Search results

Many youth-serving organizations refer to social and emotional learning (SEL) as a process through which adults and young people develop the critical knowledge and skills one needs to be successful in school, work, and personal life (e.g., Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning – CASEL, 2020). SEL is a learning process and – as evidence from the science of learning and development would suggest – one that happens everywhere, both in and out of school. The science also suggests that young people and adults learn best in safe and supportive environments that are identity-safe and filled with developmentally rich relationships (Science of Learning and Development Alliance, n.d.). These finds highlight the importance of meaningful, intentional, and inclusive SEL practice that is grounded in equity and cultural competence. This has historically been the approach out-of-school time (OST) educators have taken to expanding learning opportunities for young people and these practices continue to evolve as the OST field moves toward more intentional SEL practice. OST practitioners are looking to the evidence, many of whom are doing so by partnering with researchers to reexamine and bolster their SEL practices. In this chapter, we explore why and how researcher–practitioner partnerships can foster equitable SEL in OST.

This paper is second of seven in this volume elaborating different approaches to quality improvement in education. It delineates a methodology called design-based implementation research (DBIR). The approach used in this paper is aimed at iteratively improving the quality of classroom teaching and learning practices in defined problem areas through collaborations among researchers, practitioners and other education stakeholders.

The paper describes the origins of the approach in US education, along with its foundations, core principles and a case application of DBIR in practice. The case focuses on the specific problem of teaching science and genetics in primary and secondary schools in a district.

The guiding principles of DBIR are: a focus on persistent problems of classroom educational practice; iterative and collaborative design and testing of innovations through partnerships between researchers and practitioners, involving multiple stakeholders’ perspectives; a concern with developing theory related to both implementation processes and classroom learning outcomes, using systematic inquiry; and development of the capacity of both researchers and practitioners to sustain changes in educational systems.

Few theoretical treatments and demonstration cases are currently available in US education that examine common models of quality improvement, particularly DBIR. By engaging practitioners with researchers in designing, testing and implementing reforms meaningfully, DBIR shows promise in offering significant on-the-ground benefits. This paper adds value by allowing readers to compare the DBIR method with the other improvement approaches explicated in this volume.

The purpose of this paper is to provide evidence based guidance to researchers and practice personnel about forming and carrying out effective research partnerships.

A review of the literature, interviews and discussions with colleagues in both research and practice roles, and a review of the authors' personal experiences as researchers in partnership research.

Partnership research is, in some respects, a distinct “approach” to research, but there are many different versions. An analysis of research publications and of their research experience led the authors to develop a framework for planning and assessing the partnership research process, which includes defining expected outcomes for the partners, their roles, and steps in the research process.

This review and analysis provides guidance that may reduce commonly-reported misunderstandings and help to plan more successful partnerships and projects. It also identifies future research which is needed to define more precisely the questions and purposes for which partnership research is most appropriate, and methods and designs for specific types of partnership research.

As more research moves towards increased participation of practitioners and patients in the research process, more precise and differentiated understanding of the different partnership approaches is required, and when each is most suitable. This article describes research approaches that have the potential to reduce “the research-practice gap”. It gives evidence- and experience-based guidance for choosing and establishing a partnership research process, so as to improve partnership relationship-building and more actionable research.

Currently, in the education data use literature, there is a lack of research and examples that consider the early steps of filtering, organizing and visualizing data to inform decision-making. The purpose of this study is to describe how school leaders and researchers visualized and jointly made sense of data from a common learning management system (LMS) used by students across multiple schools and grades in a charter management organization operating in the USA. To make sense of LMS data, researchers and practitioners formed a partnership to organize complex data sets, create data visualizations and engage in joint sensemaking around data visualizations to begin to launch continuous improvement cycles.

The authors analyzed LMS data for n = 476 students in Algebra I using hierarchical cluster analysis heatmaps. The authors also engaged in a qualitative case study that examined the ways in which school leaders made sense of the data visualization to inform improvement efforts.

The outcome of this study is a framework for informing evidence-based improvement cycles using large, complex data sets. Central to moving through the various steps in the proposed framework are collaborations between researchers and practitioners who each bring expertise that is necessary for organizing, filtering and visualizing data from digital learning environments and administrative data systems.

The authors propose an integrated cycle of data use in schools that builds on collaborations between researchers and school leaders to inform evidence-based improvement cycles.

To investigate ways of developing positive partnerships between practice‐based librarians and those active in library and information (LIS) research.

An opinion piece reflecting on issues currently discussed in the practitioner and research communities.

That there are a number of practical strategies that practitioners, researchers and funding bodies can adopt to maximise the potential for mutually beneficial collaboration.

An expression of opinion about the value of partnering in research to the library practitioner community, and about the reasons why partnerships in this area may not occur as frequently or fruitfully as they could.

If taken further, the suggestions made in this editorial would enhance the quality and increase the quantity of practice‐based LIS research collaborations.

This opinion piece attempts to shed light for researchers on attitudes to research among the practitioner community, creating perspectives which cannot be gained from the standpoint of the research community alone.

