Political Control: A Way Forward for Educational Research?

Abstract

Educational research in the UK has for some time been criticised in terms of both its relevance and its quality. Indeed, these issues of relevance and quality have been presented by some critics as linked with each other. One way forward that has been suggested is greater political (and thereby user and practitioner) control of research and its funding. This would presumably ensure the immediate practical relevance of future work, encourage flexibility of approach, and remove some responsibility from the 'dead-hand' of academic departments of educational research. This paper considers some of the counter-arguments, and contrary evidence, to this approach. It presents examples of projects by teachers, a large-scale study of teacher effectiveness contracted to consultants by the DfEE (as it then was), and of political self-censorship by intellectual fields. On this basis the paper suggests that the link between quality and relevance in research has been exaggerated, and that increasing political control of academic research alone is unlikely to lead to a marked improvement in quality.

Bridging the teacher/researcher divide: Master’s-level work in initial teacher education

“…She recognised for herself the weakness of any warrants for claims to truth and although keen to continue this work herself, was very cautious about making any strong recommendations on the basis of such limited and inconclusive evidence. She began to see the implementation of PL as a series of feasible small changes in practice, reminiscent perhaps of Gorard's (2002) claim that 'it is as though "research" is being conducted to find evidence for already existing agenda' (381). Nevertheless, as with the previous projects, the most powerful learning seemed to come not from the intervention itself but from preparatory investigations: Emma expressed surprise about pupils' reported positive attitudes to the subject and satisfaction with their own level of progress.…”

“…A recent study by Vanderlinde and Braak (2010) in Flanders reports the frustration of researchers at their lack of impact on the teaching profession. On the other hand, action research and other forms of practitioner research developed precisely to focus on those immediate practical concerns are challenged by established researchers for their lack of rigour and concern about their hidden agendas (Foster 1999;Gorard 2002). …”

Can educational experiments both test a theory and inform practice?

“…It has also been noted, however, that simply increasing practitioner or political control over academic research is unlikely to impact on the quality of the research (e.g. Gorard, 2002c). Notwithstanding this note of caution, the conduct of the current study has suggested specific ways in which more involvement from teachers could lead, in the case of experimental studies, to improvements in research quality, strengthening the potential of the study to inform both theoretical and practical issues.…”

Under-tapped potential: practitioner research as a vehicle for widening participation

“…The relationship between research, policy and practice is complex (Gorard, 2002;Hammersley, 2005;Wilkins and Burke, 2015) and these three accounts highlight the intersections as fluid and multidirectional rather than linear and hierarchical. In holding both identities, research and practice can be seen to be continuously in play.…”