Evidence and Policy Research

Abstract

The EERJ roundtable took as its point of departure the experience of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) in carrying out policy research. CERI has conducted four reviews of national educational research and development (in New Zealand, England, Mexico and Denmark), and has run a number of meetings specifically on the use of evidence-based policy research (in the USA, Sweden and the Netherlands). Tom Schuller, Head of CERI, presented some conclusions from these and other CERI activities. Responses were made by Wim Jochems, Open University of the Netherlands, Lejf Moos, Danish University of Education, and Agnes van Zanten, Observatoire Sociologique du Changement, CNRS, Paris. The EERJ Roundtable was an opportunity to return to the issues raised in the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) 2003 Hamburg Roundtable on the 'OECD Examiners' Report on Educational Research and Development in England' (European Educational Research Journal, 3(2), 2004, pp. 510-526) in a wider context and as part of a trend to evaluate the quality and organisation of educational research, and its contribution to educational policy. The roundtable posed questions on the way international organisations such as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and units within them such as the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), define, develop and disseminate knowledge, and specifically educational research. There are a number of approaches to this (see, for example, Porter & Webb, 2004;Robertson, 2005). One is to ask empirical questions about the actual impact of such organisations on educational policy or practice. This is a rich potential area for inquiry, though fraught with difficulty, notably in demonstrating causal links -but I'm sure that those of us that work in these organisations would like to see more results from this line of inquiry! A second approach is to raise political questions about the role of international organisations, their legitimacy Tom Schuller et al 58 or their legitimating processes (two quite different things), their functions and their accountability. A third is to use investigation of international organisations such as OECD as an entry point for considering the role of international research generally, whether it is executed through such agencies or in national or subnational units such as university departments. These reflections touch on all three approaches. I want in particular to address the growing concern about the nature of educational research and its relation to policy. My remarks derive not from original research but from involvement as head of CERI in a range of international projects, particularly in a specific project on evidence-based policy research (see Schuller, 2005; Burns & Schuller, 2006 forthcoming); and prior to that as an examiner in one OECD review (New Zealand) and an examinee in another (England). TOM SCHULLER. Reviewing OECD's Educational ...

Hard and Soft Governance: The Journey from Transnational Agencies to School Leadership

“…The EU has developed the 'open method of coordination' (Lange & Alexiadou, 2007), and the OECD a method of 'peer pressure' (Moos, 2006b;Schuller, 2006).…”

Models and Paradigms of Educational Sciences

“…A későbbi években az érintett tudományok vonatkozásában a program mind elméleti, mind politikai téren szinte kizárólagos, intenzív propagandával is megerősített támogatott-ságra tett szert, annak Amerikán kívüli recepciója is rendkívüli mértékben felerősödött, részleteiben is kidolgozottá vált, egészen azokig a gyakorlati szempontokig bezárólag, hogy miként lehet a kutatás minőségét a tényekre alapozottság kritériumai alapján érté-kelni (Davies, 1999;Schuller, Jochems, Moos és Van Zanten, 2006) 1 , továbbá a témában számos nagyhatású tanulmány is született (pl. Bennett, Lubben, Hogarth és Campbell, 2005;Evans és Benefield, 2001;Feuer, Towne és Shavelson, 2002;Gorard, Rushforth és Taylor, 2004;Gorard, 2005;Hammersley, 2005;Oakley, Gough, Oliver és Thomas, 2005;Pirrie, 2001;Slavin, 2002;MacLure, 2005;Whitty, 2006 …”

EERA: A Participant or an Agent in European Research Policy? A Governance Perspective

“…The EU has developed the open method of coordination (Lange and Alexiadou 2007), and the OECD has developed a method of peer pressure (Moos, 2006b;Schuller, 2006).…”

“…Lawn and Lingard claim that transnational organisations such as the OECD act as shapers of emerging discourses of educational policy, as 'expressed in reports, key committees, funding streams and programmes' (Lawn & Lingard, 2002). The main influence comes from the OECD setting the agenda (Schuller, 2006) both within the whole organisation -for example, through international comparisons such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA; Hopman, 2008) and other agencies such as UNESCO and the IEA -and within individual member nations. If a government wants to put an issue on the national agenda but lacks the strength to do so on its own, it can call on the OECD for help.…”

“…The team's report often forms the basis for political action in such states. The reviews of educational research and development in England and Denmark are relevant examples to show how the political interest is being shifted from universities being 'knowledge producers' towards a situation where they are deliverers of policy-and practice-relevant results (Moos, 2006b). …”