Research Evidence In Education Research Articles

Sustaining professionalism: Teachers as co‐enquirers in curriculum design

AbstractIn England, the development of teachers' curriculum design capabilities has been identified as a ‘challenge remaining’ (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child). A recent White Paper (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child) offered access to a publicly funded online platform as a solution. Drawing on Stenhouse's concepts of teachers as researchers and curriculum as an inquiry process, this article argues that such a policy initiative restricts both curriculum and professional development. An alternative approach to curriculum design, one based on Stenhouse's conception of the iterative development of teachers' professional and curriculum knowledge is profiled. In this article, we, as four teacher‐researchers, analyse a project which featured the Curriculum Design Coherence (CDC) model. We share insights gained from our involvement, both in relation to our professional learning and the impact of our curriculum design work on our pupils. We argue that the ‘othering’ of teachers in research contributes towards the under valuing of practice‐informed evidence in policy making. We draw on the work of Lawrence Stenhouse to inform a different means of generating educational research evidence, one that sustains teacher‐researchers through engagement with principles and concepts so as to inform policy and curriculum development.

Reflections on conducting rapid reviews of educational research

ABSTRACT Background Rapid reviews involve a streamlined approach to knowledge synthesis. They are used to identify high-quality evidence for the purpose of informing decisions and initiatives, completed over relatively short timeframes, and have been found to reach conclusions that do not differ extensively from full systematic reviews. Although common in the health sector, rapid reviews are not as widespread in education. Purpose This paper reflects on the experiences of conducting a rapid review that applied review guidance from the health sector to a topic situated within education: effective Professional Learning (PL) for school-based educators. Our purpose is not to share the rapid review’s findings: rather, our interest lies in exploring the process of undertaking the review. We sought to investigate the methodological decisions we made for the education context as we carried out the review. Methods As part of a large-scale investigation focusing on practitioner use of research evidence in education, we undertook a rapid review to understand what is known about effective PL. Drawing on methodological literature from the health and education sectors, we documented the procedure involved in conducting our rapid review in education. At each step, we reflected on methodological issues encountered, decisions taken and the procedural adjustments we made to align the process to the education context. Findings Our reflections identify the key adaptations we made to ensure that review guidance was carefully attuned to the context of the education field and the wider purpose of the review: in our case, to inform an initiative in education. Considerations highlighted by our procedure also included the role of reviewer judgement in quality appraisal and attending to collaborative review team processes. These reflections support the notion that the use of research to inform decisions in education needs to be a dynamic, contextualised, and collaborative process. Conclusion Rapid reviews have a crucial part to play in efforts to strengthen evidence-informed practice in the education sector. Our methodological exploration offers insights for those conducting, using, and commissioning rapid reviews to provide systematic and transparent evidence-based guidance for initiatives in education.

Making the case for project‐based learning: An examination of research evidence translation and mobilisation in education

AbstractEvidence about how to translate and mobilise research evidence for use in schools remains quite limited. The present study sought to address this gap by leveraging an opportunity to examine such processes. In February 2021, Edutopia (a large US‐based, practice‐focused educational intermediary organisation) hosted a large virtual event, with 6526 participants, to communicate/highlight just‐released findings from four large‐scale, funded causal studies into the efficacy of project‐based learning and to encourage educators to adopt this practice. Examining this event, this primarily qualitative study addressed one main research question: How were research evidence and other forms of evidence used to justify and motivate the adoption of project‐based learning in schools? This study also drew upon secondary data to examine certain self‐reported impacts. This study applied a two‐layered analytic frame to broadly examine the selling and gelling of educational research evidence and other forms of evidence, and to uncover if/how five main factors of innovation adoption were addressed. Findings provided detail and analysis along each of these dimensions and, further, revealed certain apparent tensions associated with making the case for project‐based learning—for example, some instances of possible research ‘over‐selling’, and a focus on answering certain questions that could not be addressed solely via research evidence, necessitating a reliance on other evidence sources. Survey/summary results suggested participants were strongly convinced of this innovation's positive impacts and were eager to discuss it further with colleagues, though given data limitations we were unable to discern the extent/ways participants’ subsequent practices subsequently shifted.

