For some years, in France as in others countries, one can find numerous claims about the necessity of research to improve teaching and learning (T&L) practices. Policy makers particularly state that teaching should be based on sound research results and not only on experiences, tricks or recipes told in an informal peer community. Despite this, the links between research and teaching are still disappointing. Yet the recent French reform in teacher education officially targets the use of research by teachers. We argue that the issue of linking research to practice has to be tackled in a different way than previously. Briefly, most policy and teacher training institutions tend to concentrate on convincing teachers of using “scientific” knowledge on education, while teachers think that academic knowledge on education is often too far from practical considerations. We argue that what is at stake is different: research knowledge in education should be put back in teaching context prior to be disseminated, in order to be shaped according to the complexity of educational practice. Indeed, we claim that the main incentive for teachers to use research results lies in improved T&L and professional practice. The aim is that teachers consider research knowledge because of its relevance, not because its academic weight. Our theory is especially based on the experience of the French Institute of Education specialized in the training of teachers trainees and the organization of a range of consensus conferences on several educational issues. Each conference is shaped from elements borrowed from the medical model and the Danish model (on technology) and consists in literature reviews, mixed panels composed of practitioners and concerned citizens, experts to enlighten practitioners or citizens. The first conference tackled the issue of school failure and repeating students. Despite strong evidence that repeating a year rarely improves school achievement, teachers continue to want some students to repeat. The consensus conference deeply investigated the issue, finding that teachers approach repeating years within a framework that includes beliefs about mastering their classroom, school climate, teacher authority and their capacity to deal with learning difficulties. Therefore, each research result has to be contextualized and, if necessary, linked to other research, to be appropriated by teachers. Knowledge mobilization in education requires not only a “one way” from research to practice, but a broader understanding of the issues at stake in the day-to-day teaching.

Crahay, Marcel (2007). Que pensent les enseignants du redoublement ? in Crahay Marcel. Peut-on lutter contre l’échec scolaire? Bruxelles : De Boeck, p. 123–162. Conseil national d’évaluation du système scolaire (2014). Le redoublement en France et dans le monde : une comparaison statistique et réglementaire. In Conseil national d’évaluation du système scolaire (dir.), Lutter contre la difficulté scolaire : le redoublement et ses alternatives. Draelants Hugues (2009). Réforme pédagogique et légitimation. Le cas d’une politique de lutte contre le redoublement. Bruxelles : De Boeck. Gaussel, Marie (2014). Production et valorisation des savoirs scientifiques sur l’éducation. Dossier de veille de l'IFÉ, n°97, décembre. Lyon : ENS de Lyon. Rey, Olivier (2014). Entre laboratoire et terrain : comment la recherche fait ses preuves en éducation. Dossier de veille de l'IFÉ, n°89, janvier. Lyon : ENS de Lyon.