This scoping review utilizes findings from 80 articles to build a research model to study research-practice-policy networks in K-12 education systems. The purpose of this study was to generate a broad understanding of the variation in conceptualizations of research-practice-policy partnerships, rather than dominant conceptualizations.

Arskey and O'Malley's (2005) five stage scoping review process was utilized including: (1) a consultative process with partners to identify research questions, (2) identify relevant studies, (3) study selection based on double-blind peer review, (4) charting the data and (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results in a research model identifying key dimensions and components of research-practice partnerships (RPPs).

Coburn et al. (2013) definition of RPPs arose as an anchoring definition within the emerging field. This article proposes a model for understanding the organization and work of RPPs arising from the review. At the core lies shared goals, coproduction and multistakeholder collaboration organized around three dimensions: (1) Systems and structures: funding, governance, strategic roles, policy environment, system alignment; (2) Collaborative processes: improvement planning and data use, communication, trusting relationships, brokering activities, capacity building; (3) Continuous Learning Cycles: social innovation, implementation, evaluation and adaptation.

By using a common framework, data across RPPs and from different studies can be compared. Research foci might test links between elements such as capacity building and impacts, or test links between systems and structures and how those elements influence collaborative processes and the impact of the RPPs. Research could test the generalizability of the framework across contexts. Through the application and use of the research model, various elements might be refuted, confirmed or refined. More work is needed to use this framework to study RPPs, and to develop accompanying data collection methods and instruments for each dimension and element.

The practical applications of the framework are to be used by RPPs as a learning framework for strategic planning, iterative learning cycles and evaluation. Many of the elements of the framework could be used to check-in with partners on how things are going – such as exploring how communication is working and whether these structures move beyond merely updates and reporting toward joint problem-solving. The framework could also be used prior to setting up an RPP as an organizing approach to making decisions about how that RPP might best operate.

Despite increased attention on multistakeholder networks in education, the conceptual understanding is still limited. This article analyzed theoretical and empirical work to build a systematic model to study RPPs in education. This research model can be used to: identify RPP configurations, analyze the impact of RPPs, and to compare similarities and differences across configurations.

There is a growing emphasis on the need to integrate research and practice in the fields of domestic and sexual violence. However, additional research is needed to identify strategies for key stakeholders to use to bridge research and practice in these areas. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The current study analyzed qualitative data collected during a statewide conference for researchers and practitioners whose work addresses domestic and/or sexual violence.

The findings provide information about building effective researcher-practitioner collaborations, developing methodologically sound studies that address practice-relevant research questions, and identifying steps that funders, state coalitions, researchers, and practitioners can take to advance the integration of research and practice.

Additional research is needed to evaluate specific approaches to better integrating research and practice related to domestic and sexual violence.

Researcher-practitioner collaborations offer numerous benefits to advancing research and practice related to domestic and sexual violence. Additional guidance and tangible support is needed to foster these collaborations.

This study used data collected during an innovative conference that brought together researchers and practitioners. The data have implications for furthering the integration of research and practice related to domestic and sexual violence.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a new conceptual model integrating research, university-community partnerships, and an innovative undergraduate team approach to more effectively and efficiently address social problems while enhancing university-community relations and providing valuable learning experiences for students.

The paper describes the rationale for, and the key components, steps, and activities involved in piloting the conceptual model of university-community engagement. The model integrates research, community engagement, and undergraduate development and education along with ongoing evaluation by the relevant stakeholders.

As illustrated in a brief case study presentation, the model has significant promise in meeting several university and community objectives simultaneously. Specifically, it focusses on community needs by addressing a mutually agreed upon social issue, it builds and strengthens university-community relationships as a partnership of equals, and it promotes undergraduate development and learning in a way that integrates knowledge and service to society. Specific outcomes in each area are summarized.

This approach is a viable option for university and college professors interested in synthesizing several important foci: research, developing and sustaining university-community partnerships, and undergraduate development and learning.

The initial experience with the model indicates that it is an efficient and effective means for colleges and universities to simultaneously meet the goals of education, individual and collective citizenship, community engagement, and research productivity.

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.

Calls for the development and dissemination of evidence-based programs to support children and families have been increasing for decades, but progress has been slow. This paper aims to argue that a singular focus on evaluation has limited the ways in which science and research is incorporated into program development, and advocate instead for the use of a new concept, “scientific accompaniment,” to expand and guide program development and testing.

A heuristic is provided to guide research–practice teams in assessing the program’s developmental stage and level of evidence.

In an idealized pathway, scientific accompaniment begins early in program development, with ongoing input from both practitioners and researchers, resulting in programs that are both effective and scalable. The heuristic also provides guidance for how to “catch up” on evidence when program development and science utilization are out of sync.

While implementation models provide ideas on improving the use of evidence-based practices, social service programs suffer from a significant lack of research and evaluation. Evaluation resources are typically not used by social service program developers and collaboration with researchers happens late in program development, if at all. There are few resources or models that encourage and guide the use of science and evaluation across program development.