Search

Background:This study draws on two communities theory to address two major research questions related to conceptions of research in educational practice and policy. First, how do educators conceptualise research? Second, to what extent do educators’ conceptions of research align with recent US federal educational policies? Methods:We conducted 90 semi-structured interviews with educators in the US, asking them what comes to mind when they think of research. We used open, axial, and selective coding to characterise educators’ conceptions of research. We also compared educators’ conceptions of research to two US federal educational policies that define scientifically-based research and evidence-based interventions. Findings:Findings indicate that educators and policies defined research in similar ways, but each included some unique characteristics. Discussion and conclusions:Implications from the study include the need for increased communication between federal policymakers and educators and improved reporting by researchers to better attend to the needs of educators and policymakers.

This study examines the salience of six types of parent engagement among 60 Michigan public school educators at the county, district, and school levels, and how salience varies across educators at each level. Directed content analysis of 59 interviews was conducted using Epstein’s (1995) Framework of Six Types of Involvement as a priori codes. Communicating was most salient among educators, but all other types of parent engagement were substantially less salient. County and district educators were more attuned to parent engagement that stretched outside the boundaries of the school building like collaborating with the community, parenting, and learning at home. In contrast, district and school educators were more attuned to volunteering and decision-making which involves direct and extended interaction between parents and schools. Findings highlight opportunities for expanding and improving parent engagement strategies in part by leveraging the functional roles and resources of building, district, and county level educators.

The presence of a research-practice gap is recognized across multiple fields including education, psychology, and public health. In this paper, we examine which of five structural types of brokerage are most and least effective in bridging this research-practice gap in the context of education. Using a small world survey design, we tracked how a statewide random sample of 247 K-12 principals and superintendents in Michigan seek information about social skills programs from brokering individuals and organizations. We find that some triadic brokerage structures are more effective than others in closing the communication gap between practitioners and researchers. Specifically, educators relying on itinerant brokerage, which circulates information between members of the same community, were five times less likely to obtain information from a researcher. In contrast, educators relying on representative or liaison brokerage, which facilitate information transfer between members of different communities, were more than twice as likely to obtain information from a researcher. We conclude by discussing implications for the development of interventions designed to facilitate information sharing between practitioners and researchers.

An increased focus on the use of research evidence (URE) in K-12 education has led to a proliferation of instruments measuring URE in K-12 education settings. However, to date, there has been no review of these measures to inform education researchers’ assessment of URE. Here, we systematically review published quantitative measurement instruments in K-12 education. Findings suggest that instruments broadly assess user characteristics, environmental characteristics, and implementation and practices. In reviewing instrument quality, we found that studies infrequently report reliability, validity, and demographics about the instruments they develop or use. Future work evaluating and developing instruments should explore environmental characteristics that affect URE, generate items that match up with URE theory, and follow standards for establishing instrument reliability and validity.

Measuring the use of research evidence (URE) by schools has become a central focus of education researchers. However, it has proven challenging due to low response rates, social desirability bias, and costly or time-consuming data collection methods. To overcome these challenges and meet the needs of research focused on URE, this paper introduces a non-reactive archival measure: Archival Search of Use of Research Evidence (ASURE). ASURE counts references to research or evidence on a school’s or school district’s website to capture the extent of its rhetorical use of research evidence. After illustrating the collection of ASURE in all public school districts in Michigan (N = 595), we use data on these districts to show that ASURE is reliable and valid, and thus offers a promising new strategy for measuring URE in schools. We conclude by considering future steps for exploring ASURE, not simply as a measure of URE in schools, but instead as a measurement strategy for assessing URE in a broad range of organisational contexts.

In this study, we explored the extent to which educators discuss and prioritize Rogers' (Diffusion of innovations, The Free Press: New York, 1995) five attributes of innovations-relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialability-in the context of research use. Using a directed content analysis of 54 semi-structured interviews and exemplar quotes, we describe how educators mentioned compatibility most frequently, but also commonly invoked observability and complexity in their discussions of research use. Our results also revealed key differences between educators in executive and non-executive roles. We discuss the implications of our findings for closing the research-practice gap in school-based mental health services and psychosocial interventions.

We propose transaction cost economics theory as a tool for exploring when school administrators rely on information from two types of sources: internal sources like their own colleagues, and external sources like researchers and government agencies. The theory’s application is illustrated in a comparative case study of two public school districts in Michigan. Consistent with the theory’s predictions, the smaller, homogeneous, high-performing district used more external sources of information, while the larger, diverse, low-performing district used internal sources of information. We conclude by identifying some strengths and limitations of the theory, which can serve as starting points for debate.

Purpose: We apply diffusion of innovations theory to examine two key research questions designed to inform efforts to improve the research–practice gap in education: (1) Are there distinct types of educators that differ in their prioritization of the compatibility, observability, complexity, relative advantage, and trialability of research? and (2) Are educators’ roles or context associated with their categorization in this typology? Research Method: Using semistructured interview data in two Michigan counties from intermediate school district staff ( N = 24), district central office staff ( N = 18), principals ( N = 22), and school building staff ( N = 23), we first used directed content analysis to code for mentions of compatibility, observability, complexity, relative advantage, and trialability. Next, using the coded data, we conducted a hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis and follow-up cross-tabulations to assess whether cluster memberships were associated with educators’ roles or county context. Findings: Educators in our sample could be categorized in one of five clusters distinguished primarily by different patterns of prioritization of the compatibility, observability, and complexity of research. Membership in these clusters did not vary by role but did vary by county, suggesting the importance of context for educators’ perceptions of research. Implications for Research and Practice: These findings suggest that narrowing the research–practice gap in education will require attending to multiple audiences of educators with distinct priorities that guide their perceptions and use of educational research and evidence-based practices.

The implementation of effective community interventions can be challenging for many reasons, including financial and time costs, lack of infrastructure, local contextual variations, and barriers to fidelity. But, prior to all of these is the challenge of limited information exchange between the researchers developing interventions and the practitioners implementing them, or the so-called research-practice gap. In this paper, we use network theory and review a dozen small world experiments to understand the research-practice gap, identifying three key lessons: (1) spatial and social distances are related to the severity of the gap, (2) social boundaries may lead to echo chambers and closed loops, and (3) wider gaps reduce the likelihood of successful information exchange. From these lessons, we recommend that researchers and practitioners should rely on the assistances of information brokers who know people they do not know and who are different from themselves.

Despite widespread recognition of a research–practice gap in multiple service sectors, less is known about how pre-existing communication channels facilitate the flow of information between researchers and practitioners. In the current study, we applied an existing typology of brokerage developed by Gould and Fernandez (Sociol Methodol 19:89–126, 1989) to examine what types of brokerage facilitate information spread between researchers and educational practitioners. Specifically, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 school administrators and staff in two public school districts regarding their experiences searching for information about instructional, health, and social skills programs. Using deductive content analysis, we found evidence of all five types of brokerage identified by Gould and Fernandez (1989). However, only three types of brokerage—gatekeepers, representatives, and liaisons—were involved in the flow of information between school administrators and researchers. Moreover, information transfer often occurred in longer chains that involved multiple, distinct types of brokerage. We conclude with the broad implications of our findings for narrowing the research–practice gap by improving researchers’ dissemination efforts and practitioners’ search for information.