Neal Jennifer Watling, Mills Kristen J, McAlindon Kathryn, Neal Zachary P, Lawlor Jennifer A
Department of Psychology, Michigan State University.
Educ Adm Q. 2019 Feb;55(1):154-181. doi: 10.1177/0013161X18785867. Epub 2018 Jun 26.
We apply diffusion of innovations theory to examine two key research questions designed to inform efforts to improve the research-practice gap in education: (1) Are there distinct types of educators that differ in their prioritization of the compatibility, observability, complexity, relative advantage, and trialability of research? and (2) Are educators' roles or context associated with their categorization in this typology?
Using semi-structured interview data in two Michigan counties from intermediate school district staff (N=24), district central office staff (N=18), principals (N=22), and school building staff (N=23), we first used directed content analysis to code for mentions of compatibility, observability, complexity, relative advantage, and trialability. Next, using the coded data, we conducted a hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis and follow-up cross-tabulations to assess whether cluster memberships were associated with educators' roles or county context.
Educators in our sample could be categorized in one of five clusters distinguished primarily by different patterns of prioritization of the compatibility, observability, and complexity of research. Membership in these clusters did not vary by role but did vary by county, suggesting the importance of context for educators' perceptions of research.
These findings suggest that narrowing the research-practice gap in education will require attending to multiple audiences of educators with distinct priorities that guide their perceptions and use of educational research and evidence-based practices.
我们应用创新扩散理论来研究两个关键的研究问题,旨在为缩小教育领域研究与实践差距的努力提供信息:(1)是否存在不同类型的教育工作者,他们在对研究的兼容性、可观察性、复杂性、相对优势和可试验性的优先级排序上存在差异?以及(2)教育工作者的角色或背景是否与他们在这种类型学中的分类相关?
利用密歇根州两个县的中学学区工作人员(N = 24)、学区中心办公室工作人员(N = 18)、校长(N = 22)和学校建筑工作人员(N = 23)的半结构化访谈数据,我们首先使用定向内容分析法对兼容性、可观察性、复杂性、相对优势和可试验性的提及进行编码。接下来,使用编码后的数据,我们进行了层次凝聚聚类分析和后续的交叉制表,以评估聚类成员资格是否与教育工作者的角色或县背景相关。
我们样本中的教育工作者可以分为五个聚类中的一类,主要区别在于对研究的兼容性、可观察性和复杂性的优先级排序模式不同。这些聚类中的成员资格在角色上没有差异,但在县之间存在差异,这表明背景对于教育工作者对研究的认知很重要。
这些发现表明,缩小教育领域的研究与实践差距将需要关注具有不同优先级的多个教育工作者群体,这些优先级指导着他们对教育研究和循证实践的认知和使用。