Factors Influencing Educators Capacity to Critically Consume Research

• In Event: Using Research Evidence to Inform Educational Practice: Exploring Teachers’ Skill and Will to Do So

Abstract

Use of research is far from a simple task, and literature suggests it consists of several activities, including search, evaluation, sensemaking in local context, and incorporation (Honig & Coburn, 2008) - what we call critical consumption of research. Extant research suggests that educators may lack both confidence in their research-use abilities including critically interpreting research (Authors, 2022; Hill & Briggs, 2020; Williams & Coles, 2007; Coburn & Talbert, 2006; Supovitz & Klein, 2003). Although research suggests educators’ training and experiences influence engagement with research (Authors, 2023; Biddle & Saha, 2002; Supovitz & Klein, 2003), there has been little inquiry into what kinds of preparation are associated with greater confidence and capacity to use research. The purpose of this paper is to answer the question, What prior experiences contribute to educators capacity to critically consume research and to what extent?

We draw on data from a national study conducted by the Center for Research Use in Education. The Survey of Evidence in Education-Schools (May et al., 2018) was administered to U.S. schools’ between 2018 and 2020, with 4,415 respondents representing 154 schools across 19 states, 21 districts, and 10 charter organizations. Educator capacity to critically consume research is measured through a validated scale (mean= 2.17, sd=0.81, α=.97) consisting of seven dimensions of use rated on a 4-point scale from not at all confident to very confident. We include items capturing potentially relevant experiences that contribute to critical consumption of research suggested by prior literature: years of experience, highest degree attained, research-specific training, and professional experiences in which research was prominent, such as in a research-practice partnership (RPP). We use OLS regression to predict scores on the capacity scale, using R2 and coefficients to assess model fit and explanatory power.

As demonstrated in Appendix 1, all parameters except three (a Master’s degree, being contacted by a researcher 6 or more times, and participation in a professional learning community that engaged with research) are significant at p<0.05, with the overall model achieving an R² of 0.24 and significance of p<.0001. Several factors positively influence teachers’ confidence in research use, the most influential of which include intermediate coursework in research methods or other research courses, an earned doctorate, and to a lesser extent, other research experiences, contact with researchers, and RPPs. Effect sizes range from .2 to .46 SD. Factors negatively contributing to capacity include no research-related training or experiences, as well as years of experience, the latter of which may seem counterintuitive. We speculate this may reflect reliance on experiential expertise or changes in how teachers were prepared over time.

This paper uniquely leverages large scale data on factors that influence educator capacity to use research. Findings reveal high leverage strategies - such as formal research methods training - and provide support for recent evidence-use initiatives such as RPPs. Results also point to variability in educators’ opportunities for preparation related to research use, with 30% reporting no relevant experiences and 47% reporting no specific training. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

Authors

• Ekaterina Bergwall, University of Delaware

• Elizabeth N. Farley-Ripple, University of Delaware