Keeping educational research close to practice

Abstract

Wondering whether we need 'close-to-practice' (CtP) as a new category in the already quite extended and varied spectrum of educational research types is the starting point for these reflections. If it is to be research, then both rigour and relevance need to be taken care of. A second issue concerns the question of who is to perform this type of research: practitioners or researchers? Sustained collaboration between both types of professional, around a negotiated agenda and in a culture of complementary competence, seems a feasible and promising road ahead, I argue. Finally, I look into the question of the outcomes of CtP research and try to build a case for the use of 'good examples of practice' (as different from 'examples of good practice').

From evidence‐informed to evidence‐based: An evidence building framework for education

“…Researchers at the Collaborative Institute for Education Research, Evidence and Impact (CIEREI) have developed a schema to distinguish between the terms enquiry and research and that these fall on a teacher enquiry ‐ to ‐ research continuum . This clarification can help teachers conceptualise their role in the creation and mobilisation of evidence and how and when they might collaborate with researchers to create skilled teams that are able to apply a range of robust and relevant research tools to help evaluate and improve educational practice (Kelchtermans, 2021). In this schema, research involves university collaboration, requiring external ethical approval, and adopting more robust research methods.…”

People and practice: defining education as an academic discipline

“…Another point that challenges Hordern’s position is made in Kelchtermans’s response: the idea that the value of practice‐related research is ‘often framed in terms of the tension or even opposition of rigour and relevance. As an opposition, this can only be a false one’ (Kelchtermans, 2021, p. 2). Hordern’s suggestions about imperialism and fetishism are built on his argument that the underlying purposes of education, or at least those purposes that Hordern asserts the CtP work should be attending to, can be, and were, marginalised by the selection of particular research methods in the CtP research project.…”

“…Kelchtermans also usefully suggests that collaboration between people with different kinds of expertise in research and/or practice could be more systematically developed as part of research projects, for example in the ‘careful construction of a clear and shared research agenda ’ (Klechtermans, 2021, p. 4, italics in the original). Of particular importance in relation to our argument is Kelchtermans’s opinion that the creation of what he calls good examples of educational practice (which some describe as ‘effective’ practice) requires an answer to this question: ‘On what “evidence” or “data” is that explanation grounded?’ (Klechtermans, 2021, p. 6) This is a legitimate question to be answered in relation to all of the papers that are part of this special section.…”

“…It may sound like stating the obvious, but the ultimate goal of educational research is to contribute to valid knowledge and theory‐building on the complex phenomena of educational practices. (Kelchtermans, 2021, p. 2).…”

“…This is a Response from the BERA Close‐to‐Practice Research Project Team to Hordern (2021), Takayama and Nishioka (2021), Kelchtermans (2021) and Parsons (2021), published as a ‘special section’ in the British Education Research Journal . Education research that ‘focuses on issues defined by practitioners as relevant to their practice, and involves collaboration between people whose main expertise is in research, in educational practice, or both’ (Wyse et al ., 2020, p. 5) has been the source of a range of debates relevant to understanding the development of education as an academic discipline.…”