Crossing boundaries between research and practitioner communities: The role of research use and cross-community journal authorship

IF 3.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Research in Science Teaching Pub Date : 2023-11-11 DOI:10.1002/tea.21914
Joseph A. Taylor, G. Michael Bowen, Marcus Kubsch, Ryan Summers, Asli Sezen-Barrie, Patricia Patrick, Cathy Lachapelle, AbdiRizak Warfa, S. Selcen Guzey
{"title":"Crossing boundaries between research and practitioner communities: The role of research use and cross-community journal authorship","authors":"Joseph A. Taylor,&nbsp;G. Michael Bowen,&nbsp;Marcus Kubsch,&nbsp;Ryan Summers,&nbsp;Asli Sezen-Barrie,&nbsp;Patricia Patrick,&nbsp;Cathy Lachapelle,&nbsp;AbdiRizak Warfa,&nbsp;S. Selcen Guzey","doi":"10.1002/tea.21914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study pursued two major objectives. The first was to use bibliometric techniques to examine bidirectionality in the relationship between teachers and researchers, as indicated by collaborative authorship among these communities. The second was to explore more deeply knowledge mobilization to classrooms by documenting the extent to which research is cited in science education practitioner journals (SEPJ). Specifically, we examined: (a) the frequency of collaboration between researchers and practitioners in the writing of journal articles for both practitioner-focused and academic journals in science education, and (b) the extent to which authors of articles in practitioner-focused journals drew on academic research to support their advocacy for and/or description of science education programs, policies, or practices. Findings indicate that writing collaborations among academic researchers and practitioners are relatively infrequent, even on practitioner-focused articles. Also, articles in SEPJs more often cite books and other resources over academic journals, even those academic journals focused on informing science education teaching and learning. Recommendations include providing open access to published research, development of research summaries for lay audiences, and incentivizing practitioners to engage in research and writing. This study explores only one mechanism by which knowledge can be mobilized to classrooms and only one type of dissemination product (i.e., journal articles) upon which researchers and practitioners can collaborate. Additional limitations are noted including the applicability of the findings only to the specific journals and timeframes analyzed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48369,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","volume":"61 7","pages":"1727-1754"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/tea.21914","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.21914","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study pursued two major objectives. The first was to use bibliometric techniques to examine bidirectionality in the relationship between teachers and researchers, as indicated by collaborative authorship among these communities. The second was to explore more deeply knowledge mobilization to classrooms by documenting the extent to which research is cited in science education practitioner journals (SEPJ). Specifically, we examined: (a) the frequency of collaboration between researchers and practitioners in the writing of journal articles for both practitioner-focused and academic journals in science education, and (b) the extent to which authors of articles in practitioner-focused journals drew on academic research to support their advocacy for and/or description of science education programs, policies, or practices. Findings indicate that writing collaborations among academic researchers and practitioners are relatively infrequent, even on practitioner-focused articles. Also, articles in SEPJs more often cite books and other resources over academic journals, even those academic journals focused on informing science education teaching and learning. Recommendations include providing open access to published research, development of research summaries for lay audiences, and incentivizing practitioners to engage in research and writing. This study explores only one mechanism by which knowledge can be mobilized to classrooms and only one type of dissemination product (i.e., journal articles) upon which researchers and practitioners can collaborate. Additional limitations are noted including the applicability of the findings only to the specific journals and timeframes analyzed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨越研究界与实践界的界限:研究用途和跨社区期刊作者身份的作用
这项研究有两个主要目标。首先是利用文献计量学技术来研究教师与研究人员之间关系的双向性,这种双向性体现在教师与研究人员之间的合作著作权上。第二个目标是通过记录研究成果在科学教育从业者期刊(SEPJ)上被引用的程度,更深入地探索知识在课堂上的应用。具体来说,我们研究了:(a) 研究人员和从业人员在科学教育从业人员期刊和学术期刊上合作撰写期刊论文的频率;(b) 在从业人员期刊上发表文章的作者在多大程度上利用学术研究来支持他们对科学教育项目、政策或实践的宣传和/或描述。研究结果表明,学术研究人员和从业人员之间的写作合作相对较少,即使是在以从业人员为重点的文章中也是如此。此外,SEPJs 上的文章更经常地引用书籍和其他资源,而不是学术期刊,即使是那些侧重于为科学教育教学提供信息的学术期刊也是如此。建议包括提供公开发表的研究成果,为非专业读者编写研究摘要,激励从业人员参与研究和写作。本研究只探讨了将知识应用于课堂的一种机制,以及研究人员和从业人员可以合作的一种传播产品(即期刊论文)。本研究还存在其他局限性,包括研究结果仅适用于所分析的特定期刊和时间范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Journal of Research in Science Teaching EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
19.60%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, the official journal of NARST: A Worldwide Organization for Improving Science Teaching and Learning Through Research, publishes reports for science education researchers and practitioners on issues of science teaching and learning and science education policy. Scholarly manuscripts within the domain of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching include, but are not limited to, investigations employing qualitative, ethnographic, historical, survey, philosophical, case study research, quantitative, experimental, quasi-experimental, data mining, and data analytics approaches; position papers; policy perspectives; critical reviews of the literature; and comments and criticism.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information “Powered by emotions”: Exploring emotion induction in out‐of‐school authentic science learning Issue Information Developing and evaluating the extended epistemic vigilance framework The IPM cycle: An instructional tool for promoting students' engagement in modeling practices and construction of models
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1