Search results

This article examines the challenges facing agencies working across social care, health, education and voluntary sector boundaries in leading a drive for evidence‐informed practice (EIP). A study conducted by Research in Practice has identified the competencies and functions that managers deem most important to lead an EIP initiative successfully. Views about agencies' current capabilities and confidence to do so vary. Leadership development opportunities are generally perceived as poor. Plans are outlined for an action learning project within the Research in Practice network to support managers to lead EIP effectively.

South Africa is a developing country with an education system that remains in crisis, despite three decades of democracy. The vestiges of South Africa's oppressive past continues to plague a system where repeated efforts at top-down transformation and curriculum renewal have failed to create the change required (Roodt, 2018). Extensive country-wide research attests to persistent inequalities linked to poverty, unemployment, and poor educational outcomes, effectively trapping disadvantaged communities in downward spirals (World Bank, 2018). As in most other countries, evidence-informed practice (EIP) has been widely discussed and advocated for in South Africa, with the matric (school leavers') results resurging the conversation annually. Unfortunately, as is the case in many developing countries, it is well documented that the actual implementation of EIP is not as widespread as desired.

This chapter reviews and analyzes the use of EIP in South Africa through an exploration of the various spaces where EIP is reported to occur within the broader education landscape. Examples of teacher and school level EIP innovations, led by a wide variety of actors within the system, are evident – this despite the pervasive lack of resources, support, and effective leadership within the formal education system. Through reflecting on these ‘pockets of hope,’ which were found to exist not only within, but also outside and alongside the system, we hope to gather insights and initiate debate on how the uptake of EIP might be better informed and facilitated within the broader South African public education system.

The implications of the debates about evidence and knowledge transfer are explored in the context of integrated working and in the wake of a new research utilisation agency for adult social care.

The United Arab Emirates has made great strides in terms of its overall educational system with a variety of educational reforms to meet the nation's strategic vision. In this chapter, we utilize Hood's (1998) social cohesion/social regulation theory and DiMaggio and Powell's (1991) institutional theory to examine the evidence-informed teaching practice in the UAE. It is evident that the UAE educational model sits in the top two quadrants based on this chapter's analysis – a high social cohesion with high social regulation (i.e., “a hierarchist way”) and at times exhibiting fatalism with high social regulation and low social cohesion. Although the findings reveal substantial diversity in terms of enablers and barriers to evidence-informed practices, they provide a space to reflect on the complex cultural and social contexts behind such a diverse set of perspectives and responses.

We first outline the history of the relationship between lesson study in Japan and research evidence. This explanation is meaningful for understanding the situation of EIP in Japan and how to utilise it. We then consider examples of educational efforts of two local governments to identify the ways in which the social cohesion/social regulation matrix is found in each case, what rules and norms are used as the basis for the activities of the organisation, and the extent to which teachers implement research evidence in their teaching practice. Finally, we take generalisable lessons from education in Japan that can be applied to improve evidence-informed practice (EIP) in other areas.

It is difficult to replicate evidence-informed models of psychosocial and assertive care interventions in non-research settings, and means to determine workforce capability for psychosocial therapies have not been readily available. The purpose of this paper is to describe and provide a rationale for the Therapy Capability Framework (TCF) which aims to enhance access to, and quality of, evidence-informed practice for consumers of mental health services (MHSs) by strengthening workforce capabilities and leadership for psychosocial therapies.

Guided by literature regarding the inadequacies and inconsistencies of evidence-informed practice provided by publicly-funded MHSs, this descriptive paper details the TCF and its application to enhance leadership and provision of evidence-informed psychosocial therapies within multi-disciplinary teams.

The TCF affords both individual and strategic workforce development opportunities. Applying the TCF as a service-wide workforce strategy may assist publicly-funded mental health leaders, and other speciality health services, establish a culture that values leadership, efficiency, and evidence-informed practice.

This paper introduces the TCF as an innovation to assist publicly-funded mental health leaders to transform standard case management roles to provide more evidence-informed psychosocial therapies. This may have clinical and cost-effective outcomes for public MHSs, the consumers, carers, and family members.

Educational change and innovation have been a clear priority in educational systems across Europe in recent years. In this chapter, we reflect on the role played by educational evidence in shaping school practices in the Catalan context. Situated at a crossroads between social cohesion and strong regulations, Catalan schools are navigating a hybrid system marked by increasing autonomy and the educational tradition with an increased interest in accountability and quality assessment through rigid standards and designs.

Despite the Catalan administration's recent promotion of several initiatives to engage schools and teachers with the use of evidence, this process is still irregular and fundamentally depends on decisions made by the school or teachers' commitment.

The factors shaping the teachers' engagement with evidence cover a wide spectrum: from teachers' and educational leaders' conception of the nature of evidence, to given teachers' willingness to use evidence and whether school environments are favourable (or not) to the use of evidence. Acknowledging these factors allows us to specify the direction of action at the system, organisational and class levels. At the system level, promoting a vision of practice based on evidence requires coherent and responsible actions among all actors. At the organisational level, the development of the capacity to use evidence requires leadership that is sensitive to research and favours a positive organisational culture. At the classroom level, teachers' motivation, individual orientation towards the use of evidences, research conception and the capacity to use it, are the key factors.