This article discusses what we know about the underlying social and political conditions shaping research evidence use in education and how this applies to Research-Practice Partnerships (RPPs). It discusses types of use, political dynamics and processes, brokers and intermediaries, and racial dynamics and lenses. It also recommends strategies for RPPs in light of these political and social contexts to improve the quality of use and reduce the misuse of research evidence, ending with implications for future research.
Arce-TrigattiP.ChukhrayI.Lopez-TurleyR. (2018). Research-practice partnerships in education. In SchneiderB. (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology in education in the 21st century (pp. 561–579). Springer.
AsenR.GurkeD.ConnersP.SolomonR.GummE. (2013). Research evidence and school board deliberations: Lessons from three Wisconsin school districts. Educational Policy, 27(1), 33–63.
4.
BaldwinB. L. (2021). In the shadow of the ivory tower: How universities are plundering our cities. Bold Type Books.
5.
BlackmanH.MayH.Farley-RippleE.FarrellC.PenuelW. R., (2018). Using research at the classroom, school, district, & state levels: Results from the knowledge utilizations R&D centers [Conference session]. Presentation at the IES Annual Principal Investigators Meeting, January 9-10, 2018, Arlington, VA.
CoburnC. E.SpillaneJ. P.BohannonA. X.AllenA -RCeperichR.BenekeA.WongL.-S (2020). The role of organizational routines in research use in four large urban school districts (Technical Report No. 5). National Center for Research in Policy and Practice.
9.
DalyA.FinniganK. (2012). Exploring the space between: Social networks, trust, and urban school district leaders. Journal of School Leadership, 22(3), 493530.
10.
DalyA. J.FinniganK. S.JordanS.MoolenaarN. M.CheJ. (2014). Misalignment and perverse incentives: Examining the role of district leaders as brokers in the use of research evidence. Educational Policy, 28(2), 145–174.
11.
DeBrayE.ScottJ.LubienskiC.JabbarH. (2014). Intermediary organizations in charter school policy coalitions: Evidence from New Orleans. Educational Policy, 28(2), 175–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813514132
12.
DennerJ.BeanS.CampeS.MartinezJ.TorresD. (2019). Negotiating trust, power, and culture in a research–practice partnership. AERA Open. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419858635
Farley-RippleE. N. (2012). Research use in central office decision-making: A case study. Education management, Administration and Leadership, 40(6), 784–804.
17.
FarrellC. C.DavidsonK. L.Repko-ErwinM. E.PenuelW. R.QuantzM.WongH.RiedyR.BrinkZ. (2018). A descriptive study of the IES researcher–practitioner partnerships in education research program: Final report (Technical Report No. 3). National Center for Research in Policy and Practice.
18.
FarrellC. C.HarrisonC.CoburnC. E. (2019). “What the hell is this, and who the hell are you?” Role and identity negotiation in research-practice partnerships. AERA Open, 5(2), 233285841984959. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419849595
19.
FarrellC. C.PenuelW. R.AllenA.AndersonE. R.BohannonA. X.CoburnC. E.BrownS. L. (2022). Learning at the boundaries of research and practice: A framework for understanding research-practice partnerships, Educational Researcher, 51(3), 197–208.
20.
FarrellC. C.PenuelW. R.CoburnC. E.DanielsJ.SteupL. (2021). Research-practice partnerships in education: The state of the field. William T. Grant Foundation. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED615899.pdf
21.
FedorowiczM.AronL. Y. (2021). Improving evidence-based policymaking: A review. Urban Institute.
22.
FinniganK. S.DalyA. J. (Eds.) (2014). Research evidence in education: From the schoolhouse door to capitol hill. Springer.
23.
FinniganK. S.DalyA. J.CaduffA.LealC. C. (2021). Broken bridges: The role of brokers in connecting educational leaders around research evidence. In WeberM.YanovitzkyI. (Eds.), Networks, Knowledge Brokers, and the Public Policymaking Process (pp. 129–154). Palgrave-MacMillan.
24.
FinniganK. S.DalyA. J.CheJ. (2013). Systemwide reform in districts under pressure: The role of social networks in defining, acquiring, and diffusing research evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(4), 476–497.
25.
FinniganK. S.JabbarH. (in press). Critical networks in critical times. In YoungM. D.DiemS. (Eds.), Handbook on critical approaches to education research. Routledge.
26.
GarciaN. M.LópezN.VélezV. N. (2017). QuantCrit: Rectifying quantitative methods through critical race theory. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 149–157, https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377675
GoldieD.LinickM.JabbarH.LubienskiC. (2014). Using bibliometric and social media analyses to explore the “echo chamber” hypothesis. Educational Policy, 28(2), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813515330
29.
