Ensuring that research crosses the divide to practice has been a long-standing challenge in the academy. There is tremendous value in disseminating research broadly, as highlighted by the Edu-Scholar Rankings. To 鈥渕ove ideas from the pages of barely read journals,鈥� as rankings creator Rick Hess writes, 鈥渋nto the real world of policy and practice鈥� should be a goal of both scholars and educators.
An approach distinct from broad dissemination of research results鈥攂ut complementary to it鈥攊s that of 鈥渞esearch-practice partnerships,鈥� where researchers and practitioners enter into collaborations with specific aims. By targeting particular policy dilemmas and providing timely and actionable evidence, such RPPs can influence local decisions directly.
Over the past decade, I have been part of and learned from partnerships with , the , , and a group of teacher-professional-learning organizations ( or RPPL). All these partnerships were robust鈥攅xploring a range of questions, not undertaking just a single study鈥攁nd sustained over time. They relied on active engagement from policymakers and practitioners and built on some of the best thinking of leaders in this field, such as Nate Schwartz and Carrie Conaway.
I see several key lessons drawn from reflections on what has worked鈥攁nd what hasn鈥檛鈥攊n our work together:
- Co-construct a living research agenda to build core knowledge in a single area. Such agendas should trace out a line of inquiry that builds on existing research evidence and tackles questions of central interest to policymakers and the research community. Building such an agenda is challenging but worthwhile. The RPPL partnership recently engaged in this process, articulating a to structure our partnership work over the next several years. Such agendas can help ensure that long-standing partnerships build strong evidence in core areas while also allowing for nimble analysis of real-time challenges. Developing and then regularly revisiting this agenda ensures that all sides of the partnership have their needs met.
- Conduct analysis to support policy decisions without the potential for academic publication. Research designs that support causal inferences and rich statistical descriptions of problems鈥攖he stuff of journal articles鈥攃learly have a place in any strong partnership. But simple descriptive statistics that provide new insights can be equally powerful for policy impact. From a policy perspective, a statistic that illuminates an issue in a new way can be the most powerful part of an analysis. And sometimes policymakers need quick information that their internal research shops cannot provide. Doing smart analysis can provide timely data to inform key decisions.
- Build dissemination structures that engage program staff and stakeholders beyond the research team. Many partnerships鈥攊ncluding the ones I鈥檝e worked with鈥攂egan when academics engaged with state or district research teams. Bringing in program staff outside the research team and other stakeholders beyond the agency makes the partnerships more effective. For example, in Massachusetts, we now hold triannual briefings for a wider audience of internal stakeholders and have worked to develop evidence of interest to the state K-12 and higher education boards. A broader base of stakeholders helps increase the influence of research evidence and ensures that the work lives beyond a single champion.
The growing success of smart, well-funded RPPs has already led to new and innovative partnership arrangements. With adequate support, robust and sustained partnerships could play a major role in making evidence-informed policymaking the new normal for the nation鈥檚 schools.
