Clearinghouse on Educational Policy and Management College of Education · University of Oregon
	"Search Help" Note that this is a web site search and will not search our databases ("Directory of Organizations", "In-Process Abstracts", the ERIC Database, "Publications").	Trends and Issues: Research Abstracts Discussion Links References Resources See also our new Consumer's Guide to Research Information. Discussion Compiled in 2000 by Jamie Pearson under the supervision of Meredith "Mark" Gall. Revised in March 2003 by Ron Beghetto, who added content, references, and links pertaining to scientifically based research. Despite the millions spent each year, educational research does not play a direct role in the professional lives of school practitioners. Much of the work seems distant from everyday concerns, and dissemination is inefficient. Moreover, findings are often misinterpreted or used as ammunition in political battles. Research that supports the existing beliefs or biases of educators is likely to be accepted uncritically, while contrary evidence may simply be ignored. In the worst cases, research simply becomes ammunition in the education wars, with each side leaping on any findings that support their positions, but paying little attention to the quality of the studies they are citing. The picture appears to be changing, however. Research priorities are becoming more tightly focused on the needs of practice, while researchers and practitioners are beginning to communicate and work together. In addition, the federal government is working to promote the development and use of evidence-based programs and practices. The passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 has placed greater emphasis on the nature of educational research. As a result, federal funding decisions will now, in part, be determined by whether programs and practices have a basis in "scientific research." Research Struggles To Be Relevant Researchers and practitioners seem to inhabit two separate worlds. Research is often theoretically oriented, highly technical, and driven more by academic fashion or politically driven funding priorities than by the needs of schools. Researchers' main interest in knowledge is scientific. They explore the nature of problems, seemingly unconcerned with the time it takes to reach a conclusion. When discoveries are made, the findings rarely reach practitioners in a manner conducive to implementation. Researchers typically publish their work in arcane journals that few practitioners are inclined to read--if they can find them in the first place. When research findings do reach practitioners, they are often poorly understood or misapplied. Because most practitioners have only a third-hand acquaintance with research (hearing about it in practitioner magazines or at inservice sessions), they may oversimplify or misapply the findings. For example, some neuroscientists have complained that educational applications of "brain-based learning" are wholly unsupported by research evidence. Practitioners complain they are frustrated by research-driven trends in education. Not only are the trends rarely responsive to practitioners' daily needs, the latest trend replaces the "old" trend just as changes have been made. Researchers admit this can be a problem. Practitioners, by nature, depend on being certain of their methods and knowledge. Researchers, by nature, are constantly questioning everything known to be true. This clash between a practitioner's clinical need for immediate solutions and a researcher's time-consuming process creates understandable difficulties. Furthermore, when a new research finding is implemented, the long-term effects on learning are often not known until students have passed through the educational system. This is especially true if the finding is the result of basic rather than applied research. Basic research is defined as research designed to advance the understanding of the basic processes and structures that underlie observed behavior. Applied research is research designed to develop and test predictions and interventions that can be used directly to improve practice. (Borg, Gall, and Gall). Educators, for good reason, want immediate solutions, and it might be assumed that those solutions are more likely to come from applied research. But some of the best answers actually might come from basic research, especially cognitive neuroscience, which is concerned with how the brain functions and learns. The delayed results inherent in educational research make it difficult, if not impossible, to provide practitioners with the immediate solutions they desire. There are no virtual-reality students or laboratory rats on which to test theories. Everyone agrees educational research is very difficult precisely because of these challenges. Newer "postmodern" views have challenged the assumption of scientific objectivity, arguing that all research reflects the biases and commitments of the researcher. As a result, some researchers have moved from experimental or quantitative analysis to "qualitative" studies that seek to understand the world as it is experienced by practitioners. This means rather than experimenting on students and using an experimental design with control groups, some researchers are opting for qualitative research designs that rely more on interviews and intensive direct observation of a few "cases" as a means of collecting data. Nonresearchers often find this work to be more understandable and useful. A challenge facing practitioners and researchers alike is education's lack of an established body of knowledge that is accessible to practitioners and widely accepted in its contents. In medicine, when a human body displays a set of symptoms, practitioners can almost always use research-based diagnoses to find the problem and apply the treatment or cure that researchers have demonstrated to be effective for that