Urban Regimes, Intermediary Organization Networks, and Research Use: Patterns Across Three School Districts

• In Event: 31.052 - Advocacy Networks and Intermediaries in Educational Policy: Local, National, and Global Perspectives

Abstract

This paper is part of a larger study focused on the role of networks in disseminating research evidence on “incentivist” policies — namely charter schools and teacher pay-for-performance — to policymakers [IDENTIFYING INFORMATION REMOVED, 2001]. Researchers have known for some time that evidence is not always the primary consideration in policy discussions, particularly in education policymaking. But at the same time, some prominent funders have gone through extraordinary lengths to produce evidence — while also aligning media, advocacy organizations and other elements of the policy discussion apparatus — in order to increase the chances that their desired policy agendas will advance. Two prominent examples of this are the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) study (Kane, McCaffrey, Miller, & Staiger, 2013); and the 2009 and 2013 CREDO/Stanford studies on charter school outcomes, both funded by philanthropic organizations trying to promote particular reforms in American education (although, interestingly, the initial CREDO findings were seen by many as undercutting the funders’ pro-charter school agenda).

In view of the importance placed on these studies, and their consequent usefulness for illustrating how advocacy networks can advance evidence in education policymaking, the following research questions will be addressed: 1.) What have been the responses in both the academic literature and a sub-sample of policy-related blogs to two studies, the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) study, and the 2009 and 2013 CREDO/Stanford studies on charter school outcomes? 2.) Are there identifiable networks in the blogosphere and/or academic community that are interpreting and disseminating the studies in different ways? 3.) What can interview data drawn from three cities where the two reforms were implemented reveal about perceptions of the usefulness and validity of the studies?

The paper’s conceptual framework builds on that of Goldie et al. (2014)’s bibliometric analysis of vouchers, but broadens it by incorporating systematically collected blog data as well as selected interview data. For the 2009 CREDO study, there is approximately three and a half years of blog data, for MET, two and a half years, and for the 2013 CREDO study, one and a half years. Blog data were coded for their mention of the studies, links to reports, and nature of the commentary on the blog. In addition, coded mentions of the studies in over 250 interviews conducted with organization leaders and policymakers provide a third source of information of how and whether reform leaders in three cities (New Orleans, New York, and Denver) perceive the treatment of the studies’ usefulness and relevance to policy decisions, including sub-studies from CREDO that focus on specific states. Our analyses of the uptake of these influential studies sheds some light on the potential of advocacy networks to advance evidence in undergirding specific agendas, while also showing how other research reports typically do not enjoy the same degree of support.

Authors

• Janelle T. Scott, University of California - Berkeley

• Elizabeth H. DeBray, University of Georgia

• Christopher A. Lubienski, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

• Priya Goel La Londe, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

• Elise Castillo, University of California - Berkeley

• Stephen Owens, University of Georgia - Athens