A framework for understanding the quality of evidence use in education

IF 2.7 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Research Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/00131881.2022.2054452
M. Rickinson, Connie Cirkony, Lucas Walsh, J. Gleeson, Blake Cutler, M. Salisbury
{"title":"A framework for understanding the quality of evidence use in education","authors":"M. Rickinson, Connie Cirkony, Lucas Walsh, J. Gleeson, Blake Cutler, M. Salisbury","doi":"10.1080/00131881.2022.2054452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background There are growing expectations internationally that schools and systems will use research evidence to inform their improvement efforts. Such developments raise important questions about what it means to use research evidence well in education. Purpose To date, there has been wide-ranging debate about what counts as quality evidence, but very little dialogue about what counts as quality use. In response, this article presents a conceptual framework to define and elaborate what quality use of research evidence might mean in relation to education. Method The framework is informed by a cross-sector systematic review and narrative synthesis of 112 relevant publications from four sectors: health, social care, education and policy. The review explored if, and how, quality of evidence use had been defined and described within each of these sectors in order to inform a quality use framework for education. Findings Based on the cross-sector review, quality use of research evidence is framed in terms of two core components: (1) appropriate research evidence and (2) thoughtful engagement and implementation, supported by three individual enabling components (skillsets, mindsets and relationships) and three organisational enabling components (leadership, culture and infrastructure), as well as system-level influences. Conclusions There is potential for this framework to inform current approaches to the use of research in education. There is also an important need to test and refine its components through further empirical investigation, theoretical inquiry and intervention development.","PeriodicalId":47607,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2022.2054452","RegionNum":3,"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: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background There are growing expectations internationally that schools and systems will use research evidence to inform their improvement efforts. Such developments raise important questions about what it means to use research evidence well in education. Purpose To date, there has been wide-ranging debate about what counts as quality evidence, but very little dialogue about what counts as quality use. In response, this article presents a conceptual framework to define and elaborate what quality use of research evidence might mean in relation to education. Method The framework is informed by a cross-sector systematic review and narrative synthesis of 112 relevant publications from four sectors: health, social care, education and policy. The review explored if, and how, quality of evidence use had been defined and described within each of these sectors in order to inform a quality use framework for education. Findings Based on the cross-sector review, quality use of research evidence is framed in terms of two core components: (1) appropriate research evidence and (2) thoughtful engagement and implementation, supported by three individual enabling components (skillsets, mindsets and relationships) and three organisational enabling components (leadership, culture and infrastructure), as well as system-level influences. Conclusions There is potential for this framework to inform current approaches to the use of research in education. There is also an important need to test and refine its components through further empirical investigation, theoretical inquiry and intervention development.
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
理解教育中证据使用质量的框架
摘要背景国际上对学校和系统将利用研究证据为其改进工作提供信息的期望越来越高。这些发展提出了一个重要的问题,即在教育中充分利用研究证据意味着什么。目的到目前为止,关于什么是高质量的证据,人们进行了广泛的辩论,但关于什么是低质量的使用,人们很少进行对话。作为回应,本文提出了一个概念框架来定义和阐述研究证据的高质量使用对教育可能意味着什么。方法对来自卫生、社会护理、教育和政策四个部门的112份相关出版物进行跨部门系统审查和叙述性综合,为该框架提供信息。审查探讨了是否以及如何在每个部门内定义和描述证据使用的质量,以便为教育质量使用框架提供信息。研究结果基于跨部门审查,研究证据的高质量使用由两个核心组成部分构成:(1)适当的研究证据和(2)深思熟虑的参与和实施,由三个个人促成部分(技能、心态和关系)和三个组织促成部分(领导力、文化和基础设施)支持,以及系统级别的影响。结论该框架有可能为当前在教育中使用研究的方法提供信息。还需要通过进一步的实证调查、理论探究和干预发展来检验和完善其组成部分。
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
Educational Research
Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Educational Research, the journal of the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), was established in 1958. Drawing upon research projects in universities and research centres worldwide, it is the leading international forum for informed thinking on issues of contemporary concern in education. The journal is of interest to academics, researchers and those people concerned with mediating research findings to policy makers and practitioners. Educational Research has a broad scope and contains research studies, reviews of research, discussion pieces, short reports and book reviews in all areas of the education field.
期刊最新文献
Exploring cooperative learning as a tool in civic education Invisible and fluid walls in early childhood nature learning: collecting data through video Conditions for higher education study: the perspectives of prospective students from rural areas What is the meaning of family participation in schools? A multi-voice perspective Leadership as a profession in early childhood education and care
×
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