HenrickE.C.CobbP.PenuelW.R.JacksonK.ClarkT. (2017). Assessing research-practice partnerships: Five dimensions of effectiveness. William T. Grant Foundation.
HollandsF.ChangY.HolmesV. (2021, June9). What does it mean to call a program ‘Evidence-based’ anyway?EducationWeek.
32.
HonigM. I.VenkateswaranN.McNeilP. (2017). Research use as learning: The case of fundamental change in school district central offices. American Educational Research Journal, 54(5), 938–971.
33.
HonigM.VenkateswaranN.McNeilP.TwitchellJ. (2014). Leaders’ use of research for fundamental change in school district central offices: Processes and challenges. In FinniganK.DalyA. (Eds.), Using research evidence in education (pp. 33–52). Springer.
34.
HopkinsM.WeddleH.GluckmanM.GautschL. (2019). Boundary crossing in a professional association: The dynamics of research use among state leaders and researchers in a research-practice partnership. AERA Open, 5(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419891964
35.
HopkinsM.WileyK. E.PenuelW. R.FarrellC. C. (2018). Brokering research in science education policy implementation: The case of a professional association. Evidence & Policy, 14, 459–476.
MalinJ. R.LubienskiC. (2013). Whose opinions count in educational policymaking?Current Issues in Education, 16(2), 1–12.
38.
MalinJ. R.LubienskiC. (2015). Educational expertise, advocacy, and media influence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(6), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.1706
39.
McDonnellL. M.WeatherfordM. S. (2013) Organized interests and the Common Core. Educational Researcher, 42(9): 488–-497. https://doi.org/doi:10.3102/0013189X13512676
40.
McDonnellL. M.WeatherfordM. S. (2020). Evidence, politics, and education policy. Harvard Education Press.
41.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2022). The future of education research at IES: Advancing an equity-oriented science. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26428
42.
NealJ. W.NealZ. P.KornbluhM.MillsK.LawlerJ. (2015). Brokering the research-practice gap: A typology. American Journal of Psychology, 56(3–4), 422–435.
PenuelW. R.BriggsD. C.DavidsonK. L.HerlihyC.ShererD.HillH. C.FarrellC.AllenA. -R. (2017). How school and district leaders access, perceive, and use research. AERA Open, 3(2): 23. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417705370
45.
ReckhowS. (2016). More than patrons: How foundations fuel policy change and backlash. PS: Political Science & Politics, 49(3), 449–454.
46.
ScottJ.JabbarH. (2014). The hub and the spokes: Foundations, intermediary organizations, incentivist reforms, and the politics of research evidence. Educational Policy, 28(2), 233–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813515327
47.
ScottJ.JabbarH.LalondeP.DeBrayE.LubienskiC. (2015). Evidence use and advocacy coalitions: Intermediary organizations and philanthropies in Denver, Colorado. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(2015), 124. http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/2079
48.
TanksleyT.EstradaC. (2022). Toward a critical race RPP: How race, power and positionality inform research practice partnerships. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 45(4), 397–409.
49.
Tompkins-StangeM. (2016). Policy patrons: Philanthropy, education reform, and the politics of influence. Harvard Education Press.
50.
TsengV. (2012). The uses of research in policy and practice, SRCD Social Policy Report, 26(2), 1–-24.
51.
TsengV. (2021). Toward a new agenda for education research. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(5), 52–53.
52.
TsengV.CoburnC.E. (2019). Using evidence in the U.S. In BoazA.DaviesH.FraserA.NutleyS. (Eds.), What works now: Evidence informed policy and practice (pp. 351–368). Policy Press.
53.
VakilS.McKinneydeRoystonM.KirschnerB.NasirN. (2016). Rethinking race, power, and definitions of learning in design-based research: Reflections from the field. Cognition & Instruction, 34(3), 194–209.
54.
VetterA.FairclothB. S.HewittK. K.GonzalezL. M.HeY.RockM. L. (2022). Equity and social justice in research practice partnerships in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 92(5), 829–866. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211070048
55.
WeissC. H. (1977). Research for policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3(4), 531–545.
WentworthL.MazzeoC.ConnollyF. (2017). Research practice partnerships: A strategy for promoting evidence-based decision-making in education. Educational Research, 59(2), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/07391102.2017.1314108
YoungM. D.DiemS. (2018). Doing critical analysis in education research: An emerging paradigm. In LochmillerC. R. (Ed.), Complementary research methods for educational leadership and policy studies (pp. 79–98). Palgrave MacMillan.
