A Tool to Assess and Compare Knowledge Mobilization Efforts of Faculties of Education, Research Brokering Organizations, Ministries of Education, and School Districts

Cooper, Amanda

doi:10.26522/brocked.v25i1.441

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As individuals, the faculty members in these colleges may recognize the value of both generating and mobilizing knowledge, yet survey results demonstrate that the relative importance of mobilizing knowledge remains low. As a whole, these results reflect prior research related to both individual education faculty (Cooper, 2011;Cooper et al, 2018) and colleges of education (Cooper, 2016;Qi & Levin, 2013). What is noteworthy about this study is the fact that it arrived at these results while concentrating exclusively on colleges of education with organization-level KM agendas.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Complementing findings from these interviews, Amanda Cooper (2016) analyzed KM indicators on the websites of 21 college of education in Canada. Based on their public sites, most colleges engaged in only "moderate" levels of KM.…”

Section: Fostering Knowledge Mobilization In Colleges Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on their public sites, most colleges engaged in only "moderate" levels of KM. Moreover, Cooper (2016) reported that it proved "difficult on most university websites even to ascertain what research is being done by whom …, let alone what the implications of that research might be for sector stakeholders that might apply that knowledge" (p. 13). While websites and social media can expand KM because they enable direct engagement (Cooper, 2016;Cooper et al, 2018;Qi & Levin, 2013;Veletsianos, 2013), the moderate efforts suggested by college websites underscore the wider tensions within universities considered above, including entrenched traditional scholarly orientations and ill-defined KM targets, criteria, measures, and outcomes.…”

Section: Fostering Knowledge Mobilization In Colleges Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…five factors each college addressed. All three colleges addressed at least three of the factors, in contrast to limited evidence about other North American colleges of education, suggesting that each participating college had established a relatively comprehensive KM agenda (Cooper 2016;Cooper et al, 2018;Levin, 2004;Sá, Li, & Faubert, 2011). Following best practices for internet surveys (Fan & Yan, 2010), 66 faculty from these three colleges of education responded to an online survey (Zuiker, Piepgrass, Tefera, & Fischman, 2018).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Recognizing and Transforming Knowledge Mobilization in Colleges of Education

Zuiker

Piepgrass²,

Tefera³

et al. 2019

IJEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines emerging efforts by three colleges of education to contribute to research use through public systems of knowledge exchange among researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other education stakeholders. Often labeled knowledge mobilization (KM), such organization-and individual-level agendas seek to enhance, expand, and sustain engagement with educational research. Colleges of education with public KM agendas signal formal, local efforts at a time when KM remains weakly integrated within education. This study seeks to highlight the interdependent opportunities and challenges that accompany individual and organizational capacities for such change associated with KM. Findings from analysis of faculty survey responses (n = 66) suggest that progressive engagement with KM among colleges of education challenges their faculty to navigate the competing demands of knowledge production and mobilization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Fostering Knowledge Mobilization In Colleges Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fostering Knowledge Mobilization In Colleges Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Recognizing and Transforming Knowledge Mobilization in Colleges of Education

Zuiker

Piepgrass²,

Tefera³

et al. 2019

IJEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the same time, scholars and practitioners have amplified their call for evidence-based policy and practice. In this context, "knowledge brokers" and "research brokering organizations" are poised to provide a crucial role in the reinforcement of the relationship between university-based researchers and those contexts where research can have concrete impact (Cooper 2015;Naidorf 2014). At a time when "the field of KMb .…”

Section: The Rrn Knowledge Mobilization and Social Mediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilizing Global Knowledge

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The artwork on the cover of this book is not open access and falls under traditional copyright provisions; it cannot be reproduced in any way without written permission of the artists and their agents. The cover can be displayed as a complete cover image for the purposes of publicizing this work, but the artwork cannot be extracted from the context of the cover of this specific work without breaching the artist's copyright.

show abstract

If Mobilizing Educational Research Is the Answer, Who Can Afford to Ask the Question? An Analysis of Faculty Perspectives on Knowledge Mobilization for Scholarship in Education

Fischman¹,

Anderson

Tefera

et al. 2018

AERA Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today it is rare to find a college of education (COE) that does not request faculty to include metrics in annual reports of their scholarly productivity (e.g., number of articles published in high-impact factor journals, H-factors, altmetrics, citations, funded grants). At the same time, faculty and COEs alike often struggle to understand if and how the educational research they produce is useful and used among wider stakeholders (Southerland, Gadsden, & Herrington, 2014). The gap between research production and potential use is likewise reflected in university promotion and tenure practices, which increasingly rely on indirect measures of research quality (Cooper, 2015a). For example, the journal impact factor (JIF) is a metric that reveals little about the quality or relevance of any article, yet it remains one of the most influential indicators for research accountability and to distribute incentive (Piwowar, 2013). Many scholars recognize the limitations of indirect metrics and seek to broaden definitions of scholarly impact (e.g.

show abstract

A Tool to Assess and Compare Knowledge Mobilization Efforts of Faculties of Education, Research Brokering Organizations, Ministries of Education, and School Districts

Abstract: There are few tools that exist to measure knowledge mobilization (KMb)

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Recognizing and Transforming Knowledge Mobilization in Colleges of Education

Recognizing and Transforming Knowledge Mobilization in Colleges of Education

Mobilizing Global Knowledge

If Mobilizing Educational Research Is the Answer, Who Can Afford to Ask the Question? An Analysis of Faculty Perspectives on Knowledge Mobilization for Scholarship in Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About