Over the past two decades, there has been a growing demand for evidence-based policies and practices in education worldwide. This has led to a hierarchy of knowledge sources, with data from standardized testing and evaluations being prioritized as "objective" measures, while local and contextual knowledge ranks lower (cf. Johansson et al., 2012). School and system actors are expected not only to comply with policy demands but also to develop their practices and infrastructure according to research relevant to their profession (Penuel et al., 2017). A key challenge is that it is often assumed that access to various knowledge sources leads to its actual use. Several studies show that this is not the case. For teachers, they often rarely use research to develop their practice as research is perceived as too abstract (Joram et al., 2020). In policy spaces, research and evidence use is often understood instrumentally, not reflecting the complex means through which research and evidence is collected and engaged with, and the discernment it should support in decision making, rather than offering definitive answers (Tseng, 2012).  Expectations for rapid improvements to raise test scores put pressure on school and system actors’ decision-making and seem to promote knowledge sources targeted at short-term solutions rather than long-term developmental work (Mausethagen et al., 2018).

This double symposium focuses on the extent to which and how teachers use various knowledge sources, such as data from standardized testing, practical experiences, subject knowledge, pedagogy, didactics, and educational research in development work, and how this relates to the work of other actors within school systems. It addresses research gaps, enhances our understanding of conceptual frameworks as well as contextual factors and conditions influencing teachers' use of knowledge sources. Moreover, it discusses the research-policy-practice-nexus to improve education and serve the public good.

The first paper (in par 2) explores the use and integration of diverse knowledge sources, such as research, in school development considering the growing demand for evidence-based practices in Switzerland. The second paper examines performance-based accountability factors associated with two distinct uses of data by primary and secondary school teachers in three country contexts: Chile, Norway and Spain. The final paper enquires the varied conceptualizations of research and evidence use within education policy, examining the forms, systemic influences, and drivers of engagement with research aimed at school improvement.

Johansson, K. Denvall, V. & Vedung, E. (2020). After the NPM Wave. Evidence-Based Practice and the Vanishing Client. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration 19(2): 69-88. Mausethagen, S., Prøitz, T.S. & Skedsmo, G. (2018): Teachers’ use of knowledge sources in ‘result meetings’: Thin data and thick data use. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 43(6), 37-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1379986 Joram, E., Gabriele, A. J. & Walton, K. (2020). What influences teachers’ “buy-in” of research? Teachers’ beliefs about the applicability of educational research to their practice. Teaching and Teacher Education. Penuel, W.R., Briggs, D.C., Davidson, K.L., et al. (2017). How school and district leaders access and use research. University Libraries Open Access Fund Supported Publications, 32. Tseng