Supporting Use of Data and Evidence from Early Warning Indicator Systems in Research–Practice Partnerships

Teachers College Record - Tập 122 Số 14 - Trang 1-24 - 2020
William R. Penuel1, Caitlin C. Farrell1, Julia Daniel1
1University of Colorado Boulder

Tóm tắt

Background/Context Research on data and evidence use suggest that productive use depends on interactive processes, including sustained interactions between educators and researchers. Recent research on research-practice partnerships (RPPs) has examined conditions under which these sustained collaborations support evidence use. Findings from these studies can inform research on early warning indicators, helping interpret implementation studies of productive use and creating conditions for use of data from early warning indicator systems. Purpose This chapter presents results of a review of studies of data and evidence use within RPPs. It investigates the claim that RPPs can support productive data and evidence use only under certain conditions, conditions that are relevant to studying and supporting the implementation of early warning indicator systems in education. Research Design The synthesis focused on identifying studies published between 2013 and 2019 as journal articles, book chapters, and technical reports that focused on data and evidence use in RPPs. To be included, studies had to be empirical and related to the focal topics. A total of 114 studies met criteria for inclusion. For all studies, members of the research team developed summaries, which the team then discussed. Themes emerged from summaries, grouped by RPP, and from team discussions. Findings The review found six supportive conditions were needed for productive use of data and evidence to guide decision-making and action. These were (1) valuation of knowledge, experience, and perspectives of partners; (2) processes for identifying sources of evidence needed to answer questions that are priorities for educators and community partners; (3) complementarity of knowledge of partners; (4) adoption of a learning perspective on systems change; (5) routines for sensemaking and collaboration; (5) synchrony with decision-making processes; and (6) a commitment to developing and using evidence among partner organizations. Conclusions Developers of early warning indicator systems should consider ways an RPP can support the creation of conditions for productive use of data from systems. Effective systems likely will depend on making room for educator voice and valuing of practitioner perspectives at all stages of design and implementation of systems. They will also require allocation of time and skill for structuring opportunities to make sense of data and developing a culture where evidence plays an important role in decision-making.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1080/10824669.2013.745181

Allensworth E., 2005, The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school graduation

Allensworth E., 2007, What matters most for staying on-track and graduating in Chicago public high schools: A close look at course grades, failures, and attendance in the freshman year

10.1177/1075547004267491

10.1002/sce.21151

10.1080/07370008.2016.1179535

Bryk A. S., 2015, Learning to improve: How America's schools can get better at getting better

Bryk A. S., 2010, Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago

10.1080/01619561003685346

10.1080/10508406.2011.630849

Cobb P. A., 2018, Systems for instructional improvement: Creating coherence from the classroom to the district office

10.1177/016146811311501408

10.3102/0013189X16631750

Coburn C. E., 2013, Research–practice partnerships at the district level: A new strategy for leveraging research for educational improvement

10.1086/518487

10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00608.x

Cousins J. B., 2004, Participatory evaluation in education: Studies in evaluation use and organizational learning

CPS Office of Communications. (2017). New freshmen-on-track data shows more CPS students are likely to graduate than ever before. Retrieved March 1, 2020, from https://cps.edu/News/Press_releases/Pages/PR1_08_27_2017.aspx

Davidson K. L. & Frohbieter G. (2011). District adoption and implementation of interim and benchmark assessments (CSE Technical Report 806). CRESST.

10.1177/2332858419858635

Deussen T., 2017, Are two commonly used early warning indicators accurate predictors of dropout for English learner students? Evidence from six districts in Washington state

10.1126/science.1236180

10.1177/016146811311501411

Dukakis K. & Strobel K. R. (2010, March). University and community partners sharing data to improve systems, services and policy. Paper presented at the Society for Research on Adolescence 2010 Biennial Meeting, Philadelphia, PA.

