Research into policy doesn't go? A response to the editorial ‘Interesting times, and interested research’, British Educational Research Journal, 30, 4, 475–476

Abstract

Virtually all of our editorial space in this edition, apart from this short introduction, is given over to a response from Lesley Saunders, of the General Teaching Council for England (GTCE), to our editorial in 30(4). The editorial drew attention to the conclusions and implications of three substantive articles contained in the issue, conclusions which run counter to current education policy in the UK. The editorial wondered whether the government, given its supposed commitment to 'evidencebased policy', would take any notice or not. Lesley takes us to task for being 'hopelessly naive and unrealistic' about the capacity of government to respond to research. We, of course, would far rather confess to be knowingly tongue-in-cheek about the rhetorical devices employed by policymakers and researchers alike. Could policy really change in response to research evidence, or is the Government's espoused commitment to evidence-based policy simply a convenient rhetoric to wheel out when research happens to support what the Government would do anyway, with awkward findings being quietly ignored? Nevertheless, following email correspondence about the editorial, we invited, and are happy to publish, Lesley's response. The issues she raises are important; and particularly, if we assume that research evidence could and should influence policy, over a reasonable timescale, how might this happen? What might BERA as an organisation and BERJ as the journal of the association do to encourage 'brokerage'? Lesley makes some suggestions and we are pleased to publish them and encourage others to develop such ideas further.