Making sense of place in school-based intervention research

Abstract

The commentary made here by this intervention researcher arises from a "place" in which schoolbased interventions are used to build knowledge, and thereby to bring relief to a young democracy -at once highly diverse and in transition -with aspirations for eradicating inequality. I use the concept of place as a theoretical lens to argue that intervention researchers, whose task it is to consider the meaning of intervention findings in different contexts, require a cognisance of pluriversality and geopolitical variance as a result of unequal development. In this study, I deliberately and reflexively integrate familiar education-place descriptions in my commentary. By means of this representation, I substantiate the argument that intentional reporting of place (rather than assumptions of school-places as normative) informs quality when adapting interventions. I frame my commentary around activism and engagement, ideology and politics, identity culture, and connectedness, which all influence sense of place in school-based intervention. I first show that using activism and engagement to make sense of place may denote emancipatory research in the case of one place, and theory-derived, hypothesis testing in another. I then explain how ideology and politics mean that marginalisation is embodied in high risk schools. Within high risk school settings, randomised control trials become unlikely, and interventions require both fluidity to adapt to crises, and extended time for implementation. I explain that identity culture requires interventions that promote effective literacy instruction in multilingual spaces, and that compel multiple implementation languages. Lastly, I discuss the benefits of partnerships that connect researchers and teachers to an intervention. I conclude that besides the evidence that shows that place variability requires consideration for quality intervention, commonalities also exist across intervention research, irrespective of place. Sharing descriptions of strategies to overcome common challenges in school-based inquiry can be used to plan and implement interventions with a high level of integrity.

Challenges and Resources in CPD for In-Service Teachers: Establishing Communities of Inquiry

“…Schleicher (2015) reported that teachers in Indonesia attending teacher development program of which district office and the school supervisors involved feel more confident and better prepared. These findings are consistent with Ebersöhn et al (2015) who find that school intervention for in-service teachers in highrisk and high-need schools in South Africa motivated teachers to gain competency and optimism, demonstrate management skills, and make valuable contributions in a group.…”

Changing school climates to promote adolescent wellbeing: two trials with one goal

“…It will be interesting to see anti-IL-17 data in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis, and to learn more about the relative effect of IL-17 inhibition in patients with and without an increased C-reactive protein concentration at baseline. 10 Finally, similar to previous studies, the expectation is that the efficacy of ixekizumab will also be sustained over several years with relatively high retention and limited radiographic progression. 10,11 Nevertheless, there is still an unmet need for head-tohead and strategy trials to provide better and scientifically based care to patients with axial spondyloarthritis.…”

Exploring a Century of Advancements in the Science of Learning

“…Rather, as the science of learning has evolved, intervention researchers have begun to blend or weave the theoretical roots emanating from various traditions to maximize the effects of an instructional intervention on students’ learning as it unfolds in the multidimensional, dynamic nature of actual classrooms. There are numerous examples of this type of intervention: that is, intervention that draws on the very best of what is known about the science of learning across the various lenses (e.g., Flourishing Learning Youth, see Ebersöhn, 2015; Self-Regulated Strategy Development, see Harris et al, 2012; Quality Talk, see Murphy, Greene, & Firetto, 2015). What is articulated by Murphy (2015) and others (e.g., Greene, 2015; Harris, Graham, & Adkins, 2015; Star et al, 2015) in a recent special issue of Contemporary Educational Psychology is that the sustainability of instructional innovations rests in their feasibility and usefulness as well as their adaptability.…”

“…What is articulated by Murphy (2015) and others (e.g., Greene, 2015; Harris, Graham, & Adkins, 2015; Star et al, 2015) in a recent special issue of Contemporary Educational Psychology is that the sustainability of instructional innovations rests in their feasibility and usefulness as well as their adaptability. In essence, each classroom is a unique place where many factors are at play, including the teacher, students, administrators, and parents, and each of these stakeholders plays a role in determining how learning will unfold (Ebersöhn, 2015). Thus, it is fundamental that instructional interventions must address the challenges faced by sociocultural groups in particular contexts, while simultaneously nurturing behavior, motivation, and cognition.…”