A collaborative, community-owned approach can bring together experience, networks, local knowledge, and other resources to form a locally-driven, place-based initiative that can address complex issues effectively. Research on community empowerment, coalition functioning, health interventions and the use of local data provide evidence about what can be achieved in communities. There is less understanding about how communities can collaborate to bring about change, especially for mental health and wellbeing. METHOD: A comprehensive literature search was undertaken to identify community wellbeing initiatives that address mental health. After screening 8,972 titles, 745 abstracts and 188 full-texts, 12 exemplar initiatives were identified (39 related papers). RESULTS: Eight key principles allowed these initiatives to become established and operate successfully. These principles related to implementation and outcome lessons that allowed these initiatives to contribute to the goal of increasing community mental health and wellbeing. A framework for community wellbeing initiatives addressing principles, development, implementation and sustainability was derived from this analysis, with processes mapped therein. CONCLUSION: This framework provides evidence for communities seeking to address community wellbeing and avoid the pitfalls experienced by many well-meaning but short-lived initiatives.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Brian Kelly

  45 shared

• J. Paul Attfield

  University of Edinburgh

  41 shared

• Hazel Dalton

  Charles Sturt University

  40 shared

• J. F. Clarke

  38 shared

• Lide M. Rodrı́guez-Martı́nez

  CIC energiGUNE

  38 shared

• A.M.T. Bell

  38 shared

• Jean‐Marc Grenèche

  Institut des Molécules et Matériaux du Mans

  38 shared

• R. Retoux

  École Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Caen

  36 shared