What types of brokerage bridge the research-practice gap? The case of public school educators.

• Two-thirds of educators cannot reach a researcher through their social networks. • Educators using itinerant brokerage were 5 times less likely to reach a researcher. • Educators using liaison brokerage were 3.4 times more likely to reach a researcher. • Interventions to narrow the research-practice gap should leverage liaison brokers. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]