Search results

This chapter reports on the design-based research study aimed at the re- and codesign of the third-year course “Introduction to Biostatistics,” part of the Bachelor program in Medicine. The authors aimed to make teaching more interactive, student-based and future-proof by empirically testing theoretical assumptions during iterative studies, including both quantitative and qualitative results from the perspective of the students and the teacher. The authors’ conclusion is that teacher–researcher collaboration can be an effective approach for professional development and improving innovative practices. At the same time, it allows to get a better theoretical understanding of effective teaching and learning practices. The authors hope that this chapter can inspire others to transform toward a progressive institution and looking for concrete innovative classroom practices in the context of innovative learning spaces.

This chapter examines two different research approaches in education, namely “academic research” (rooted in theory) and “practitioner research” (rooted in practices), and some tensions that might arise from this distinction. It is suggested that the relationships between these two types of research are fuzzy, and that hybrid research studies (a mix of both theory and practice-guided research) are possible. The chapter also analyses both kinds of research in relation to etic and emic perspectives. In etic research, the researcher interprets data based on her theoretical frameworks, while in emic research the researcher is closer to the interpretations that social actors give to a particular social reality. It follows that, in higher education research, “academic research” would be likely to reflect an etic perspective (closer to theory) while “practitioner research” would reflect an emic perspective (closer to practice). However, in this chapter, it is proposed that both perspectives in research – etic and emic – constitute a continuum across which researchers need to move in a permanent, systematic, and reflective way. It is also proposed that the exercise of “epistemological vigilance” might help researchers to transit between etic and emic perspectives.

Until recently, motivation has been considered to be an individual phenomenon. Motivational theorists have accordingly conceptualised key constructs in individualistic terms and emphasised the individual origins and nature of motivation, although they have also long recognised that contextual or social factors have a significant influence on these individual processes. Recently this conceptualisation has been questioned as theorists have suggested, after Vygotsky, that motivation, like learning and thinking, might be social in nature. This idea was first suggested by Sivan (1986) more than twenty years ago but it received a major impetus with the publication of an article by Hickey (1997) eleven years later. Since that time interest in the social nature of motivation has grown as a small number of book chapters and journal articles have been published and conference papers have been presented on the topic. Although some motivational theorists remain sceptical (e.g. Winne, 2004) of this theoretical development, the inclusion of a section on sociocultural approaches to motivation in Perry, Turner, and Meyer's (2006) chapter on classrooms as contexts for motivating learning in the 2nd edition of the Handbook of Educational Psychology suggests that this perspective is being seriously considered by motivational researchers. Similarly, the inclusion of a chapter (Walker, in press-b) on the sociocultural approach to motivation in the 3rd edition of the International Encyclopedia of Education indicates that this approach has achieved some recognition.

This chapter provides an overview of the development of a USDE SLP-funded leadership preparation partnership between a local school division and our university. We specifically describe our efforts to cultivate an authentic and purposeful partnership that would allow us to move beyond the limitations of the traditional leadership preparation programs that have been so widely criticized in the literature. This chapter describes the research and development efforts which involved iterative cycles of design, implementation, reflection, and redesign that helped to identify problems of practice and develop meaningful solutions to these identified areas of need. We also discuss four key elements of effective university–school partnerships that grew out of our efforts to build and refine an effective partnership.

In the past five years, state education agencies (SEAs) have increased the number of social and emotional learning (SEL) policies, oftentimes engaging stakeholders across the state. However, few use multiple sources of stakeholder engagement data to develop and improve their SEL standards and resources (Yoder, Dusenbury, Martinez-Black, & Weissberg, 2020). This chapter describes the experience of a nonprofit research organization supporting an SEA and a volunteer workgroup in Washington state to gather and use several forms of stakeholder input and feedback in developing statewide SEL guidance for K-12 educators. Operating from a research–practice partnership framework (Coburn & Penuel, 2016), the team assisted the workgroup members in applying both an ecological systems theory perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006) and an equity lens to their work through an iterative process of data collection, interpretation, and use. This chapter describes the process and outcomes of this research–practice partnership and provides examples of how the workgroup incorporated stakeholder input and feedback into the development of SEL guidance and resources. We offer insights and lessons learned from these efforts to expand the perspectives represented in SEL research and policymaking. Our aim is to highlight the importance of stakeholder engagement to ensure that SEL guidance considers the priorities and values of diverse communities, especially historically marginalized communities. We hope to encourage more research–practice partnerships to investigate and amplify community perspectives in SEL.

We study research designs where a binary treatment changes discontinuously at the border between administrative units such as states, counties, or municipalities, creating a treated and a control area. This type of geographically discontinuous treatment assignment can be analyzed in a standard regression discontinuity (RD) framework if the exact geographic location of each unit in the dataset is known. Such data, however, is often unavailable due to privacy considerations or measurement limitations. In the absence of geo-referenced individual-level data, two scenarios can arise depending on what kind of geographic information is available. If researchers have information about each observation’s location within aggregate but small geographic units, a modified RD framework can be applied, where the running variable is treated as discrete instead of continuous. If researchers lack this type of information and instead only have access to the location of units within coarse aggregate geographic units that are too large to be considered in an RD framework, the available coarse geographic information can be used to create a band or buffer around the border, only including in the analysis observations that fall within this band. We characterize each scenario, and also discuss several methodological challenges that are common to all research designs based on geographically discontinuous treatment assignments. We illustrate these issues with an original geographic application that studies the effect of introducing copayments for the use of the Children’s Health Insurance Program in the United States, focusing on the border between Illinois and Wisconsin.