Search results

This piece discusses the research–practice gap in comparative and international education, postulating that the gap occurs due to the different operating spheres of the researcher and end user, the lack of accessibility of research, and its unidirectional nature. Only through close linkages across research, policy, and practice can we close the gap and ensure better education outcomes for those around the globe. Research application is not automatic but requires working in partnership with policymakers and practitioners. Drawing on my own experience across the research, policy, and practitioner spheres, I discuss three ways researchers can narrow the research–practice gap by: (1) better understanding the social sphere; (2) producing accessible, engaging content, including by storytelling; and (3) creating more partnerships with end users, such as Communities of Research.

This chapter is written in response to ‘The Quest for Generic Ethics Principles in Social Science Research’ by David Carpenter. I address his communitarian arguments for additional principles to inform a virtue theory approach to research ethics. These require that social researchers ensure that their research is both socially and scientifically valuable, and that they ‘involve members of the public in the designing, planning, delivery, ongoing monitoring and dissemination of research’. Carpenter underpins these principles with an appeal to the common good as a balance to the more individualistic principles characteristic of principlism. I argue that enforcement of these new communitarian principles via ethical regulation would further undermine the quality of research, and especially of academic social science.

In this chapter I explore the issues of whose interest and rights are at stake when social scientists conduct their research. I caution that the ethical considerations, values and principles that pertain to the social sciences are not always the same as those which rightly underpin the biomedical sciences and so not all should be imported. In particular I consider the dangers of applying a ‘participant protection model’ to social science research. I suggest that the social sciences must be regulated through a framework that understands and enables these differences rather than misconstrues and hinders good social science research.

Comparative and international education-related research is increasingly being integrated into the educational agenda of the countries of the global south. The global demand for being international and internationalizing drives universities across the world to bring an international aspect to their research whether it is learning from educational developments in other parts of international knowledge system or focusing their research activities on the periphery of that system. While this exchange of knowledge is a promising trend for enhancing comparative and international education-related research and reaching out to those areas that were previously isolated from the international knowledge exchange, the question that arises is whether the research findings reach those who can benefit from them the most – those who work in the field? This is especially relevant to the countries where English is not the first language. This essay discusses the issue of communicating research outcomes to the field using the example of Kazakhstan.

Issued in 2005, the Levine report challenges the current way that colleges and universities prepare pre-service administrators to lead elementary and secondary schools. The reforms recommended by the report include shifting attention away from educational research in favor of a more practical focus. Although we support the idea of making school leadership programs more practice-oriented, we disagree with the suggestion that students receive little or no research training. This chapter discusses how learning and conducting educational research can benefit those preparing to lead schools in the educational environment of the 21st century.

The purpose of this research is to highlight some of the experiences and lessons learned from participating in qualitative research abroad for the first time. The chapter provides an overview of an international research trip to Cuba to study the impact of tourism on a tourist's value stance and highlights some of the feelings and emotions a researcher may experience when embarking on this type of trip. Tips for conducting research before, during and after a trip, are provided throughout the chapter.

This chapter considers the implications of the lack of uniformity, consistency and harmonisation in defining and regulating research integrity across Europe. In view of this, recent initiatives of the Council of Research Ministers and of the European Commission aim to provide a common point of reference in institutional terms and legal terms. However researchers and institutions themselves remain ultimately responsible for detecting, investigating and adjudicating any allegations of scientific misconduct through their established procedures. Therefore, a complementary approach between the Commission’s initiatives and the self-regulatory approach of local/national structures is desirable. A major step towards this direction could be the formulation of a single European-wide definition of research integrity.