Strategic Forum for Research in Education

 

Key questions considered at Forum III (17th and 18th March 2010, Edinburgh)

Is there a strategy for educational R&D impact in each relevant educational sector – with clear understanding of what counts as basic and applied research and of forms of development by practitioners and others – and the funding streams and organisational infrastructures to support these activities?

• Why is the impact of education research important, to whom, for what purposes?
• How is the impact of education research knowledge currently being promoted? What are the challenges being faced by processes and initiatives aimed at increasing the impact of education research?
• How can co-ordination and communication among the different existent strategies be improved? How could we get more value from them in different country and sector contexts?
• How are the countries’ research and development work linked to appropriate international networks, centres and activities focussed on research knowledge impact?

Synopsis of discussions at SFRE III

By and large, the rationale for investing in research mediation is to increase the likelihood of achieving impact. Predictably, discussions around impact at SFRE III overlapped with those about mediation. Effective communication, the role of champions of research, and that of good leadership in the use of evidence from practitioner and higher-education-led research were common themes in both sets of discussions. Some of the tensions identified above in relation to mediation also surfaced in relation to impact; in particular, the tension between shaping research interpretation to current policy issues, and maintaining academic integrity.

It is important to distinguish between forward-looking and backward-looking impact considerations. Strategies for educational research impact in the UK should aim to promote potential impact, to support current use of evidence in practice, and to create enabling conditions for further engagement with research evidence among practitioners and other relevant constituencies. Reporting and measuring accurately and consistently the actual impact achieved and its sustainability are distinct, unresolved issues for assessment policies and for evaluation research. Many of these impact-related activities are not, at the moment, adequately resourced.

Impact is not a clear-cut concept. At system level, participants suggested that impact could encompass, for example, changes in practice, changes in policy, institutional changes, as well as enhanced public debate and increased public awareness of important issues. Some of these areas could be defined as research application; others, as diffusion of knowledge; others, as challenging established ways of thinking and acting; yet others, as contributions to informed practical judgment.  At individual level, in practice and policy, research evidence, however strong, rigorous, and effectively communicated, does not simply compel to action, but is filtered through judgments about aims and values, and balanced against other forms of evidence and incentives to action. Dialogue and partnership throughout the research process may enable shifts in the language used in public debates, and in the assumptions shaping the use of research evidence, which may have implications for both the individual and the systemic levels. Simply bringing people together in a genuine conversation may, however, be difficult, given the particular constraints within which each community with an interest in education research operates. Therefore, initiatives such as the SFRE have an important role to play in establishing connections on which future developments may build.

Further discussion of knowledge application and impact is available in the SFRE III Report and in the SFRE Final Report.