A research model to study research-practice partnerships in education

Abstract

PurposeThis scoping review utilizes findings from 80 articles to build a research model to study research-practice-policy networks in K-12 education systems. The purpose of this study was to generate a broad understanding of the variation in conceptualizations of research-practice-policy partnerships, rather than dominant conceptualizations.Design/methodology/approachArskey and O'Malley's (2005) five stage scoping review process was utilized including: (1) a consultative process with partners to identify research questions, (2) identify relevant studies, (3) study selection based on double-blind peer review, (4) charting the data and (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results in a research model identifying key dimensions and components of research-practice partnerships (RPPs).FindingsCoburn et al. (2013) definition of RPPs arose as an anchoring definition within the emerging field. This article proposes a model for understanding the organization and work of RPPs arising from the review. At the core lies shared goals, coproduction and multistakeholder collaboration organized around three dimensions: (1) Systems and structures: funding, governance, strategic roles, policy environment, system alignment; (2) Collaborative processes: improvement planning and data use, communication, trusting relationships, brokering activities, capacity building; (3) Continuous Learning Cycles: social innovation, implementation, evaluation and adaptation.Research limitations/implicationsBy using a common framework, data across RPPs and from different studies can be compared. Research foci might test links between elements such as capacity building and impacts, or test links between systems and structures and how those elements influence collaborative processes and the impact of the RPPs. Research could test the generalizability of the framework across contexts. Through the application and use of the research model, various elements might be refuted, confirmed or refined. More work is needed to use this framework to study RPPs, and to develop accompanying data collection methods and instruments for each dimension and element.Practical implicationsThe practical applications of the framework are to be used by RPPs as a learning framework for strategic planning, iterative learning cycles and evaluation. Many of the elements of the framework could be used to check-in with partners on how things are going – such as exploring how communication is working and whether these structures move beyond merely updates and reporting toward joint problem-solving. The framework could also be used prior to setting up an RPP as an organizing approach to making decisions about how that RPP might best operate.Originality/valueDespite increased attention on multistakeholder networks in education, the conceptual understanding is still limited. This article analyzed theoretical and empirical work to build a systematic model to study RPPs in education. This research model can be used to: identify RPP configurations, analyze the impact of RPPs, and to compare similarities and differences across configurations.

An overview of quantitative instruments and measures for impact in coproduction

“…Recent developments in PLN-related topics, such as research–practice partnerships, have shown that measuring impact is especially challenging under the complex conditions of coproduction [2], wherein multiple stakeholders “aim to shift the research paradigm from one in which the researcher is the sole expert to one in which researchers and stakeholders co-lead research activities and collectively apply their expertise, knowledge and skills within a team” (Hoekstra et al , 2020, p. 2). A scoping review by Cooper et al (2020), for example, found that despite the publication of at least 80 articles on the topic of research–practice partnerships since 2007, only three have provided any guidance about measuring impact. Without robust guidance, stakeholders such as those in PLNs have little recourse to draw comparisons across contexts, to support informed decision-making for increasing the effectiveness and sustainability of interactions or to provide evidence for the impacts of mobilizing knowledge among diverse stakeholders (Davies et al , 2015; Durose et al , 2018; Hoekstra et al , 2020).…”

Working at the Intersection of Research and Practice: The Love to Read Project

“…Indeed, there is often a disconnect between the aims and focus of University-led educational research and priorities of those in practice (Ross & Bruce, 2012;Snow, 2015), described by Snow (2015) as "the science we do and the science we need to improve educational outcomes" (p464). Collaborative research ensures those highly connected to practice (e.g., teachers, school leaders) contribute to the research agenda, making it more likely that practice priorities are fore fronted before research commences (Cooper et al, 2020;Scanlon et al, 1994). Furthermore, participation in research has been shown to improve teachers' attitudes to research and teacher efficacy (Ross & Bruce, 2012) and is argued to democratize the research system, allowing teachers' opportunities to participate in the development of new knowledge (Sjölund et al, 2022a).…”

“…As we create partnerships working at the intersection of research and practice, we can learn, work, and create knowledge together, as well as better understand each other's commitments and constraints (Snow, 2015). Indeed, a defining feature of RPPs is that they are mutually beneficial (Cooper et al, 2020). Baum (2000) warns of being overzealous about RPPs without fully recognizing the time, resources and openness to different perspectives required, in addition to not fully recognizing the potential for disjointed communication or poor-quality outcomes.…”

Discipline and Work Environment Affect Employee Productivity: Evidence From Indonesia

“…The work environment is everything around the workers that can influence him in carrying out the tasks carried out (Cooper et al, 2020;D'Intino et al, 2020;Mylona & Mihail, 2020;Sarro et al, 2020;Silva-Romo et al, 2020;Velicu & Barca, 2020). The work environment is: "Tools and materials faced, the surrounding environment in which a person works, his working methods, as well as working arrangements both as an individual and as a group" (Apaolaza et al, 2020;Busta & Russo, 2020;Mackert et al, 2020;Pogodziński et al, 2020;Sampson et al, 2020;Susanto, 2020).…”