ERG SES D 06, Policies and Education
The following paper brings into discussion the perception of both researchers and policy makers on research mobilization. Research mobilization is used to define an action of advancing research results in policy-making processes which implies the interaction of two or more stakeholders (researchers, policymakers, practicionaires, relevant institutions).
The aim of the present research is to analyse policymakers and researchers perception regarding the use of educational research in the process of decision making. The data is collected from 3 mixed focus-groups (researches and policymakers) and in-depth interviews with policymakers. The paper derives from a research project funded by the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-RU-TE-2014-4-1605.
Although the research is ongoing, the results that emerge from this research contribute to enlarging the general perception of stakeholders on research. It is expected that policymakers to elaborate on a hyphothesized gap between them and the researchers and on problems that block the communication
The background of this subject is in relation to research production and its impact in society. In particular, the research in education is considered to have a small impact in society and often fails to meet the decision-makers’ needs (Coburn & Talbert, 2006; Hess, 2008; Levin & Edelstein, 2010; Cherney, Povey, Head, Boreham, & Ferguson, 2012). Authors have elaborated on a series of aspects describing the misalingment between stakeholders and researchers. From funding that sustains research to lack of communication between policy makers and researchers (Bell, Cordingley, Isham, & Davis, 2010; Levin, 2011; and Ion and Iucu, 2015) and from perceptions of policy-makers on research to lack of traning of researchers to involve in activities of transfer of knowledge (Ion & Iucu 2015).
On one hand, researchers consider that the dissemination of scientific results and the transfer of research is not a priority for them. Their perceive the educational field as being conservative and reluctant to change. Lack of funding was also mentioned as a barrier in disseminating scientific outcome of their work (Ion & Iucu, 2015).
On the other hand, policy-makers make decisions based on public or political agenda and researchers engage in elaborated activities and contribute to knowledge enlargement. In relation to research, authors argue that research projects fail to address solutions and answer to political issues from the public agenda, because of their scientific methodology planned on long time scale (Scott, 2000).
Even with this distinction between the two processes, research outcomes must be comprehensible for both policymakers, stakeholders and practitioners or other type of audience (Conrad, & Serlin, 2005; Whitty, 2006; Bell, Cordingley, Isham, & Davis, 2010; Levin, 2011; and Ion & Iucu, 2015).
Behind the factors that inhibit communication between policymakers and researchers, it is important to underline who are the educational entities involved in the process of research mobilization that can involve in creating an environment of collaboration. The three educational entities: communities of researchers, policymakers and practitioners should be partners in the process of knowledge mobilization. These entities should also be aware of the fact that this process is in a constant change, sculptured by social and political contexts and that other factors too, except research evidence, can influence the decision making process (Levin, 2011).
Taking in consideration the theorethical framework, the present research aims at analysing the perception of politicians on research mobilization in education and the use of educational research in the process of decision making.
References: 1. Bell, M., Cordingley, P., Isham, C., & Davis, R. (2010). Report of professional practitioner use of research review: Practitioner engagement in and/or with research. Coventry: CUREE, GTCE, LSIS, & NTRP. Available at: http://www.curee—paccts.com/node/2303 2. Cherney, A., Povey, J., Head, B., Boreham, P., & Ferguson, M. (2012). What influences the utilisation of educational research by policy-makers and practitioners? The perspectives of academic educational researchers. International Journal of Educational Research, 56, 23-34. 3. Conrad, C. F., & Serlin, R. C. (2005). The Sage handbook for research in education: Minding The Gap Between Research And Policymaking, Sage Publications. 4. Coburn, C., & Talbert, J. (2006). Conceptions of evidence use in school districts: Mapping the terrain. American Journal of Education, 112, 469–495. 5. Hess, F.M. (2008). When research matters: How scholarship influences education policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. 6. Ion, G & Iucu, R. (2015) Does Research Influence Educational Policy? The Perspective of Researchers and Policy- Makers in Romania. In: Curaj, A., Matei, L., Pricopie, R., Salmi, J. & Scott, P. (eds) The European Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies. Springer, pp.873-889 7. Levin, B. (2011). Mobilising research knowledge in education. London Review of Education,9(1), 15–26. 8. Levin, B., & Edelstein, H. (2010). Research, policy and practice in education. Education Canada, 50(2), 29–30. 9. Scott, P. (2000) ‘Higher Education Research in the Light of a Dialogue between Policy-Makers and Practitioners’ in U. TEICHLER and J. SADLAK (eds.) Higher Education Research: Its Relationship to Policy and Practice. Oxford: Pergamon and IAU Press, pp.43-54. 10. Whitty, G. (2006). Education (al) research and education policy making: is conflict inevitable?. British educational research journal, 32(2), 159-176.
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.