Human Services Research Dissemination: What Works?

Macoubrie, Jane; Harrison, Courtney

doi:10.1037/e553312013-001

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This model closely aligns with the teacher-centered systemic reform developed by Gess-Newsome et al (2003). Both models identify a) the various organizational levels (e.g., department, institution, professional organizations) that influence faculty decision processes regarding teaching (Anderson et al 2011;Austin 2011;Brownell and Tanner 2012;Childs 2009;Fixsen et al 2005;Froyd 2011;Gess-Newsome et al 2003;Graham et al 2006;Dancy 2007, 2011;Hora 2012a;Lomas 1993;Macoubrie and Harrison 2013;National Research Council 2012;Seymour et al 2011;Walczyk et al 2007), as well as b) the individual influences such as self-efficacy, beliefs about teaching, and pedagogical training behaviors favorably Ghaith and Yaghi 1997;Gordon and Debus 2002;Guskey 1988;Henderson et al 2012a;Hora 2012b;Kember and Kwan 2000;Murray and Macdonald 1997;Postareff et al 2007Postareff et al , 2008Schuster and Finkelstein 2006;Trigwell and Prosser 1996b). Figure 1, which combines these complementary models, presents the model for faculty instructional decisionmaking that informs this project.…”

Section: Conceptual Framework Instructional Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 74%

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Research at the secondary and postsecondary levels has clearly demonstrated the critical role that individual and contextual characteristics play in instructors' decision to adopt educational innovations. Although recent research has shed light on factors influencing the teaching practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty, it is still not well understood how unique departmental environments impact faculty adoption of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) within the context of a single institution. In this study, we sought to characterize the communication channels utilized by STEM faculty, as well as the contextual and individual factors that influence the teaching practices of STEM faculty at the departmental level. Accordingly, we collected survey and observational data from the chemistry, biology, and physics faculty at a single large research-intensive university in the USA. We then compared the influencing factors experienced by faculty in these different departments to their instructional practices. Results: Analyses of the survey data reveal disciplinary differences in the factors influencing adoption of EBIPs. In particular, the physics faculty (n = 15) had primarily student-centered views about teaching and experienced the most positive contextual factors toward adoption of EBIPs. At the other end of the spectrum, the chemistry faculty (n = 20) had primarily teacher-centered views and experienced contextual factors that hindered the adoption of student-centered practices. Biology faculty (n = 25) fell between these two groups. Classroom observational data reflected these differences: The physics classrooms were significantly more student-centered than the chemistry classrooms. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that disciplinary differences exist in the contextual factors teaching conceptions that STEM faculty experience and hold, even among faculty within the same institution. Moreover, it shows that these differences are associated to the level of adoption of student-centered teaching practices. This work has thus identified the critical need to carefully characterize STEM faculty's departmental environment and conceptions about teaching before engaging in instructional reform efforts, and to adapt reform activities to account for these factors. The results of this study also caution the overgeneralization of findings from a study focused on one type of STEM faculty in one environment to all STEM faculty in any environment.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Framework Instructional Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 74%

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An explanation for this is that there may be other factors, in addition to evidence alone, that affect the likelihood that policy briefs are used or shared. For example, policymakers make decisions based on their personal attitudes, values, interpretation of community support, and political trade-offs (Macoubrie and Harrison 2013). In addition, establishing relationships between researchers and policymakers may contribute to the likelihood that evidence is incorporated into policies (Palinkas et al 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Policy Briefs to Communicate Dental Research Findings to Policymakers

Lee

Hill

Donald

2023

JDR Clinical & Translational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: New scientific knowledge is not always available to decision makers. Policy briefs are a way that dental researchers can communicate research findings to policymakers. This study compares usefulness of 2 types of policy briefs about sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) intake and tooth decay. Methods: We developed 2 policy brief types (data focused and narrative focused) and emailed a randomly assigned policy brief to 825 policymakers and staff from 3 levels of government (city, county, and state) in Washington State. Participants completed a 22-item online questionnaire. There were 4 study outcomes: whether the brief was understandable, whether the brief was credible, likelihood of use, and likelihood to be shared (each measured on a 5-point Likert-like scale). The t test was used to evaluate whether outcomes differed by policy brief type and government level (α = 0.05). Results: There were 108 respondents (adjusted response rate 14.6%). About 41.6% of participants were in city government, 26.9% were in county government, and 29.6% were in state government. Participants reported that both data- and narrative-focused briefs were understandable (mean rating [MR] and standard deviation [SD]: 4.15 ± 0.68 and 4.09 ± 0.81, respectively; P = 0.65) and credible (MR and SD: 4.13 ± 0.70 and 4.09 ± 0.70, respectively; P = 0.74), but they were not likely to use (MR and SD: 2.71 ± 1.15 and 2.55 ± 1.28, respectively; P = 0.51) or share it (MR and SD: 2.62 ± 1.04 and 2.66 ± 1.30, respectively; P = 0.87). The likelihood of sharing briefs differed significantly by level of government ( P = 0.017). Participants at the state level were more likely to share information from the briefs (mean rating and SD: 3.10 ± 0.80) than city- and county-level participants (MR and SD: 2.62 ± 1.27, and 2.24 ± 1.21, respectively). Conclusion: Both data- and narrative-focused policy briefs may be a useful way to communicate dental research findings to policymakers, but additional steps are needed to ensure that briefs are used and shared. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Researchers should disseminate their research findings to maximize scientific impact. Our study findings indicate that policy briefs may be a useful way to communicate dental research findings to policymakers, but additional research is needed on the best ways to disseminate findings.

show abstract

“…Practitioners are central to adopting, implementing, and sustaining the use of research in practice [ 30 ]. Herein we provide both theoretical and empirical support for practitioner–researcher partnerships as innovations—new ideas, programs, or technologies based on research [ 31 ]. Innovations can be implemented across systems of health and human services organizations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nurturing Practitioner-Researcher Partnerships to Improve Adoption and Delivery of Research-Based Social and Public Health Services Worldwide

Pinto

Spector

Rahman

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research-based practices—psychosocial, behavioral, and public health interventions—have been demonstrated to be effective and often cost-saving treatments, but they can take up to two decades to reach practitioners within the health and human services workforce worldwide. Practitioners often rely on anecdotal evidence and their “practice wisdom” rather than on research, and may thus unintentionally provide less effective or ineffective services. Worldwide, community engagement in research is recommended, particularly in low-resource contexts. However, practitioner involvement has not been adequately explored in its own right as an innovative community-engaged practice that requires a tailored approach. The involvement of practitioners in research has been shown to improve their use of research-based interventions, and thus the quality of care and client outcomes. Nevertheless, the literature is lacking specificity about when and how (that is, using which tasks and procedures) to nurture and develop practitioner–researcher partnerships. This paper offers theoretical and empirical evidence on practitioner–researcher partnerships as an innovation with potential to enhance each phase of the research cycle and improve services, using data from the United States, Brazil, and Spain. Recommendations for partnership development and sustainability are offered, and a case is made for involving practitioners in research in order to advance social justice by amplifying the local relevance of research, increasing the likelihood of dissemination to community settings, and securing the sustainability of research-based interventions in practice settings.

show abstract

Human Services Research Dissemination: What Works?

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty

Using Policy Briefs to Communicate Dental Research Findings to Policymakers

Nurturing Practitioner-Researcher Partnerships to Improve Adoption and Delivery of Research-Based Social and Public Health Services Worldwide

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About