What are the conditions under which research-practice partnerships succeed?

Farrell, Caitlin C.; Wentworth, Laura; Nayfack, Michelle B.

doi:10.1177/00317217211007337

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This has allowed for trainees at the Center to spearhead longitudinal studies of development, and spend up to a year before data collection in active discussion and iterative exchange with practitioners to adequately address meaningful problems of practice. Trainees also explicitly practice many critical "invisible" skills (Farrell et al, 2021), such as communication of scientific concepts and fostering interpersonal connections with practitioners.…”

Section: Immersion In Partnership Building Is Graduate Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Toomarian,

Gosavi,

Hasak

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in the field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE) have been limited by a fundamental separation between university-based neuroscience laboratories and school communities, constraining the field’s ability to collaboratively devise research studies germane to child development. This commentary explores the assertion that the persistent obstacles in MBE work may stem from how we structure these partnerships. We examine this premise through a detailed case study of a research-practice partnership that has successfully implemented a range of innovative programmatic elements, including the establishment of specially-trained liaisons, situating a neuroscience lab within a school, and actively involving practitioners and students in research. An analysis of the values that iteratively emerged from this approach may encourage other MBE stakeholders to consider affordances of this model when embarking upon future partnership endeavors.

show abstract

Section: Immersion In Partnership Building Is Graduate Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Toomarian,

Gosavi,

Hasak

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• there are known discrepancies between what is intended by the curriculum, what is taught by teachers (enacted curriculum) [27] and what students learn [82]; • it would appear that evidence-informed Computing Education best practices are not globally implemented in schools [55,72], which is coherent with the well known research-practice gap which exists in numerous ields [8,17,20,28], despite the fact that educators may be interested to use research outcomes to inform their practice [28].…”

Section: Teachersmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Research-Practice Partnership to Introduce Computer Science in Secondary School: Lessons from a Pilot Program

El-Hamamsy

Pellet

Roberts

et al. 2023

ACM Trans. Comput. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Introducing Computer Science (CS) into formal education can be challenging, notably when considering the numerous stakeholders involved which include the students, teachers, schools, and policy makers. We believe these perspectives should be considered conjointly, which is possible within Research Practice Partnerships (RPPs). RPPs look to bridge research-practice gaps and have seen an increase in the field of education and CS-education. Unfortunately, RPPs are considered to be under-researched, in addition to presenting their own challenges. Objectives To the purpose of assessing how RPPs may support the successful introduction of CS into formal education, we investigate three perspectives (students, teachers, and RPP stakeholders) and their interplay within the context of a multi-institution RPP conducting a pilot program to introduce CS to secondary school students. Methods A mixed methods analysis was employed to triangulate data in a concurrent triangulation design. The data included i) 3 surveys distributed over the semester to 106 grade 9 students (ages 12-14), ii) four teacher-journals, iii) 2 interviews and 4 focus groups with the teachers and representatives of the partner institutions. Findings From the students’ perspective , while their self-efficacy increased, their motivation decreased throughout the semester due to a miss-match between their expectations and the course. The findings also indicate that gender biases and heterogeneity are already present in grade 9. From the teachers’ perspective , co-constructing the study plan, having access to regular support and collaborating within a community of practice when starting to teach CS all facilitated the teachers’ experience. Finally, from the RPP’s perspective the collaboration between stakeholders and having researchers evaluate the program were considered to be key elements in the pilot program. However, there appears to be a research-practice gap, in big part due to limited interactions between researchers and curriculum designers, and researchers and the teachers in the field. Conclusions From the students’ perspective it appears relevant to introduce CS i) prior to secondary school to address motivation and bias-related issues early on, and ii) to all students to avoid participation being motivation-, stereotype-, or belief-driven, and risk broadening the gap between students, iii) all the while being attentive to course format and content to ensure that the course meets students’ expectations and fosters autonomous motivation. From the teachers’ perspective , while the provided support met the teachers’ needs, it is essential to find means of scaling such approaches when looking to deploy CS-curricular reforms to entire administrative regions. Finally, from the RPP’s perspective i) teachers’ should be given a voice in the RPP to better align with the field, and ii) researchers’ roles should be reconsidered to move beyond being only evaluators, and towards having a more co-constructive role in setting up the curricular reform. Recommendations are provided for researchers and practitioners involved in CS curricular reforms.

show abstract

“…As mentioned above, how research can be used to inform practice is a central question for RPPs (Farrell et al, 2021) as a means for educational improvement. Before turning to research use in RPPs, however, we first need to describe frameworks for discussing research theories and research use.…”

Section: Research-practice Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, research ‐ based instructional methods and models can be used to directly influence practice, or research findings can be used to challenge assumptions on teaching and learning. The second challenge concerns the question of how to include practitioners more in the generation of research evidence (Farrell et al, 2021). The engagement of practitioners in the process of research evidence generation is a vital element of RPPs in order to produce research that is more relevant to practice (Farrell et al, 2021; Tseng et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second challenge concerns the question of how to include practitioners more in the generation of research evidence (Farrell et al, 2021). The engagement of practitioners in the process of research evidence generation is a vital element of RPPs in order to produce research that is more relevant to practice (Farrell et al, 2021; Tseng et al, 2018). Note that the two challenges are closely related.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using research to inform practice through research‐practice partnerships: A systematic literature review

Sjölund

Lindvall

Larsson

et al. 2022

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research‐practice partnerships (RPPs) have drawn a great deal of attention as promising structures for bringing educational research and practice closer together. However, promising as RPPs may be, challenges still exist and there have been calls for studies investigating how research can be used within RPPs, and how to include practitioners more in the generation of research evidence. We address these calls by conducting a systematic review of the research literature on RPPs. Our review of 57 articles shows that research is used in various ways to inform both the methods and content for facilitating school improvement in RPPs. For instance, research on effective PD can be directly applied to a Professional Development (PD) programme to inform the methods of the intervention, or research findings can be used as the content of an intervention to facilitate teacher learning. Moreover, the results suggest that the type of research used to inform RPPs affects the kinds of opportunities for research use that are presented to practitioners; ranging from applying research directly to practice (instrumental use), to using research to extend understanding (conceptual use), or using research methods and methodologies in order to increase practitioners’ capacity for improving education (process use). Based on the results, we argue that the presented opportunities for research use in interventions strongly affect teachers’ opportunities to participate in the generation of research evidence and thereby achieve a more democratised evidence system.

show abstract

What are the conditions under which research-practice partnerships succeed?

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

A Research-Practice Partnership to Introduce Computer Science in Secondary School: Lessons from a Pilot Program

Using research to inform practice through research‐practice partnerships: A systematic literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About