Background:The importance of 'evidence-informed practice' has risen dramatically in education and in other public policy areas. This article focuses on the importance of knowledge mobilisation strategies, processes and outputs. It is concerned with how these can support the adaptation and implementation of evidence from research and professional knowledge to inform changes in educational practices. It presents a case study of the Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research (KNAER), a tripartite initiative in Canada involving the Ontario Ministry of Education, University of Toronto and Western University and 44 KNAER-funded projects. Purpose: The purpose of the article is to analyse the developing approach towards supporting knowledge mobilisation by the KNAER provincial partners through the governing body of the Planning and Implementation Committee and strategic and operational work of the university teams, and also the knowledge mobilisation strategies, challenges and successes of 44 KNAER projects. Design and methods: We utilised a qualitative case study approach to investigate the Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research's (KNAER) approaches to developing knowledge mobilisation over four years (2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014).To explore the work of the KNAER provincial partners, we analysed 17 meeting notes from the Planning and Implementation Committee and 9 notes from the university KNAER partners' meetings. To explore the knowledge mobilisation strategies, challenges and successes of KNAER-funded projects, we analysed the 44 knowledge mobilisation plans, 141 interim reports and 43 final reports submitted by projects. To further investigate the experiences of KNAER projects during their implementation, we analysed responses from 21 people from 19 KNAER projects who participated in a facilitated discussion about their experiences. Results: The Planning and Implementation Committee's role involved three core responsibilities: (1) Approving knowledge mobilisation proposals submitted to the KNAER; (2) Ensuring that collaborative partnerships were developed at the local, provincial, national and international levels; and (3) Approving the KNAER operational and strategic plan. The university partners have taken on the roles of operational management, strategic leadership, and research and

As the prevalence and negative effects of bullying become widely known, people around the world seem desperate to solve the bullying "problem". A sizeable body of research about many aspects of bullying and a plethora of anti-bullying programmes and policies now exist. This critical policy analysis asks: how does Ontario, Canada's bullying policy support and/or undermine critical democracy; and how does it reflect, support and further the interests of neoliberalism and/or neoconservatism? Findings indicate that the policy constructs the problem of bullying as a problem of individuals and a "behaviour for learning" problem. The policy also prescribes standardised responses to bullying incidents. We explore ways in which these constructions are undemocratic and unjust. The findings are particularly concerning because bullying policies are often viewed as innocuous by practitioners. This paper offers more than just critique by providing suggestions for how research and policies can become more just and equitable and how bullying policy may be enacted to support critical democracy.What can be done to stop bullying? As the widespread prevalence and negative effects of bullying on youth and society become widely known, researchers, teachers, parents and government officials around the world appear desperate to solve the bullying "problem". Their concern has given rise to a sizeable body of knowledge about characteristics, behaviours and effects of bullies, victims and bystanders; new laws and policies; and a plethora of anti-bullying programmes. Not aiming to minimise concerns about bullying on youth, the critical policy analysis (CPA) described in this article asks a different question: how does Ontario, Canada's current bullying policy support and/or undermine critical democracy? More specifically, it examines Ontario's approach to addressing bullying in schools to understand if and how it reflects, supports and furthers the interests of neoliberalism, neoconservatism and/or critical democracy.We begin by locating our study in the field of CPA. We then briefly review the contemporary global education policy context and highlight how neoliberalism and neoconservatism, as political rationalities (Brown 2006), have influenced education policy in Ontario and beyond. Next, we review how bullying is typically conceptualised in research and policy and discuss critiques of their dominant discourse around bullying. We then explain how we conducted a critical discourse analysis of key

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a study that explores the discreet activist strategies of educational leaders who promote social justice. Design/methodology/approach Part of a larger project, this study employed qualitative methods. In particular, researchers interviewed 26 leaders – principals, vice principals, department heads, and central office officials who presided over both homogeneous and diverse schools, departments, and districts in and around a large Canadian city. Data were analyzed during and after data collection, and themes were identified, explored, and described. Findings Given the resistance they faced in their efforts to promote social justice, leaders found that they had to be strategic in their efforts. In particular, they had to position themselves in ways that reduced their visibility and increased their credibility. When they took action, they tended to adopt subtle rather than obvious strategies. Originality/value The harsh reality for activist educational leaders who promote social justice is that they will likely have to be strategic in the way they go about their work. Given the nature of their relationships with the organizations in which they work and the power differentials within which they operate, educational leaders may have to adopt low key or discreet strategies if they are to successfully promote their social justice agendas.

This article describes a qualitative study which investigated how teachers made meaning of and responded to diversity in their rural school. While there is a large amount of information regarding how diversity plays out in urban settings and how teachers respond to it [e.g. Dei, G. J. S., I. M. James, L. L. Karumanchery, S. James-Wilson, and J. Zine. 2003. Removing the Margins: The Challenges and Possibilities of Inclusive Schooling. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press], little exists regarding rural schools. This is particularly troubling because of the large proportion of students attending rural schools. Data for this study were collected during individual interviews with seven elementary school teachers in a rural school in Ontario, Canada. Participants highlighted a number of categories of difference amongst their student cohort and how the challenges associated with this diversity were compounded by living in a rural area. The perceptions of participants are mirrored in educational policy and literature. Rural areas are expanding in population and diversity, and rural students are experiencing poverty and educational failure at the same levels of many large urban centres [Barlow, D. 2008. "America's Forgotten Schools." The Education Digest 22 (8): 67 -70]. Yet rural schools are being ignored in educational policy, largely based on misconceptions about the nature and value of rural environments.