Improving Student Learning A Strategic Plan for Education Research and Its Utilization (1999) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Getting Answers: Designing a Strategic Research Program
3 Getting Answers: Designing a Strategic Research Program
Pages 49-66
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 49... ...
Yet the kind of collaborative creativity that is the key to solving most complex problems including that of improving student learning is as difficult to effect among these separate professional cultures as it is essential (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1973; McLaughlin, 1991b; McDonnell and Elmore, 1991~. This strategic plan envisions building a collaborative effort focused on a small set of very important problems to improve the contribution of scientific knowledge to education.
|
From page 50... ...
Perhaps most striking is that there are no equivalents of pharmaceutical companies to support education research. And an educational intervention is not like a drug or a serum: in education, even when you have a promising intervention, it has to be incorporated into a highly complex social system.
|
From page 51... ...
is the insight that complex social problems can only be effectively addressed through interdisciplinary research. Yet both academic structures and incentive systems and federal funding mechanisms militate against sustained investigations that transcend disciplinary boundaries.
|
From page 52... ...
If successful interdisciplinary collaboration requires researchers to adapt to one another's professional culture, intellectual traditions, and analytical methods and the MacArthur experience shows that this is not easy, then how much more challenging it will be to create successful collaborations of scientists, practitioners, and policy makers. It is, nevertheless, essential if the potential of education research to improve practice is to be realized.
|
From page 53... ...
The committee accorded a special status to the utilization network. While all of the networks will be committed to promoting and studying the use of research findings relevant to the hub questions, this network will try to develop general principles for theory and practical guidance on how to remove barriers and facilitate the use of research knowledge in education practice.
|
From page 54... ...
The network as a whole would work together to design and evaluate projects that advance the network objectives, solving problems and maximizing the chances for impact on the network's hub questions. Between network meetings, the members would communicate regularly by telephone and computer communications and work as needed in subgroups with task forces on specific projects.
|
From page 55... ...
Each network will track specific cases concerning its hub question but will also plan joint work with the utilization network to identify and address potential barriers or facilitators.
|
From page 56... ...
Assessing the State of the Art Quarterly network meetings will serve as forums, where core members would present, discuss, and assess research, policies, and programs related to the network's hub question. These meetings would also serve as planning sessions for activities aimed at expanding knowledge or increasing its utilization on the hub question.
|
From page 57... ...
Network members would contribute articles based on network projects to professional journals and make presentations at conferences. Technology offers important opportunities, and the growing popularity of the Internet suggests the possibility of creating not just web pages devoted to network activities, but also databases for educators (theory-based curricular materials)
|
From page 58... ...
For example, networks might establish task forces to develop human resources, data banks, or survey instruments intended to extend beyond the life span of SERP. These might include: · workshops cosponsored by professional associations (e.g., American Federation of Teachers, the National Education Association, the International Reading Association, the National Association of Elementary School Principals, the Council of Chief State School Officers, the National Governor's Association)
|
From page 59... ...
Do the federal procurement regulations afford the flexibility needed to empower the thoughtful research managers so vital to the success of SERP? Would a consortium of foundations be a more likely alternative?
|
From page 60... ...
The entire question of governance requires more thought and discussion by the interested parties, with particular attention to arrangements that will promote the coherence of the overall program and its ability to build cumulatively on the ongoing work. S E R P G O V E R N ~ N G B O A R D To maintain the strategic nature of SERP, the host organization will need to establish a governing board to function as a policy board and also have coalition-building and development responsibilities.
|
From page 61... ...
Among its policy activities, the board would: · develop and refine the SERP mission and mandate; · establish criteria for selecting and evaluating network personnel, select network directors; · develop criteria for reviewing proposals and reports, upper and Tower limits for the duration of networks, the number of network members and amount of honoraria for each, the percent of salaried time for the network directors and central staff, and the proportion of expenditures for administrative and substantive aspects of the program; · assess the progress of the overall program at specified intervals, using independent reviews as needed, and correcting its course as needed; and · promote strong linkages among the networks to assure the overall coherence of SERP. The Board and the Networks The governing board would work with each of the networks in three ways: appointing the network director, reviewing each network's plans and allocating financial support, and assessing progress for each network.
|
From page 62... ...
In defining the relationship between the networks and the host organization, a careful balance needs to be struck between flexibilit~v and coherence. The governing board and its staff would need to promote coherence and integration of the network activities so that together they advance the SERP mission.
|
From page 63... ...
The committee strongly recommends that, if the program is implemented, it be done with the expectation that SERP will continue for at least 15 years 2 preparatory years, 12 years of operation for four networks, and a final year devoted to completing projects and ensuring that the impetus continues for using the best knowIedge in education practice. (See timeline on page 65.)
|
From page 64... ...
We call upon the federal government, and in particular the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation, major foundations whose mission includes improving education, state and local education leaders, and education research organizations to join in this year of dialogue to see if, together, we can transform the SERP idea into a productive collaboration to use the power of science to improve education in the United States.
|
From page 65... ...
Boarcl staff to commission papers, hold workshops to "auclition" potential chairs, identify potential network members, develop the initial documents that will seed the work of the four networks Boarcl develops funding sources · Boarcl appoints chair of each network, works with chairs to identify network membership · SERP website is created · Four network framing documents are published · Networks prepare first annual synthesis document (year 3) · Networks develop strategic plans (year 3)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.