scholarly journals A developmental evaluation of research-practice-partnerships and their impacts

Author(s):  
Amanda Cooper ◽  
Samantha Shewchuk ◽  
Stephen MacGregor

Globally, K-12 education systems are grappling with how best to integrate research and evidence into policy and practice.  Research-practice-partnerships (RPPs) have arisen as a potentially powerful mechanism for school improvement. This study investigates the ways four research-practice-policy-partnerships are addressing impact by (a) reporting on metrics being used to assess brokering and partnerships, and (b) exploring the ways that network leads and policymakers conceptualize partnerships and impact on the frontlines.   Our findings suggest that while metrics being used provide a necessary baseline for number and types of partnerships, more robust methods are needed capture the quality of interactions and to strategically inform network development.  Network leads conceptualize impact in relation to collaborative processes (shared goals; new and diverse partnerships; improved student achievement; system alignment); systems and structures (joint-work; funding and sustainability; demand from practitioners; equity); continuous learning (capacity-building; reach; adaptability; storytelling).  Our discussion provides ideas about network improvement that include sharing cases of failures (alongside exemplary cases) to maximize learning, and advocates for the use of developmental evaluation to explore the impacts of RPPs.

AERA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 233285841989196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Hopkins ◽  
Hayley Weddle ◽  
Maxie Gluckman ◽  
Leslie Gautsch

As spaces for researchers and practitioners to engage in long-term, mutual collaborations aimed at addressing problems of practice in education, research-practice partnerships (RPPs) offer rich contexts for research use. Our study examines how interactions between researchers and practitioners shape opportunities for research use in a professional association engaged in RPP activities focused on fostering change in statewide K–12 science education. Drawing on a conceptualization of RPPs as joint work at boundaries, we show how both researchers and practitioners facilitated research use. Furthermore, research use was facilitated by brokers’ engagement in RPP activities and with shared pieces of research. Findings affirm the role that brokers play in connecting research and practice and identify specific activities that may be useful in facilitating research use in RPPs.


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Cooper ◽  
Stephen MacGregor ◽  
Samantha Shewchuk

PurposeThis 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.Design/methodology/approachArskey 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).FindingsCoburn 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.Research limitations/implicationsBy 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.Practical implicationsThe 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.Originality/valueDespite 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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 580-597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marla Israel ◽  
Nancy Goldberger ◽  
Elizabeth Vera ◽  
Amy Heineke

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a university-multi-school district partnership that positively affected the lives of P-12 immigrant, migrant and refugee students and their parents through an iterative collaboration of talent and resources among institutions. Design/methodology/approach This is a case study describing a university-school partnership grant-funded program detailing the processes, products, and implications for policy and practice. Findings University faculty and public school educators must work through intentional, contextually informed partnerships. It is through these partnerships that scarce resources of time, talent, and funds can be used wisely to build sustainable systems to educate students in K-12 schools and prepare future leaders for this work. Research limitations/implications This is a case study limited to the suburban Chicagoland area. Generalities to other communities cannot be directly made. Originality/value This study builds on the extant literature of university-school district partnerships and sustainable leadership theory by exploring the processes for creating iterative and individualized structures that benefit both university and public school districts. This study implores universities to re-examine priorities and purpose, especially within schools and colleges of education, in order to remain viable, relevant institutions for positive school improvement.


2021 ◽  
pp. e20210005
Author(s):  
Hailey Karcher ◽  
David S. Knight

Under the Every Student Succeeds Act, the federal government allocates 7% of Title I funds, about $1 billion per year, for school improvement. States have substantial autonomy in allocating these funds, including which schools are identified for federal school improvement, what improvement strategies are used, and whether external intermediaries are involved. A growing area of research explores the private, often for-profit school improvement industry, but few studies track the finance and policy structures that funnel public funds to external K–12 intermediaries. In this study, we draw on document analysis and interview data to explore school improvement practices and finance policies in five case study states. We find that states use varied methods for identifying schools for improvement, and also vary in the extent to which they provide local autonomy to school districts. Some states, such as Texas and Tennessee, incentivize schools to adopt particular strategies or encourage partnering with an external intermediary. Texas provides a list of vetted external intermediaries they expect districts to work with (and support financially). Other states, such as California and New York, provide more state-led school improvement strategies through regional offices and give districts greater local autonomy. Findings point to possible benefits of local autonomy, while highlighting potential challenges associated with unregulated market-based reforms in education.


2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 170-194
Author(s):  
Richard O. Welsh

The contemporary social, economic, and cultural conditions within and outside the academy prompt important questions about the role of research in education policy and practice. Scholars have framed research-practice partnerships (RPPs) as a strategy to promote evidence-based decision-making in education. In this chapter, I interrogate the notion that RPPs offer an insightful framework to consider how the quality of research can be measured through its use. The findings suggest that using RPPs to assess the quality of education research enhances the relevance to policy and practice as well as attention to the quality of reporting, and pivots from the preeminence of methodological quality. RPPs increase local education leaders’ access to research and bolster the use of research. RPPs may also strengthen the alignment between education research and the public good. Notwithstanding, employing RPPs as a vehicle to assess research quality has its challenges. Valuing the work of RPPs in academia is a work in progress. Building and sustaining an RPP is challenging, and there is still much to learn about the ways in which RPPs work and overcome obstacles. Assessing the impact of RPPs is also difficult. Future considerations are discussed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-36
Author(s):  
Mike Fisher

This paper concerns the impact of social work research, particularly on practice and practitioners. It explores the politics of research and how this affects practice, the way that university-based research understands practice, and some recent developments in establishing practice research as an integral and permanent part of the research landscape. While focusing on implications for the UK, it draws on developments in research across Europe, North America and Australasia to explore how we can improve the relationship between research and practice.


Author(s):  
Maria Del Pilar Ramirez-Salazar ◽  
Rafael Ignacio Perez-Uribe ◽  
Carlos Salcedo-Perez

The open collaborative innovation model based on a triple helix proposes a way by which collaborative processes and innovation networks create value. It contains seven components: (1) innovation challenges, (2) internal-external knowledge, (3) paradigm change, (4) leadership, (5) interinstitutional and transdisciplinary teams, (6) communication, and (7) creative solutions; and six principles: (1) identity, (2) agreements,(3) flexibility, (4) commitment, (5) recognition, and (6) trust. This research emphasizes on the importance of Component 5 for programs of open collaborative innovation, since the joint work among the academy, the government, and the industry to create a triple helix consolidates systems of regional innovation that are necessary to improve national competitiveness and productivity.


Author(s):  
Louis G. Castonguay ◽  
Michael J. Constantino ◽  
Henry Xiao

This chapter reviews efforts to integrate psychotherapy research and practice through collaboration and information-sharing within naturalistic clinical settings. Specifically, the chapter focuses on three types of practice-oriented research that capitalize on the bidirectional partnership between researchers and practitioners: (1) patient-focused, (2) practice-based, and (3) practice-research networks. The authors provide examples of each type of integration, highlighting the ways in which the research is different, yet complementary to more traditional studies conducted in controlled settings. They submit that the researcher–practitioner partnership in an ecologically valid treatment context represents an optimal means to reduce the pervasive research–practice chasm and to promote genuine integration for enhancing the effectiveness and personalization of psychotherapy. The chapter also discusses future directions in this vein.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document