Leading the use of research and evidence in schools

Bridging the GapCanons Park 12 November@DrGaryJonesJones.gary@gmail.comhttp://evidencebasededucationalleadership.blogspot.com

EVANS, D. 2003. Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. Journal of clinical nursing, 12, 77-84.

+BROWN, C. (ed.) 2015. “Conclusion’ in Leading the use of research & evidence in schools: IOE Press. Does you approach to research and evidence use

demonstrate your commitment as well as facilitate the efforts of others?

Does your own approach to research and evidence use have buy-in throughout the school?

Does your approach to research and evidence use have teacher learning and practice at its core?

Does your approach to research and evidence use ‘start with the end in mind’ and ensure that progress towards this end is tracked?

Does your approach to research and evidence ensure that the right people are in the room?

+Does you approach to research and evidence use demonstrate your commitment as well as facilitate the efforts of others?

Vision Resources Structure Time Space Integral part of your role - Modelling, mentoring and

coaching

+Brown, C and Zhang, D (2016) How can school leaders establish evidence-informed schools: An analysis of potential school policy levers, Educational Management Administration and Leadership 1 – 20 40 primary schools Surveyed 696 practitioners Data analysed potentially

successful strategies for the promotion of use of evidence

The existence of teacher capacity to engage in and with research and data;

School cultures that are attuned to evidence use;

Schools promoting the use of research as part of an effective learning environment (professional learning communities);

The existence of effective structures, system and and resource that facilitate research-use and the sharing of best practice.  

+Brown, C and Zhang, D (2016) How can school leaders establish evidence-informed schools: An analysis of potential school policy levers, Educational Management Administration and Leadership 1 – 20 What is key is, however, is that these solutions do not

appear to be either resource intense or complex to implement relating as they do to school leaders to:

1) promote the vision for evidence-use (that is, encourage its use);

2) engage in actions such as ‘modelling’ , ‘monitoring’ and ‘mentoring and coaching’ in order to demonstrate how evidence can be employed to improve issues of teaching and learning;

3) establish effective learning environments in which learning conversations around the use of evidence can flourish. (p15)

+

+Distinguishing between types of inquiry Pseudo-inquiry takes place where there is not a

commitment to open-mindedness and has the surface characteristics of inquiry, it is not driven by a desire to learn.

Genuine inquiry requires conversations to be motivated (either consciously or unconsciously) by a desire to learn and to be drive by a stance of open-mindedness (p884)

+Barriers to genuine inquiry

Cognitive biases Confirmation bias Attribution bias

Perceptions of risk Relationship Being challenged

Interpersonal skills Too concerned with what next

+Open Learning Conversations

Describe your point of view without assuming its truth Describe what your point of view is based on Invite the other’s point of views Paraphrase the the other’s point of view and check Detect and check important assumptions Establish common ground Make a plan to get what you both want

Weak evidence culture School leadership evidence culture

Whole-school evidence culture

No dedicated time to engage with research evidence

Dedicated time for senior leaders

Dedicated time for all staff groups

Narrow culture focused on immediate imperatives

Open learning culture, focus on longer term goals

Inconsistent and/or low levels of engagements with research evidence across the schools

Senior leaders filter research evidence

All staff or most staff engages in and access research evidence directly

Few staff motivated, skilled and confident in engaging with research

Senior leaders motivated, skilled and confident in engaging with research

All or most staff motivated, skilled and confident in engaging with evidence

Support structures - reading groups, research projects, learning communities – limited or unavailable

Support structures in places- reading groups, research projects, learning communities – that all staff are invited to engage in research

Support structures in places- reading groups, research projects, learning communities – that all staff are expected to engage in research

No or very limited policiies and guidance on engaging with research evidence

Informal policies and guidance on engaging with research evidence

Clear formal policies and guidance on engaging with evidence

Few or no research-related relationships with other schools and external organisations

School leader research-related relationships with other schools and external organisations

Research related relationships with other schools and external organisations across the school

Coldwell, Greany, Higgins et al forthcoming

+Evidence of effects (evidence use outcome) Interventions facilitating access to research evidence,

conditional on the intervention design simultaneously trying to enhance decision-makers’ opportunity and motivation to use evidence (reliable evidence)

Interventions building decision-makers’ skills to access and make sense of evidence conditional on the intervention design simultaneously trying to enhance both capability and motivation to use research evidence (reliable evidence).

Interventions that foster changes to decision-making structures and processes by formalising and embedding one or more of the other mechanisms of change within existing structures and processes ( (cautious evidence)

+Evidence of no effects Interventions that take a passive approach to communicating

evidence that only provide opportunities to use evidence (reliable evidence).

Multi-component interventions that take a passive approach to building EIDM skills (such as seminars and ‘communities of practice’ without active educational components) (cautious evidence).

Skill-building interventions applied at a low intensity (such as a once-off, half a day capacity-building programme) (cautious evidence).

Overall, unstructured interaction and collaboration between decision-makers and researchers tended to have a lower likelihood of success. However, clearly defined, light-touch approaches to facilitating interaction between researchers and decision- makers, engagement in particular, were effective to increase intermediate CMO outcomes (cautious evidence).

+Absence of evidence

Interventions building awareness of, and positive attitudes towards, EIDM.

Interventions building agreement on policy-relevant questions and what constitutes fit-for-purpose evidence.

+

@DrGaryJonesjones.gary@gmail.comhttp://evidencebasededucationalleadership.blogspot.com