This paper examines the philosophical and empirical literature around knowledge mobilization – how knowledge, generated by research, is translated and transformed for use in educational practice, particularly in schools. At least since the time of Dewey (1929) there has been sporadic engagement in the research literature with the question, ‘what is the relationship between research and practice in education?’ On the one hand, policymakers have increasingly demanded that publicly-funded research be more attuned to the needs of practice, citing the medical model of research into practice, as exemplary. In reply, researchers have argued that educational research is more wide-ranging than the policymakers’ discourse of ‘what works’; that research contributes to the development of theory; and that its values, concepts, questions and methods are often as important as its findings (which cannot be understood outside these other matters). As research moves into practice, further issues arise. What research is chosen and on what grounds? How is research transformed into an element of professional development? How do teachers understand and conceptualise research, and how do these understandings lead to changes in practice? These questions are contested; although they can appear simple from a policy perspective, the literature suggests they are actually complex. A theoretical framework from Levin (2013) is used to examine competing conceptions of high-quality research, research knowledge, research translation, professional development and practice. Data include previous literature reviews (e.g Nisbet & Braodfoot 1980; Levin 2013), philosophical writing (e.g. Biesta 2007; Hammersley 2002) as well as a range of empirical studies. At a time when research-informed practice is being promoted across Europe, the paper aims to summarise some of the more important challenges for effective knowledge mobilization, and point to gaps in the current research literature.