set of symptoms. This same approach is rarely possible in education. Each set of circumstances in each school building or classroom is inherently unique. Scientifically Based Research: The Development of a Knowledge Base? Historically, the federal government has been a key player in supporting educational research and, more recently, helping to develop a knowledge base of "what works" in education. The What Works Clearinghouse (available online at http://www.w-w-c.org/about.html/) is one of the first projects of the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences. The What Works Clearinghouse is designed to serve as a resource that will assist practitioners to select programs and practices that are based on scientific research. The premise of the What Works Clearinghouse is that a shift toward scientifically based research in education will lead to the identification of practices and programs that are effective. Scientifically based research is the hallmark of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. It is defined in Section 9101 of the act (NCLB 2002) as "research that involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs." The act expands on the definition by identifying a variety of attributes that are characteristic of "scientifically based research." Proponents of SBR hope that it will replace the "folk wisdom of education" with a scientific knowledge base (Whitehurst 2002). Focusing on scientific research is seen as a means of assisting practitioners in making decisions about potential programs and practices. Several scholars are concerned, however, that undue emphasis on "what works" may result in a failure to consider possible unintended outcomes (Erickson and Gutierrez 2002) and a "rejection" of diverse traditions of scholarship and inquiry in education (St. Pierre 2002). Although opinions regarding the benefits and potential drawbacks of SBR vary, there seems to be some agreement that practitioners will play an important role in bridging the gap between research and practice. Practitioners Become Researchers For their part, some practitioners are beginning to do their own research. Many schools are employing action research, in which teachers and administrators study problems arising in their practice. Unlike conventional research, action research is directly aimed at immediately improving practice, rather than making broad, abstract generalizations. Meanwhile, school-university partnerships are creating opportunities for teachers to collaborate with researchers. For example, professional development schools offer fertile environments for teachers and researchers to work side by side on meaningful problems. The line of demarcation between research and practice has become blurred by the recent trend toward practitioner-initiated research and stronger collaboration between researchers and practitioners. Moreover, passage of the NCLB Act established additional ties between practitioners and research. In particular, practitioners who rely on federal funding are now required to be aware of the nature of the research on which their programs and practices are grounded. Conclusions What is the state of educational research now and where is it heading? Right now it seems researchers and practitioners are not on the same page. Their agendas are out of sync and they do not communicate very effectively. While that may sound grim, the future looks more promising. Researchers, practitioners, and policymakers agree that educational research is not as effective as it could and should be and it is time for that to change. The most recent indicator of that change is the emphasis placed on scientifically based research by the U.S. Department of Education. That federal funding decisions are now tied to the nature of the research supporting programs and practices indicates a significant change in the landscape of educational research. However, there is much work to be done to help ensure that educational research is relevant, rigorous, and used by practitioners. Experts have analyzed the situation, and their reports have all reached the same conclusions: For research studies to be more effective, they must involve more collaboration between researchers and practitioners, including jointly establishing the priorities for research projects. Education is a highly complex field. The process of conducting research must take into consideration factors such as different levels of schooling, a broad and variable curriculum, and the wide range of students. Educational research has many stakeholders, each with its own perspective concerning what is most valuable and urgently needed. Consequently, it's difficult to set a research agenda that appeals to a broad constituency. Alternative methods of research, including qualitative studies and practitioner research (in particular, action research), need to be given more credibility. All involved have to be patient because good research requires a tremendous amount of time and money. Getting results that improve critical areas will cost more than we're currently spending-this is clear. However, providing additional resources before modifying the research strategies currently in use will not necessarily produce the desired results. Finally, the most prominent scholars from the most prestigious institutions have examined the problems of educational research and have all reached a similar conclusion: Research can inform and improve educational practice to the same extent it affects medicine and other fields. An accessible body of knowledge must be established for practitioners to rely upon. Professional awareness of this need and the Internet are combining to lead educational research in this direction. The emphasis on scientifically based research and the development of a What Works Clearinghouse is another step in the direction of developing a knowledge base of promising practices and programs.