Evidence-informed teaching and practice-informed research

Abstract. In this commentary, I seek to join the ongoing conversation about evidence-informed educational practice that has been threaded through this special issue. I do so by drawing on related insights from the fields of teachers' beliefs and epistemic cognition and considering the roles of teacher education and educational research in improving (preservice) teachers' use of educational research. In particular, I focus on the merits of explicit research-based practice in teacher educators' teaching and ways that they can encourage preservice teachers' interactions with educational research in class, and methods of changing the beliefs that may underlie (preservice) teachers' engagement with educational research evidence, and finally, the need for clearly communicated research, including details of implementation.

Quality of Research Evidence in Education: How Do We Know?

Quality of Research Evidence in Education: How Do We Know?

Perspectives on evidence-based knowledge for teachers: acquisition, mobilisation and utilisation.

ABSTRACTThis introductory paper reviews the literature on the use of evidence-based knowledge (EBK) in the initial and continuing professional development of teachers and also in their everyday practice. It will set the scene for the theme of the SI and critically discuss general current issues about the generation of educational research evidence, how teachers may, or may not, acquire this and, drawing on and updating the outcomes of the previous JET SI (41 (5), 2014), some of the implications of translational research and knowledge mobilisation.

To jump the wave or not: teachers’ perceptions of research evidence in education

This article presents a microanalysis of how a group of primary school teachers deals with research evidence in their work. Based on analysis of a group of Norwegian teachers’ interactions over issues of educational research and research-based knowledge, we find that teachers’ representations of educational research particularly center on the following issues: educational research being perceived as circular, ‘polyphonic’, and a matter of accommodation to their experience-based knowledge. These metaphors also shed light upon the dilemmas that arise when research evidence meets teachers’ more contextual knowledge. We conclude that teachers’ practice-based evidence may take new forms with an increased policy focus on research-based evidence, as well as bringing forth challenges for teacher work and professionalism.

Book Review: Using Research Evidence in Education: From the Schoolhouse Door to Capitol Hill

Book Review: Using Research Evidence in Education: From the Schoolhouse Door to Capitol Hill

Implementación del ABP como métodolo para promover competencias de colaboración un ambiente virtual (Webnode)

El artículo refiere a un proyecto de investigación educativa con el cual se valoró el uso del Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas y su impacto en el trabajo colaborativo a través de una webnode. Se utilizó el método de estudio de caso instrumental, ya que el fin último fue la valoración de la relación del ABP y el trabajo colaborativo a través de una plataforma virtual. La entrevista semi-estructurada, un cuestionario y la observación virtual son los instrumentos usados para la recolección de datos, que evidencian que, utilizar el método ABP a través de una webnode facilita el desarrollo de competencias de trabajo colaborativo en los procesos de capacitación docente.

Leadership for a new vision of public school classrooms

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to extend the understanding of distributed leadership to the school district level as the authors examine how leadership for twenty-first century learning is distributed within public schools and school districts as they strive to transform their school classrooms from primarily teacher-directed toward more student-centered and technology-enhanced. It contributes to a growing understanding of the inherent distribution of school and school district leadership and helps elucidate how existing leadership machinations can be adapted to facilitate the transformation of public school classrooms from being primarily teacher-directed, to predominately student-centered, technology-enhanced learning environments.Design/methodology/approach– This is a qualitative study conducted in all school districts in one Canadian province. Data were gathered through interviews of all district technology leaders and principals of two schools (per district) deemed exemplary in their use of technology for classroom learning; focus group sessions with stratified samples of teachers and all district-level program professionals in each district, and semi-structured observations of district-selected technology-savvy classrooms in two schools per district.Findings– The paper provides insights into the challenges of leading classroom innovation, including costs associated with technology acquisition and the provision of quality professional development. It reaffirms the continued relevance of the school principal while concomitantly confirming the inherent existence of distributed leadership within and across organizational boundaries that can facilitate or impede complex change. Finally, findings from this study serve as yet another reminder that the accumulated, rich evidence base regarding the process of leading and implementing complex innovation appears to be largely ignored by practitioners.Research limitations/implications– Because the research approach is qualitative and restricted to one defined population, the generalizability of this study may be limited.Practical implications– This paper draws attention to practical importance of fostering leadership from multiple sources and the need for reflection on how research evidence in education can better directed toward improved practice.Originality/value– Given the major public expenditures in the acquisition of new and emerging technology for public school classrooms, this paper may foster reflection for improved leadership and implementation practices. The paper anticipates that this work will contribute to a growing understanding of the distributed nature of school and school district leadership. Also, the paper believes it will help elucidate how current machinations of leadership might be adapted to facilitate the transformation of public school classrooms from primarily teacher-directed to predominately student-centered, technology-enhanced learning environments.

