Sharing Research Results in Research-Practice Partnership Meetings: A Comparative Analysis of Swiss and US Contexts (Poster 6)

• In Event: Bridging the Gap: Enhancing Research Use in Research-Practice Partnerships Based Across the Globe

Abstract

Objectives
Research-practice partnerships are gaining international attention and offer a promising strategy for educational improvement (Farrell et al., 2021). RPPs aim to address urgent problems and iteratively refine practice based on research (Coburn & Penuel, 2016; Henrick et al., 2023). Meanwhile, there is a relatively small research base on the day-to-day workings of RPPs (Lai et al., 2020) and notably, what transpires when research results are shared with partners. In this paper, we provide a comparative analysis of RPP meetings in Switzerland and the US addressing: How is research presented to RPP partners, and how do they respond? What differences are observed across contexts?

Perspective
RPPs emphasize relevant research that is designed for impact (Penuel et al., 2017). Research can have instrumental and/or conceptual uses (Biesta, 2007; Beywl et al., 2015). Instrumental research has clear, practical aims (Biesta, 2007; Penuel et al., 2017), whereas conceptually-oriented research involves “helping educational practitioners to…see and imagine their practice differently” (Biesta, 2007, p. 18). We examine how research use plays out in RPPs by using a practice theoretical approach (Reckwitz, 2002; Schatzki, 2019), where “bundles of practices and arrangements are the central unit of conceptuality and analysis” (Schatzki, 2019, p. 27). Discourse is a specific observational category of practice (Reckwitz, 2016). In this paper, we analyze practices in RPP meetings in Swiss and US contexts to examine how research results are shared and how partners respond.

Methods
This qualitative study focuses on data gathered in observations of meetings in two RPPs (one Swiss, one US) over three years. The meetings involved researcher and practitioner partners, and students in the Swiss case. The RPPs are oriented around different topics but share a focus on improving instruction and the engagement of participants in defining the work. Observational data gathered in RPP meetings (i.e. audio- and video recordings and protocols) were analyzed using MAXQDA coding software. In analyzing the data, we focused on how results were shared; how meetings were designed, and the interpretations and conclusions discussed.

Results
Dialogue around research results in RPPs resulted in unique patterns related to context. Swiss RPP partners co-created a survey, collecting feedback from students and teachers about a new learning setting over three years. Results were first examined by a core team of educators and researchers, and selected results were shared with students in workshops. The results of those discussions had a practical outcome: standards for how to implement the new learning setting school-wide. The impact of research in the US case was more conceptual, with researchers presenting results in a more typical way and inviting teachers to reflect on their practice. Teachers brought their own observations to bear and provided suggestions for future research.

Significance
Understanding how research results are shared and taken up in RPP meetings is important given the aim of RPPs to influence educational improvement. This study points to some differences by national context, with a more co-constructed, practical approach in the Swiss case which may relate to broader dialogues about research relevance in education.

Authors

• Amanda L. Datnow, University of California - San Diego

• Enikoe Zala Mezoe, Zurich University of Teacher Education