This paper reports on a national initiative where policy makers, practitioners and researchers worked together to bring research, policy and practice into closer alignment.  Internationally, education is littered with innovations that failed in their intention of improving outcomes for learners.  Although innovations may have been research informed and successful in their early stages they failed to be sustained.   New and creative approaches to innovation are necessary if this is to result in sustainable meaningful change in education across Europe. 

In common with many countries, Scotland is currently engaged in national curriculum and assessment reform.  Curriculum for Excellence is intended to offer young people in Scotland educational experiences which will prepare them for life in the 21^st century: every young person in Scotland should be a successful learner, a confident individual, an effective contributor and a responsible citizen.  The challenge is how to realise these aspirations for every learner.

Research has commonly been used to inform particular aspects of policy development (eg, research on assessment to inform policy on assessment); it has not been used to support sustainable change.  The impact of policy on practice, even when research informed, has been limited. The case study presented in this paper reports on a major Scottish Government funded research project to explore how different gaps in assessment in education might be narrowed.  In this context of assessment, the project explored how research evidence might be used to bring into better alignment the original, research informed aspirations of reform and their realisation in practice as Curriculum for Excellence developed over time. This model involved policy makers, practitioners and researchers working together in ways situated in socio-cultural theories of learning.  This paper analyses the rationale for the design of this collaborative research. It offers insights into the research evidence obtained and used relating to assessment and into the evidence supporting the partnership model of transformational change that underpinned the research design.

The research focused on issues identified as problematic by both policy makers and practitioners as likely to lead to gaps between policy intentions and practice in classrooms, problems with progression between primary and secondary schools, problems with differing interpretations of standards and problems of lack of trust in professional judgement.  This led to the research questions that framed the project.

• What leads to successful progression as young people move from primary to secondary school?
• What evidence is there to suggest that particular kinds of assessment arrangement support learning more effectively as young people move from primary to secondary school?
• What interpretations are there of standards?
• What factors influence the extent to which professional judgements are trusted?

The paper reflects on the processes of research, policy and practice alignment and begins to reflect on the potential of projects such as this to encourage better relationships between evidence and action.   Finally, drawing from and reflecting on the different political environments of several European countries, the paper identifies factors that appear to be influential in helping to determine the potential for better research, policy and practice alignment.

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2005) ‘Lessons from around the world: how policies, politics and cultures constrain and afford assessment practices’ The Curriculum Journal, 16: 2, 249-261 Cribb, A & Gewirtz, S. (2007) ‘Unpacking Autonomy and Control in Education: some conceptual and normative groundwork for a comparative analysis’ European Educational Research Journal 6:3, 203-213 Daugherty. R. (2011) ‘Designing and implementing a teacher-based assessment system: Where is the infrastructure?’ Presented at seminar Teachers’ judgments within systems of summative assessment: strategies for enhancing consistency, Oxford University Centre for Educational Assessment Hayward, E. L. & Hutchinson, C. (2012) ‘Exactly what do you mean by consistency?’ Assessment in Education 20:1 53-68 Hipkins, R. & Robertson, S., 2011. Moderation and teacher learning. What can research tell us about their interrelationships? Wellington: NZCER Kelchtermans, G. (2007) ‘Macropolitics caught up in micropolitics: the case of the policy on quality control in Flanders (Belgium)’ Journal of Education Policy 22:4, 471-491 Kennedy, A., Christie, D., Forbes, J., Fraser, C., MacDonald, A., Menter, I., Paton, G. & Reid, R. (2007) ‘Changing teachers, changing Scotland?’ Scottish Educational Review 39:1, 60-71 Klenowski, V. & Adie, L. (2009) ‘Moderation as judgement practice: Reconciling system level accountability and local level practice’ Curriculum Perspectives, 29:1, 10-28 Mons, N. (2009) Background paper ‘National Testing of Pupils in Europe Objectives, Organisation and Use of Results’ Brussels: EACEA Nieveen, N. & Kuiper, W. (2012) ‘Balancing Curriculum Freedom and Regulation in the Netherlands’ European Educational Research Journal 11:3, 357-368 Senge, P. & Scharmer, O. (2001) Community action research: learning as a community of practitioners, in: Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds) Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice London: Sage Sundberg, D. & Wahlström, N. (2012) ‘Standards-based Curricula in a Denationalised Conception of Education: the case of Sweden’ European Educational Research Journal 11:3, 342-356