Exploring and developing reciprocity in research design

The researcher–participant relationship has the potential to be reciprocal, a relationship in which each contributes something the other needs or desires. Participants devote their time, effort, experiences, and wisdom to inform and shape the researcher’s study. The researcher’s scope, depth, and nature of inquiry introduce vulnerability to participants’ lives. In turn, researchers are susceptible to variable involvement and apathy from participants. While neither the relational aspect of research nor its potential for reciprocity is new, we are concerned that the concept is overshadowed in the current, positivistic culture of evidence in education research. Using vignettes from our special education research, we describe the affordances of a stance of reciprocity, illustrating the contours of the component in recruitment, participation, analysis, and presentation. We ask: How do truth traditions support reciprocity? How do we authentically reciprocate participants’ efforts throughout the research process? And finally, how might qualitative work embrace reciprocity and lead education research to a broader conceptualization of evidence, one that expands the transformative potential of our collective work?

A Role for Postdocs in Undergraduate Education

In his Editorial, “Galvanizing science departments” (4 September 2009, p. [1181][1]), C. Wieman described ongoing programs at University of Colorado, Boulder and University of British Columbia in Vancouver that are successfully implementing new effective, research-based teaching methods in several science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) departments. As Wieman points out, transformations in the STEM teaching culture at large research universities are sorely needed, but such institutional change is notoriously difficult to bring about. It is therefore worth a closer look at how these two programs work. Their success has been primarily due to the science education specialists Wieman mentions, who are called Science Teaching Fellows (STFs) in Boulder. It may not have been clear from the Editorial that these are postdocs. Most earned Ph.D.s in their respective science disciplines (not education), but developed strong interests in pedagogy and educational research during their training. One of their missions is to assist departmental faculty with the kinds of course transformation that Wieman describes. As postdocs in the discipline, they have the content knowledge required for effective development of educational materials, and they are not threatening to faculty, as outsiders with educational degrees might be. Their ability to effect faculty change derives from their familiarity with the educational research evidence, their enthusiasm and people skills, and the assistance they can offer in implementing new teaching approaches, which can be labor-intensive. The other mission for STFs is to gain science education training, which is uncommon within science departments and is valuable in light of the growing number of college and university science departments desiring permanent Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) ([ 1 ][2], [ 2 ][3]). These individuals are discipline-based science faculty who make scholarly work in science education part of the fabric of the science disciplines themselves. SFES are undertaking efforts in the three science education arenas of undergraduate science education, K-12 science education, and discipline-based science education research, as well as in basic science research ([ 2 ][3]), furthering the current push to improve STEM education at all levels. The Boulder and Vancouver programs, unique to our knowledge, should be transferable to any institution that can provide strong, pedagogically informed leadership (preferably from within STEM departments) and financial support for STFs. Funding agencies and foundations could have a major impact on improving STEM education by supporting such postdoctoral positions, thereby enabling the replication of these programs at other universities and promoting the training of more SFES. 1. [↵][4] 1. S. D. Bush 2. et al ., CBE Life Sci. Educ. 5, 297 (2006). [OpenUrl][5][FREE Full Text][6] 2. [↵][7] 1. S. D. Bush 2. et al ., Science 322, 1795 (2008). [OpenUrl][8][Abstract/FREE Full Text][9] [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.1180564 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [5]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCBE-Life%2BSciences%2BEducation%26rft.stitle%253Dcellbioed%26rft.issn%253D1536-7509%26rft.aulast%253DBush%26rft.auinit1%253DS.%2BD.%26rft.volume%253D5%26rft.issue%253D4%26rft.spage%253D297%26rft.epage%253D305%26rft.atitle%253DOn%2BHiring%2BScience%2BFaculty%2Bwith%2BEducation%2BSpecialties%2Bfor%2BYour%2BScience%2B%2528Not%2BEducation%2529%2BDepartment%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1187%252Fcbe.06-09-0189%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F17146032%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [6]: /lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToiY2VsbGJpb2VkIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjc6IjUvNC8yOTciO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyNDoiL3NjaS8zMjcvNTk2NS81MjIuMi5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30= [7]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [8]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DScience%26rft.stitle%253DScience%26rft.issn%253D0036-8075%26rft.aulast%253DBush%26rft.auinit1%253DS.%2BD.%26rft.volume%253D322%26rft.issue%253D5909%26rft.spage%253D1795%26rft.epage%253D1796%26rft.atitle%253DTHE%2BPIPELINE%253A%2BScience%2BFaculty%2Bwith%2BEducation%2BSpecialties%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1126%252Fscience.1162072%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F19095927%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [9]: /lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiIzMjIvNTkwOS8xNzk1IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjQ6Ii9zY2kvMzI3LzU5NjUvNTIyLjIuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9

