Connecting Supply-Side and Demand-Side Users to Accelerated Education Innovation and Improvement

• In Event: Representation, Access, and Engagement: Exploring Problems of Knowledge/Use in Practice and Research

Abstract

Purpose
This presentation shares the results of an intermediary-led effort to mobilize knowledge between practitioner contexts in order to accelerate education innovation and improvement. The successful completion of this project required us to explore:
What knowledge regarding innovative education practice (supply) must be communicated, and how can that knowledge best be represented, so those who need it (demand) can access, understand, and use it?

In order to address this question, we developed hypotheses regarding what content to share and how best to share it. We then tested these with a sample of content and practitioners who have a demand for it.

Perspective
The term “intermediary” is commonly used to describe organizations that are situated between implementers (e.g. schools) and researchers or policy makers (Cooper & Shewchuk, 2015; Honing, 2004; Neal, Neal & Britzman, 2022). A key challenge intermediaries tackle is the mobilization of knowledge between groups. While research related to intermediaries’ roles in research to policy (Honing, 2004; Ness, 2012) and research to practice mobilization (Cooper, 2014; Malin, 2021; Malin & Brown, 2020) is more extensive, less effort has been devoted to understanding how intermediaries can support mobilization between practitioners.

We utilized our experience supporting school transformation, along with literature on program design, evaluation, implementation, and scaling (Blase and Fixsen, 2013; Elmore, 1979; Hall & Hord, 2006) to inform the following hypotheses about mobilizing knowledge between practitioner contexts:
1. A specific grain size of innovation (a “model”), which consists of various practices, resources, and structures, is powerful for school-to-school knowledge mobilization; it is substantive (not too small) but also transferable (not too big).
2. It’s essential to share three elements of a model: intended outcomes, stakeholder activities, and supporting resources and structures.
3. Descriptive information is inspiring, yet users need additional support for implementation.
4. A single source for information on many models will help users find what is right for their context.

Methods
In order to test these hypotheses we engaged in:
● Interviews and document analysis related to 20 models.
● Prototyping of content and a web-based platform to mobilize knowledge on models.
● Observations of 30 individuals using the platform followed by semi-structured interviews.

Findings
We found that:
● Models are compelling to demand side users and the supply is extensive. Yet, there is huge variation in scope and complexity across existing models.
● In addition to outcomes, activities, and supporting resources and structures, sharing guiding principles underpinning a model makes tacit assumptions explicit and provides guardrails for adaptation.
● Access to implementation supports set this knowledge mobilization effort apart from others.
● Users expected a “rigorous curation of knowledge” and sought more transparency regarding selection as well as more comparison of models.

Significance
This project supports that intermediaries have a role to play in practitioner-to-practitioner knowledge mobilization and “models” are a viable package of knowledge. It also suggests a common schema regarding the core elements of a model. However, more work is needed to clarify the upper and lower boundaries of what constitutes a “model.”

Author

• Cynthia Louise Leck, Transcend Education
  Presenting Author