This article develops a framework for investigating research use, using an “advocacy coalition framework” and the concepts of a “supply side” (mainly organizations) and “demand side” (policymakers). Drawing on interview data and documents from New Orleans about the charter school reforms that have developed there since 2005, the authors examine (a) the role of intermediaries in producing information and research syntheses for local, state, and/or federal policymakers; (b) the extent of policymakers’ demand for such research and information; and (c) the extent to which local and national coalitions of organizations appear to be influential in research use. The article concludes that there are two coalitions in New Orleans that differ in their interpretations of charter school performance, equity, and access; that there is overall very low research capacity within the intermediary sector; and that there is little evidence of demand from state policymakers for research findings. There was agreement across both coalitions that there is a lack of a credible and non-partisan research group studying the reforms, that is, one that produces data analyses that are not merely descriptive. The authors map preliminary findings about how intermediary organizations are connected to national groups, as well as how research is shared within coalitions.
AmaraN.OuimetM.LandryRé. (2004). New evidence on instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic utilization of university research in government agencies. Science Communication, 26, 75-106. doi:10.1177/1075547004267491
2.
BallS.JunemannC. (2012). Networks, new governance, and education. Chicago, IL: The Policy Press.
3.
BurasK. (2011a). Race, charter schools, and conscious capitalism: On the spatial politics of whiteness as property (and the unconscionable assault on black New Orleans). Harvard Educational Review, 8, 296-331.
CavanaghS. (2012, May23). Jackpot for insurgent in Louisiana contest. Education Week, 31(32), pp. 1, 14.
6.
Center for Research on Education Outcomes. (2009). Multiple choice: Charter school performance in 16 states. Stanford, CA: Author.
7.
Cowen Institute for Public Education Initiatives. (2011, December). K-12 public education through the public eye: Parents’ perceptions of school choice (Policy Brief). New Orleans, LA: Tulane University.
8.
GreeneJ. P.CarrollT. W.CoulsonA. J.EnlowR.HirschE. D.LadnerM. . . . SternS. (2008, January24). Is school choice enough?City Journal. Retrieved from http://www.city-journal.org/2008/forum0124.html
9.
Gumus-DawesB.LuceT.OrfieldM. (2013). The state of public schools in post-Katrina New Orleans. In OrfieldG.FrankenbergE., & Associates (Eds.), Educational delusions? Why choice can deepen inequality and how to make schools fair (pp. 159-185). Berkeley: University of California Press.
10.
HarrisD. N. (2011). Value-added measures and the future of educational accountability. Science, 333, 826-827. doi:10.1126/science.1193793
11.
HatfieldC. (2012, March). Should the educational reforms in New Orleans serve as a national model for other cities? (Policy brief). New Orleans, LA: Research on Reforms.
12.
HenigJ. (2013). The end of exceptionalism in American education: The changing politics of school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
13.
HoutM.ElliottS. W. (Eds.). (2011). Incentives and test-based accountability in public education. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences Press.
14.
LubienskiC.GarnG. (2010). Evidence and ideology on consumer choices in education markets: An alternative analytical framework. Current Issues in Education, 13(3), 1-31.
15.
LubienskiC.ScottJ.DeBrayE. (2011). The rise of intermediary organizations in knowledge production, advocacy, and educational policy (ID No. 16487). Teachers College Record. Available from http://www.tcrecord.org
16.
LubienskiC.WeitzelP. (2010). Information use and epidemics in charter school policy. In LubienskiC.WeitzelP. (Eds.), The charter school experiment: Expectations, evidence, and implications (pp. 197-217). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
17.
LubienskiC.WeitzelP.LubienskiS. T. (2009). Is there a “consensus” on school choice and achievement? Advocacy research and the emerging political economy of knowledge production. Educational Policy, 23, 161-193.
18.
McGuinnP. (2012, Summer). Fight club: Are advocacy organizations changing the politics of education?Education Next, 12(3). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/fight-club/
19.
MoeT. M. (2008). Beyond the free market: The structure of school choice. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2008(1), 557-592.
20.
National Economic and Social Rights Initiative and Families and Friends of Louisiana’s Incarcerated Children. (2010). Pushed out: Harsh discipline in Louisiana Schools Denies the Right to Education (A focus on the recovery school district in New Orleans). New York, NY: Author.
21.
New Schools for New Orleans. (2012). New Orleans-style education reform: A guide for cities. New Orleans, LA: Author.
22.
QiJ.LevinB. (2013). Assessing organizational efforts to mobilize research knowledge in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(2). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1015
23.
ReckhowS. (2012). Follow the money. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
RouseC. E.BarrowL. (2009). School vouchers and student achievement: Recent evidence, remaining questions. Annual Review of Economics, 1, 17-42.
26.
SabatierP. (1993). Policy change over a decade or more. In SabatierP.Jenkins-SmithH. (Eds.), Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 13-39). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
27.
SabatierP.Jenkins-SmithH. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In SabatierP. (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 117-166). Boulder, CO: Westview.
ScottJ. (2009). The politics of venture philanthropy in school choice policy and advocacy. Educational Policy, 23, 106-136.
30.
ScottJ.JabbarH. (2013). Money and measures: Foundations as knowledge brokers. In AnagnostopoulosD.RutledgeS.JacobsenR. (Eds.), The infrastructure of accountability: Mapping data use and its consequences across the American education system. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
31.
ScottJ.LubienskiC.DeBrayE.JabbarH.GoldieD.LinickM. (2012, April). The intermediary function in research utilization, production, and promotion: The case of educational incentives. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada.