Social Science and Evidence-based Everything: The case of education

Recent moves in academic and policy circles to strengthen the social science research evidence base have raised questions about the quality and status of educational research. They have suggested a need for systematic research synthesis, for greater accessibility of sound educational research evidence, and greater respect for the perspectives of the different stakeholders in the educational research process. This paper looks at the background to 'the evidence movement', and discusses a particular government-funded initiative designed to take forward the challenge of systematic reviews of educational research. It considers some of the ways in which this activity poses challenges for social science methodology.

What To Do About Educational Research’s Credibility Gaps?

Educational research is continually being thrashed for its poor quality. Several recent efforts to define better research standards have sputtered. Acknowledging others’ arguments that the nature of educational research is applied (directed at problems of schooling), heterogeneous (multidisciplinary), and complex (multidimensional), we nonetheless advocate more widespread implementation of scientifically based research methodologies. Our central thesis focuses on the concept of credible evidence. We suggest that most educational research approaches that are in vogue today are incapable of yielding empirical evidence that is convincing from either a scientific or a prescriptive standpoint. After offering a refresher on the logic underlying carefully controlled scientific investigations and then contrasting current educational research inquiry with inquiry characteristic of medical research, we present an educational research model in which what we refer to as “randomized classroom trials” studies are accorded a position of prominence. We provide examples of candidate topics for such studies and discuss the challenging issues that must be resolved so that educational practice will be better informed by educational research evidence that is credible.

What to do about educational research's credibility gaps?

Educational research is continually being thrashed for its poor quality. Several recent efforts to define better research standards have sputtered. Acknowledging others' arguments that the nature of educational research is applied (directed at problems of schooling), heterogeneous (multidisciplinary), and complex (multidimensional). we nonetheless advocate more widespread implementation of scientifically based research methodologies. Our central thesis focuses on the concept of credible evidence. We suggest that most educational research approaches that are in vogue today are incapable of yielding empirical evidence that is convincing from either a scientific or a prescriptive standpoint. After offering a refresher on the logic underlying carefully controlled scientific investigations and then contrasting current educational research inquiry with inquiry characteristic of medical research, we present an educational research model in which what we refer to as “randomized classroom trials” studies are accorded a position of prominence. We provide examples of candidate topics for such studies and discuss the challenging issues that must be resolved so that educational practice will be better informed by educational research evidence that is credible.