Combating Systematic Research Inequality: Recommendations and Progress for Increasing Equitable Research Evidence

• In Event: A Call to Re-IMAGINE Mixed-Methods Research in the Black Lives Matter Era

Abstract

The importance of ethnic diversity of study participants is well established in the medical, social science, and education fields but more work is needed. Currently, concern revolves around the inclusion of racial diversity, within study populations, in reporting of results, and diversity of authors and reviewers of research. Beyond an initial inclusion and equity concern, we posit that a mixed methods approach to research and evaluation brings a unique contribution, and opportunity, to furthering inclusion of all students in educational research. In the recent Black Lives Matter special issue of the International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, the authors posit recommendations that directly address the call for action of the research and evaluation community to be responsive to diversity challenges. Our recommendations were generated in response to the Institute of Education Sciences’s (IES) call for action “Acting on Diversity” (2020, p. 1), wherein Mark Schneider, Director of IES, asked researchers to address racial/cultural/gender/regional bias as “not just moral imperative – but a legal one” and noted that “IES leadership is trying to identify what we can do…”.

The first recommendation included the (a) call for more thorough reporting of study population racial diversity within the What Works Clearinghouse, (b) creation of additional funding structures within IES that create opportunity for multiple research approach studies and potentially enhance racial diversity (in studies, study topics, researchers, and reviewers), and (c) development of metrics to assess progress in addressing racial diversity goals over time. The second recommendation—particularly relevant to our supposition that mixed methods offers a key opportunity to support inclusion and equity in research and evaluation—is that IES develop a targeted funding category which, if created, could support the efficient and rapid development of more diverse intervention evidence and culturally appropriate and sensitive programs. This category is envisioned as existing within the current Education Research and Methods grants programs, within IES, in the Department of Education: the National Center for Education Research and the National Center for Special Education Research. We also posit that a similarly-focused funding opportunity could exist in grant funding structures across many federal programs.

The theory is if we rely on the development of new programs and interventions as the impetus for conducting causal studies with diverse samples, evidence will be slower in coming to the forefront. If the research community’s attention is drawn to considering existing programs, policies, and interventions that only require adaptation, revision, refinement, and/or the development of additional components rather than new program development, this process might be expedited.

In this symposium, the authors will revisit the recommendations and discuss progress to date that has been observed since the writing of the article. Also, we will discuss in detail how mixed methods can serve as the vehicle to drive the second recommendation of the targeted funding category and how such methods should be present in the grant program more prominently. The authors will note where more work needs to be undertaken and provide updated thoughts on revised recommendations to continue moving forward.

Authors

• Lauren Elizabeth Decker-Woodrow, Westat

• Donald Barfield, Westat, Inc.