Recent efforts to improve the quality and availability of scientific research in education, coupled with increased expectations for the use of research in practice, demand new ways of thinking about connections between research and practice. The conceptual framework presented in this paper argues that increasing research in educational decision-making cannot be simplified to an issue of dissemination or of motivating practitioners to access evidence-based research but rather is a bidirectional problem in which characteristics of both the research and practice communities must be understood and addressed in order to strengthen ties between research and practice in education.

The current educational policy climate in the USA places immense pressure on school district central offices to use evidence to inform their decisions in order to improve student learning. In light of both the expectations of evidence-based decision making and the significance of central offices in supporting teaching and learning, there is considerably little understanding of whether, how and why central office decision makers use research evidence to support educational decisions. Through an embedded case study of Hamilton School District and three central office decisions, this research examines the role of research in central office decisions, focusing on how research is used, what research resources are used and the factors that influence use. Evidence of limited instrumental and political uses of research in comparison to conceptual and symbolic use, preferences for practitioner-oriented resources, and the importance of research attributes, organizational context and culture, and decision-maker characteristics are presented. Findings suggest a need for strategies to improve instrumental use, including reconsidering the production and dissemination of research, facilitating the flow of knowledge within the central office, and further examination of conceptual uses of research.

This study examines the gender gap in financial literacy by using the Financial Literacy Assessment from the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). The analysis focuses on the influence of parents on their children's understanding of financial concepts, utilizing multilevel modeling procedures to examine variance among students, within schools, and within countries. Based on data from 18 countries, results suggest that a gender gap in financial knowledge favoring male high school students is present and that parents may influence their children's financial knowledge.

The use of research evidence (URE) in policy and practice is relevant to many academic disciplines, as well as policy and practice domains. Although there has been increased attention to how such evidence is used, those engaged in scholarship and practice in this area face challenges in advancing the field. This paper attempts to “map the field” with the objective of provoking conversation about where we are and what we need to move forward. Utilizing survey data from scholars, practitioners, and funders connected to the study of the use of research evidence, we explore the extent to which URE work span traditional boundaries of research, practice, and policy, of different practice/policy fields, and of different disciplines. Descriptive and network analyses point to the boundary spanning and multidisciplinarity of this community, but also suggest exclusivity, as well as fragmentation among disciplines and literatures on which this work builds. We conclude with opportunities for to improve the connectedness, inclusiveness, relationship to policy and practice, and sustainability of URE scholarship.

Policy expectations for the role of research evidence in educational decision-making have grown exponentially in the U.S. and globally, yet there has been limited attention to school capacity to engage in evidence-informed improvement. In this paper, I address this gap by first conceptualizing principal leadership for evidence use and, second, use this conceptual lens to examine large-scale survey data about school evidence use practices and capacity. Drawing on data from a national survey of more than 4000 educators in 134 schools in the US, I explore school practices and capacity to use research and surface opportunities and needs for principal leadership in evidence-informed improvement. Findings suggest that there is an opportunity to improve the role of research in school improvement decision-making, and that principals may contribute to school capacity in specific ways that relate to developing human capital, influencing culture, leveraging resources, and shaping decision-making. Data reveal moderate evidence of research use in agenda setting and of organizational routines that support research use, but lack of uptake of those routines for research use as well as limited investment in resources (e.g., time). Further, decision-making was distributed across a wide range of improvement initiatives, with evidence of a lack of clarity about goals. Although principals report confidence and experience with using research, overall school staff also reported limited experience with prior research, including coursework or participation in research, and low confidence in critically consuming research. Implications point to the need to strengthen principals’ own evidence use capacity as well as focus on dimensions school capacity as part of evidence use initiatives. Recommendations suggest strategies for developing principals’ knowledge and skills around leadership for evidence-informed improvement.

Test-based accountability policy in the US has resulted in increased availability and use of assessment systems to support instructional decision making. Though limited, literature to date suggests an important role for these systems as tools, mediating teacher knowledge and action. We examine system log data from NWEA’s MAP assessment to better understand how and when educators use the system, report features valued by educators, and patterns of use at the individual, school, and district levels. Findings reveal limited engagement with the system, occurring primarily around testing windows with a small subset of reports. We describe the features of those reports as well as how those features relate to use across the school year. We also find use is primarily an individualized practice, with little variability in use accounted for among schools and districts. We conclude with implications for research as well as local policy and practice.