Measuring opportunity: Redirecting education policy through research

Pfleger, Ryan; Wilson, Terri S.; Welner, Kevin G.; Bibilos, Charles

doi:10.14507/epaa.26.3525

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Israeli case, as presented here, the CS is also a key figure at the university to which it belongs and usually is a tenure track that it will return to; this positioning cements the CS's position as knowledge creator. Thus, in contrast to common descriptions of knowledge brokers in the international scholarship (Pfleger et al, 2018;Ward et al, 2009), the CS in Israel does not seem to fully embody and symbolize the role of the knowledge manufacturing side while, on the other hand, it neither does exclusively represent knowledge consumers at the policy level. As such, the CS is not creating a third role of mediation.…”

Section: The Chief Scientist: Double Rolementioning

confidence: 67%

Researchers as knowledge brokers: A step toward research-informed policy? Lessons from the Israeli case

Ramot

Bialik

2020

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the 1970s, the role of “chief scientist” was established in Israel as part of a knowledge mediation model aimed to promote research-informed policy and narrow the academia-field-policy gap. This paper examines how when researchers cross the boundary toward a policy role and serve as knowledge brokers, they may promote research utilization in policy. This sheds light on a key issue in the field of education research, specifically, what conditions or circumstances contribute to the maximization of research utilization and the implementation of research-based policy recommendations. Using qualitative methodology, we conducted semi-structured interviews with past chief scientists and analyzed newspaper articles to understand the complex nature of the role and to propose practical suggestions for improving its construction in future policy beyond the Israeli context. Despite the positive aura surrounding the common use of intermediaries, the issue of promoting such entities at the national educational level has not yet been realized in a coherent, stand-alone policy globally.

show abstract

Section: The Chief Scientist: Double Rolementioning

confidence: 67%

Researchers as knowledge brokers: A step toward research-informed policy? Lessons from the Israeli case

Ramot

Bialik

2020

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Returning to the idea of impact, introduced at the beginning of this article, existing literature examines various policy-related avenues that educational researchers may utilize to influence law and policy. These options include serving as an expert witness (e.g., Welner & Kupermintz, 2004), actively engaging in policy discourse (Pfleger et al, 2018), building relationships with intermediary organizations (Debray, Scott, Lubienski, & Jabbar, 2014), participating in the amicus brief process in court cases (Garces, 2013a;Lewis & Bray, 2019), and indirectly shaping public opinion (Welner, 2012). However, to our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the relationship between research and civil rights guidance, particularly from a bidirectional perspective.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An examination of the bidirectional relationship between federal civil rights guidance and research

Lewis

Kern

2020

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the primary agency responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws in the educational context, the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issues policy guidance to help ensure that school districts and universities understand their legal obligations. These policy guidance documents have direct connections to topics studied by educational researchers (e.g., disproportionality in special education, race conscious admissions policies in higher education, transgender student inclusion, etc.). However, we do not have an empirical understanding of how this guidance is used by the research community. Nor do we have a strong grasp on the extent to which this guidance is explicitly informed by research. It is important to acquire an empirical understanding of the bidirectional relationship between research and educational policy in the context of civil rights enforcement in order to determine areas of strength and those in need of improvement. Specifically, this study poses the following research questions: 1) How often and in what ways do scholars explicitly use OCR policy guidance to inform their research? What are the characteristics of this research? 2) Conversely, how often and in what ways does OCR explicitly use research to inform policy guidance? What are the characteristics of research cited in OCR guidance?

show abstract

“…Taken together, prior research and the present findings implicate both accessibility and consumability. Research must be brought to these conversations in “deliberate and thoughtful ways” (Pfleger, Wilson, Welner, & Bibilos, 2018, p. 3). Furthermore, it is critical for the research community to build upon efforts to promote open access journals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Call for Amicus Briefs as a Means to Influence Special Education Policy: Lessons Learned From Endrew F.

Lewis

Bray

2019

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the legal nature of special education, a particularly promising avenue for infusing research into practice is through court cases. Recent work has illuminated the influence of amicus briefs in court decisions. An amicus brief is a nonparty brief submitted by a person, group of people, or organization that provides insight and expertise on issues presented in a case. In this exploratory study, we examined how interest groups, through the amicus brief process, used research in a recent Supreme Court case, Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District. The case focused on a fundamental principle at the heart of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the definition of a free appropriate public education, an issue in which researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike should be interested. Our findings indicate that researchers and research played a limited role in the briefing process. We conclude with a discussion of potential reasons for the lack of research in the briefing process, as well as a call for the field to use amicus briefs as a means to influence special education policy and practice.

show abstract

Measuring opportunity: Redirecting education policy through research

Cited by 6 publications

References 53 publications

Researchers as knowledge brokers: A step toward research-informed policy? Lessons from the Israeli case

Researchers as knowledge brokers: A step toward research-informed policy? Lessons from the Israeli case

An examination of the bidirectional relationship between federal civil rights guidance and research

A Call for Amicus Briefs as a Means to Influence Special Education Policy: Lessons Learned From Endrew F.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About