Having been a part of both the research and policy communities, I can say with even greater confidence that, while the daily activities and priorities of education researchers and policymakers or practitioners may be different, their ultimate goals are remarkably similar.
Community-based mixed-methods research can be especially valuable in identifying and understanding strategies to reduce inequality in youth outcomes.
This two-part special issue focuses on strategies to improve the use of research in child welfare.
How do we increase diversity in STEM fields? A recent Foundation study found that when teachers support students’ feelings of autonomy, it increases their interest and engagement in science classes. This is especially true for black and Latino students, who are typically underrepresented in STEM fields.
Research can serve the public interest when it is used to inform decisions. But for researchers at all levels of the career ladder, getting your work used in ways that shape policy and practice can be a challenge.
Reflecting on the odds of upward mobility in light of a widening opportunity gap in the United States, Harvard’s Robert Putnam states simply: “Any notion that you can ‘pull yourself up by your boot straps’ sounds ridiculous now.”
New Resources for Researchers: Read the “William T. Grant Digest” Issue 1
The introductory issue of the William T. Grant Foundation Digest features essays and commentary on the value of qualitative and mixed-methods research in reducing inequality and the potential for researcher access to big data to yield useful research evidence.
It’s important to recognize that the form of research contributes to the social sense-making process, and can create a body of shared understandings based on research principles. Research designed for use, with specific guidance for practice, can embed common ideas in state school improvement delivery systems.