Bridging the Gap Between Research and Policy: Fostering Advocacy and Policy Engagement in Special Education Doctoral Students

Abstract

For decades, policy scholars have noted a disconnect between educational expertise, research, and policy-making, undermining the potential for coherent and effective policy development and implementation of reform initiatives. To help leverage the use of scholarship in the policy-making process, we argue that the scholarly community must refocus its efforts and adopt multiple strategies for ensuring engagement with policy-making, including strategies implemented during doctoral training. This article presents results of an exploratory mixed-methods study conducted to assess the effectiveness of a doctoral student professional development opportunity referred to as the “Short Course,” established to introduce special education doctoral students to the policy-making process through an applied experience in Washington, D.C. Survey data gathered over 3 years from participants and sponsoring faculty suggest the potential for this type of an approach to increase advocacy and policy engagement among future special education researchers, faculty, and leaders.

Preparing Doctoral Students in Special Education: What Do We Really Know?

“…Two types of empirical articles were identified in this review: qualitative ( n = 3) and survey research ( n = 8). In reviewing Nagro et al (2020), the authors noted a mixed methods design was used. As the mixed methods design was not an option according to the list provided by Tulbert et al, authors reached agreement in coding this article as survey research due to the description of the study.…”

“…Three of the articles (Dieker et al, 2014; Martin et al, 2016; Wasburn-Moses, 2008) focused on ways that mentoring provides collaborative opportunities for doctoral students to engage in research and teaching (e.g., attending and presenting at national conferences, assisting with the development and implementation of action research projects, developing and completing dissertations, opportunities to co-teach, publishing journal articles). Similarly, Abernathy et al (2008) and Nagro et al (2020) described the opportunities that arose through learning experiences in a doctoral program (e.g., routine journaling, reflective self-evaluation, on-site doctoral student professional development opportunity focusing on policy and advocacy). Rodriguez et al (2019) observed the interdisciplinary collaboration (e.g., doctoral students, professionals in the field) that both courses and networking opportunities provided through the internships experienced by participants in this study.…”

“…Five empirical and four nonempirical articles described various aspects of teaching in relation to the preparation of special education doctoral students. For example, Abernathy et al (2008) and Nagro et al (2020) shared findings from their studies about the instruction of doctoral students (e.g., routine journaling, reflective self-evaluations, on-site professional development) and benefits these approaches provide. In addition, West and Hardman (2012) noted the need for doctoral programs to prepare doctoral students to become teacher educators for a variety of educational roles (e.g., general educators, special educators, related service personnel, educational leaders, researchers).…”

“…deBettencourt et al (2016) called for the implementation of a Quality Matters framework for teaching online or hybrid courses and, according to Higher Education Consortium of Special Education (HECSE) Leadership Quality Indicators, our field needs to develop a list of clearly defined competencies related to teaching and/or administration for doctoral students. In addition, both Dieker et al (2014) and Nagro et al (2020) encouraged ongoing professional development through participation in professional conferences.…”

“…Despite the recent decline in the number of special education doctoral programs, these programs have become more competitive, and expectations have increased for both doctoral students and faculty members. For decades, researchers have observed that as the number of special education doctoral programs has grown, graduates are expected to be knowledgeable and skilled in (a) supporting teacher educators with content in general and special education, (b) developing more culturally competent and responsive educators to meet the needs of a more diverse population, (c) meeting federal, statewide, and district mandates, and (d) actively engaging in advocacy and policy making initiatives (Nagro et al, 2020; Robb et al, 2012). deBettencourt and colleagues (2016) noted expectations for special education faculty may have increased regarding (a) the number of publications they produce per year, (b) the use of technology in their work, (c) the ability to obtain grant funding, and (d) the skill in developing online learning platforms to meet a range of needs (e.g., teaching online courses, providing online professional development).…”