Earl L. M., 1995, Participatory evaluation in education: Studies in evaluation use and organizational learning, 21

10.1007/s10833-016-9291-7

10.3102/0002831218808219

Farrell C. C., 2018, A descriptive study of the IES Researcher–Practitioner Partnerships in Education Research program

10.1177/2332858419849595

10.1177/0013161X16638429

Gallagher H. A., 2019, Learning and practicing continuous improvement: Lessons from the CORE districts

10.1177/2332858419879448

10.1044/2018_PERS-ST-2018-0005

10.1093/police/pau031

10.22230/ijepl.2017v12n4a770

10.1177/016146811912100902

10.1007/s10488-013-0519-z

Haskins R., 2011, Building the connection between policy and evidence: The Obama evidence-based initiatives

Hawkins B., 2019, The 74

Henrick E. C., 2017, Assessing research–practice partnerships: Five dimensions of effectiveness

Henrick E. C., 2018, Systems for instructional improvement: Creating coherence from the classroom to the district office

10.1177/0031721716677258

Hess F. M., 2006, No Child Left Behind

10.1177/016146811311501405

10.3102/0002831217712466

Honig M. I., Venkateswaran N., McNeil P. & Myers-Twitchell P. (2014, April). Research use as learning: The case of fundamental change in school district offices. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Philadelphia, PA.

10.1080/20020317.2017.1314743

Ikemoto G. S., 2010, Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide, 93

10.1080/02671522.2018.1452965

10.1080/0161956X.2017.1324660

Jackson K., 2013, Teacher education and pedagogy: Theory, policy and practice, 80

10.1177/1098214009341660

10.1007/s10857-015-9338-3

10.1080/07370008.2016.1172833

Kelleher M., 2018, Progress and promise: Chicago's nation-leading educational gains

10.1080/10824669.2013.747945

Kochmanski N. M., Henrick E. C. & Cobb P. A. (2015, October). On the development of content-specific practical measures assessing aspects of instruction associated with student learning. Paper presented at Using Continuous Improvement to Integrating Design, Implementation, and Scale Up, Nashville, TN.

10.3102/0162373715576074

10.1080/10824669.2013.745207

Means B., 2009, Implementing data-informed decision making in schools: Teacher access, supports and use

Moeller E., 2018, Practice-driven data: Lessons from Chicago's approach to research, data, and practice in education

National Research Council., 2002, Scientific research in education

National Research Council., 2012, Using science as evidence in public policy

Nayfack M., 2017, Building systems knowledge for continuous improvement: Early lessons from the CORE districts

10.3102/0013189X15570387

10.1080/01619561003688688

10.1080/10508406.2018.1552151

Penuel W. R., 2016, Findings from a national study on research use among school and district leaders

10.1002/sce.21249

Penuel W. R., 2017, Teaching in context: The social side of education reform

10.1177/0895904816673580

Penuel W. R., 2017, Creating research–practice partnerships in education

Penuel W. R., Reiser B. J., Novak M., McGill T., Frumin K., Van Horne K., Sumner T. & Watkins D. A. (2018, April). Using co-design to test and refine a model for three-dimensional science curriculum that connects to students’ interests and experiences. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6_12

10.4135/9781526465542.n28

10.4324/9781315268309-9

10.1007/s10488-011-0368-6

10.1177/1942775118776009

Roderick M., 2009, The Consortium on Chicago School Research: A new model for the role of research in supporting urban school reform

Roderick M., 2014, Preventable failure: Improvements in long-term outcomes when high schools focused on the ninth grade year

10.1080/10824669.2014.988335

10.1177/016146811711900501

10.3102/0002831219854050

Russell J. L., 2013, Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 112, 157

10.4135/9781473998933

Seid H. H. (2016). The practices of action research and its contribution for school improvement in secondary schools of Borena Zone, Oromia Regional State. Unpublished master's thesis, Harayama University, Harayama, Ethiopia.

Shepard L. A., Davidson K. L. & Bowman R. (2011). How middle school mathematics teachers use interim and benchmark assessment data (CSE Technical Report 807). CRESST.

Stuit D., 2016, Identifying early warning indicators in three Ohio school districts

10.1177/2332858419875718

10.3102/0013189X17733965

10.1080/07370008.2016.1169817

10.17763/0017-8055.86.2.233

Weidler-Lewis J., Penuel W. R. & Van Horne K. (2017, April). Developing a measure of teachers’ vision for equitable science teaching and learning. Paper presented at the NARST Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX.