1. Policy Research and Practice in Education
Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Cheema
Assistant Professor in Teaching of Economics
Malwa Central College of Education for Women, Ludhiana

2. What the talk will cover:
The rationale for maximising research use;
How research influences policy and practice;
Improving the use of current evidence – building capacity in policy-making & the profession;
Building a higher quality evidence base for the future – investing in quality research;
Assessing research and its impact.

3. What is Policy?
Policy is a formal documented statement of intentions and sets of actions of an authority to either remove certain deficiencies or improve the conditions in any particular area of concern such as housing shortage, food crises, water contamination, growing poverty and low quality of education etc.
It could either be a part of an overall development policy and strategy of the country could be a specific document addressing a particular issue i.e. Food Security Policy, Poverty Reduction Strategy, National Housing Policy, Climate Change Policy and Education.

5. WHAT IS RESEARCH?
The systematic, rigorous investigation of a situation or problem in order to generate new knowledge or validate existing knowledge.

7. POLICY RESEARCH
Research which is aimed either o evaluate the feasibility and viability of research or to provide data and other support to policy makers to form a policy to address specific problem in an efficient way by taking care of all concerns of stakeholders.

8. History of Policy planning in Education
The policy institution India has its origin dating back to 1962 when the UNESCO established the Asian Regional Centre for Educational Planners(ARCES), Administrators and Supervisors with its nomenclature changing to Asian Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (AIEPA) in 1965.
The AIEPA was later merged with the National Staff College for Educational Planners and Administrators as its Asian Programmes Division in 1973.

9. History
Subsequently, with increasing role and functions of the National Staff College, particularly in capacity building, research and professional support services to the state governments, it was rechristened as the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) in 1979.

10. History
In recognition of the pioneering work done by the organization in the field of educational planning and administration, the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India has empowered it to award degrees by conferring on it the status of 'Deemed to be University' in August 2006 under Section- 3 of the UGC Act, 1956.
Like any Central University, NUEPA is fully maintained by the Government of India. The National University is a premier organization dealing with capacity building and research in planning and management of education not only in India but also in South Asia.

11. Role and Function of NUEPA
NUEPA is actively engaged in teaching, research and advisory services in the areas of educational policy, planning and administration. The core activities of the University include:
Providing leadership in reforming educational policy, planning and management at all tiers of the education system and structures;
Shaping the research agenda and undertaking, aiding, promoting and coordinating research in various aspects of educational policy, planning and administration;

12. Role and Function
Developing specialized human resources in the areas of educational policy, planning and administration through its inter-disciplinary interventions, especially advanced level teaching and research;
Assessing and analyzing emerging trends in educational development and identifying emerging challenges in educational planning and management to facilitate formulation of appropriate policy options and state- specific programmatic interventions;
Providing technical support to Central and State Governments in educational policy and planning;
Organizing professional development programmes in educational planning and administration for education professionals of the country;

13. Role and Function
Developing expertise among young scholars through programmes of M. Phil. and Ph. D., as well as other capacity- building activities;
Conducting research in all aspects of school and higher education;
Extending advisory services to national and international organizations;
Functioning as a clearing house for dissemination of knowledge and information;
and Providing a forum for exchange of ideas and experiences among policy makers, planners, administrators and academics.

14. Principal Functions
Research, evaluation, analysis and consultation on youth related policies
Promoting cooperation for youth development between government sectors and civil, as well as among academic fields
Supporting and consulting non-governmental youth related organizations

15. Activities Basic Surveys Policy Research and Development
NUEPA provides basic statistical data for educational research and policy through comprehensive surveys and research on status of education, values and attitudes.
Policy Research and Development
NUEPA performs policy-oriented researches to contribute to the development of national and local policies for Education.
Policy Evaluation and Consulting
NUEPA analyzes and evaluates the effect of Education policies. It develops evaluation models for analyzing the effect of national and local policies for Education.

16. Activities Exchange and Collaboration
NUEPA builds a collaboration system through the exchange of scholars and programs with institutes and agencies related to education inside and outside the country.
Providing Data for Policies and Research
NUEPA provides policy-related information presenting the direction of youth research and policy development through seminars and conferences.
Supporting Training Activities
NUEPA operates qualification system and training course for youth workers. It also develops and supplies youth activity programs and provides information service for youths and youth workers.

17. NEED OF POLICY RESEARCH

18. Need of Policy Research
What You Need to Know
What You Need to Do
How to Do It
Political Context
Who are the key policy makers?
Is there a demand for research and new ideas among them?
What is the policy-making environment (i.e., structures, processes, legal and policy framework)?
What are the opportunities and timing for input into formal processes?
Get to know the policy makers, their agendas, and their constraints.
Identify potential supporters and opponents.
Keep an eye on the horizon and prepare for opportunities in regular policy processes.
Look out for, and react to, unexpected policy windows.
Work with policy makers.
Seek commissions.
Line up research programs with high profile policy events.
Reserve resources to be able to move quickly to respond to policy windows.
Allow sufficient time and resources.

19. Need of Policy Research
What You Need to Know
What You Need to Do
How to Do It
Evidence
What is the current theory?
What are the prevailing narratives?
How divergent is the new evidence?
What sort of evidence will convince policy makers?
Establish credibility over the long term.
Provide practical solutions to problems.
Establish legitimacy.
Build a convincing case and present clear policy options.
Package new ideas in familiar theory or narratives.
Communicate effectively.
Build up programs of high-quality work.
Action-research and pilot projects to demonstrate benefits of new approaches.
Use participatory approaches to help with legitimacy and implementation.
Establish a clear strategy for communication from the start.
Conduct face-to-face communication.
Source: Overseas Development Institute

20. Need of Policy Research
What You Need to Know
What You Need to Do
How to Do It
Links
Who are the key stakeholders?
What links and networks exist between them?
Who are the intermediaries and what influence do they have?
Whose side are they on?
Get to know the other stakeholders.
Establish a presence in existing networks.
Build coalitions with like-minded stakeholders.
Build new policy networks.
Forge partnerships between researchers, policy makers, and policy end users.
Identify key networkers and salesmen.
Use informal contacts.
Source: Overseas Development Institute

21. Need of Policy Research
What You Need to Know
What You Need to Do
How to Do It
External Influences
Who are the main international actors in the policy process?
What influence do they have?
What are their aid priorities?
What are their research priorities and mechanisms?
What are the policies of the donors funding the research?
Get to know the donors, their priorities, and their constraints.
Identify potential supporters, key individuals, and networks.
Establish credibility.
Keep an eye on donor policy and look out for policy windows.
Develop extensive background on donor policies.
Orient communications to suit donor priorities and language.
Try to work with the donors and seek commissions.
Contact key individuals regularly.
Source: Overseas Development Institute

22. The 4E’s or Needs of good policy
Economy -value for money and delivering the required service on budget, on time and within other resource constraints
Efficiency- getting an acceptable return on the money and resources invested in a service.
Effectiveness - extent to which the organisation delivers what it is intended to deliver.
Equity – not always in there even with legal frameworks

23. social justice or justify public expenditure need
The goal of social science calls for us to abandon sterile word-games and concentrate on the business in hand, which is how to develop the most reliable and democratic ways of knowing, both in order to bridge the gap between ourselves and others, and to ensure that those who intervene in other people’s lives do so with the most benefit and the least harm.
(Oakley, 2000, p.3)

24. What Politicians Think...
What is needed?
What is right?
What is doable?
What is politically and financially doable?
Who’s in my way? Who’s with me?
What do my voters want?
What do experts think?
What do I now think? Conclusion

25. What is the problem?: The lack of evidence-informed policy and practice
Policy makers rank academic research well below the experts and think tanks as sources of evidence
Policy makers often regard research findings as impenetrable, ambiguous, conflicting, insignificant, untimely or only partially relevant.
Confusion about evidence is rife amongst the public: The honourable member for Braintree cited evidence from the Sun [English broadsheet], so I want to refer to a recent edition of the ????? Journal
Campbell et al (2007)

26. What stops evidence being used?
Practitioners(Teacher) are too busy, cannot locate relevant and accessible evidence, lack confidence to ‘judge’ research;
“There is nothing a politician likes so little as to be well informed; it makes decision-making so complex and difficult.” (John Maynard Keynes)
What counts as evidence, the nature of evidence & how it is used in decision-making is highly contested.
Numbers to be influenced by evidence?
Nearly 5 lakh teachers;

27. The “knowing” and “interpretive” world of policymakers
The legacy (good and bad) of New Public Management...measure everything, quantify
Money, existing policy and law, influence
The desire to do the right thing or the desire to please political masters. Why are they in the job?
Who’s got a view and how to I balance them?
There’s no money
What is the space for the possible when you take all this into account

28. The importance research:
Economic imperative:
To justify public spending:
Moral imperative:
To ensure those providing services do so by the best
possible way.
Academic imperative:
Research Assessment impact;
Significance of outputs;
Funding applications require impact report.

29. Expectation for practitioners to use research
For a teacher to cite research in a staff room ...would indicate that he or she was studying for a part-time degree ... or rehearsing for an inspection and would be regarded by most colleagues as showing off
Hargreaves, D. (1996) TTA Lecture
No reference to use of research in Teachers’ professional standards

30. Models of research impact
PUSH - INCENTIVISE PRODUCERS (RESEARCHERS):
To undertake relevant, robust research; (API, M.Ed., Ph.D.)
2. PULL - INCENTIVISE USERS/PRACTITIONERS:
a). Better articulation of benefits to funders (e.g value-added,
prestige);
b). Research ‘training’ for policy officials;
c). Role of ‘insider-researchers’in government.
NETWORKS & BROKERAGE :
Bring together researchers, users and policy makers - influence on design, research questions, verifying findings, ongoing dialogue without losing research integrity.

31. Improving the use of current evidence – building capacity(NUEPA AND DISE)
Teaching & Learning Research Programme (TLRP) projects focusing on teaching & learning, user engagement, student outcomes
Systematic reviewing of evidence over 100 reviews with summaries quality assure research;
Joint Practice Development – teachers collaborative research across schools; (DISE)
User engagement – funders now expect this throughout research process mostly user engagement help in bet utilisation;

32. Some capacity building initiatives
National Teacher Research Panel – promote teacher involvement in research;
‘DISE –Minor Project’ – Inadian researchers and practitioners were eganged NUEPA sponsored DISE data analysis and review process.
Researchers in Residence Scheme :
Brought researchers and schools together in order to introduce school students and teachers to cutting edge research in a particular field;

33. Building a higher quality evidence base for the future
Reporting the weaknesses in quality of research in education and its ‘descriptive validity’.
Features of high quality research.
clear questions (that address a need)
methods selected that are ‘fit for purpose’
methods executed properly e.g. reliability
use multiple sources of data (integration of quantitative & qualitative?)
multidisciplinary research needed for complex questions
These are all characteristics assessed through systematic reviewing.

34. Improving the future evidence base
Randomly controlled trials :
Interrogating large databases e.g. on educational outcomes & longer term employment, health etc
Longitudinal studies – EPPE – early years research following children from 1-16 years – very influential
Mixed methods – to inform us of ‘what’ and ‘how’
Quality assurance, synthesis and scaling up of practitioner inquiry.

35. Assessing research and its impact
Research Excellence Framework (REF) – 20+ panel of researchers & users assess all Indian research projects;
Research publications assessed on quality, originality & significance (impact);
Impact separately assessed through case studies;
Knowledge mobilisation work;
Research Supporting Practice in Education (OISE) - interrogating research impact.

36. Interrogating research use empirically: Research Supporting Practice in Education (RSPE), OISE, UoT
Research use in secondary schools & districts. Used knowledge claims as basis for intervention – ‘mediated’ head teacher study groups, resources on web. Had little impact;
KM in universities - Interviewed18 education faculties in leading research universities worldwide regarding the role of KM - modest in most faculties, done by individual faculty members rather than at institutional level;
Survey of 500 grant-holders to determine extent and nature of their KM efforts - tools and techniques used, mediators, linkage activities, project funding earmarked for KM.

37. Research Supporting Practice in Education continued..
Website analysis – developed metric for assessing organizational KM strategies (different types, ease of use, accessibility, focus of audience) >100 education organisations in Canada, UK, US & Australia: national/ local govt depts., universities, funders & ‘knowledge brokers’. Limited evidence of activities that build interpersonal connections that are known to lead to greatest research impact.
Facts in Education: service to counter press reporting, correct significant factual errors about education that appear in various news media across Canada, providing the source & empirical evidence base e.g. class size.
Education Media Centre in England is brokering service between journalists and researchers offering timely evidence & access.

38. The role of research mediation in maximising research use
Mediation is undertaken by funders, media, policy analysts, educators, lobby groups, think tanks, policy advisers, etc;
Knowledge brokering links decision makers and researchers, facilitating their interaction …to better understand each other's goals and professional cultures, influence each other's work, forge new partnerships, and promote the use of research
Mediators have multiple positions as trustees for each others’ organisations, sit on each others’ councils, write, speak and ‘appear on platforms’ at each other’s events (Ball & Exley 2010, p.155);
dedicated individual liaison between policy makers and researchers during commissioning/reporting.
problem definition,….expansion of public debate, innovation & knowledge brokerage
linking researchers with users throughout the research process increases research impact.

39. The media and think tanks
Media presented all the think tanks as credible sources of research, facts, and figures on education, regardless of the extent to which each think tank emphasized policy and political advocacy over the professional norms of academic research e.g. peer-reviewing (Haas 2007)

40. Welner et al (2010) Think Tank Research Quality
Policy makers & the media cite think tank reports that don’t meet minimal standards of research quality.
59 reviews of reports from 26 mainly ‘free market’ think tanks – independent evaluations using criteria from APA res standards.
Concluded that:
Most are not original research – policy briefs based on (in)adequate reviews.
Publications of think tanks are disproportionately represented in the reporting of major national newspapers (US).
Think tank network in US - echo each others’ arguments, cite and republish each others’ work.
“ Many of the nation’s [US] most influential reports are little more than junk science” (p.xiii)

41. Concluding comments
Make use of ‘best available evidence’ a requirement in professional standards & build into infrastructure of policy-making;
Improve access to synthesised, quality assured evidence in priority areas – open access;
Support practitioners to use research (and in some cases to engage in research through closer collaboration of researchers and professionals;
Most importantly, interrogate research use and evaluate any initiatives designed to increase impact – only then can we really know what is achieved.

42. References
Ball, S. & Exley, S. (2010) ‘Making policy with 'good ideas': policy networks and the 'intellectuals' of New Labour’,  Journal of Education Policy, vol 25, no 2: 151 – 169.
Brown, C. (2012) ‘Adoption by policy makers of knowledge from educational research: an alternative perspective’, Issues in Educational Research, vol 22, no 2:
Campbell , S., Benita, S., Coates, E., Davies, P. and Penn, G. (2007). Analysis for policy: evidence-based policy in practice. London: GSRU.
Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF no date) ResourcesForResearchers/KEYS/ResearchUse/KnowledgeBrokering.aspx

43. References continued
Farrington, D. (2003) Methodological quality standards for evaluation research. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 49-68
Hargreaves, D. (1996) Teaching as a research-based profession: possibilities and prospect London: Teacher Training Agency.
Haas, E. (2007) ‘False equivalency: think tank references on education in the news media’ Peabody Journal of Education, vol 82, no 1:
Lavis, J., Robertson, D., Woodside, J. M., McLeod, C. B., & Abelson, J. (2003). ‘How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers?’, The Milbank Quarterly, vol 81, no 2:
Levin, B. (2011) ‘Mobilising research knowledge in education’, London Review of Education, vol 9, no 1: 15-26

44. References continued
Martinez, N.R. and Campbell, D. (2007) ‘Using knowledge brokering to promote evidence-based policy-making’, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, vol 85, no5: np
McNutt, K. & Marchildon, G. (2009) ‘Think tanks and the web: measuring visibility and influence’, Canadian Public Policy, vol 35, no 2:
Nutley, S. M., Walter, I. and Davies, H. (2007) Using Evidence: how research can inform public services. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Oakley, A. (2000) Experiments in Knowing: gender and method in the social sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Rich, A. (2004) Think tanks, public policy and the politics of expertise Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Rickinson, M., Sebba, J. & Edwards, A. (2011) Improving research through user engagement London: Routledge 
Rigby, E. (2005) ‘Linking research and policy on Capitol Hill’ Evidence and Policy vol 1:

45. References continued
Scott, S., Knapp, M., Henderson, J. & Maughan, B. (2001) ‘Financial cost of social exclusion: Follow-up study of antisocial children into adulthood’, British Medical Journal vol 323:
Stevens, M., Liabo, K., Witherspoon, S. and Roberts, H. (2009) ‘What do practitioners want from research, what do funders fund and what needs to be done to know more about what works in the new world of children's services?’ Evidence & policy: vol 5, no 3:
Ward, V., House, A. and Hamer, S. (2009) ‘Knowledge brokering: the missing link in the evidence to action chain?’ Evidence & Policy, vol 5:
Webb, S. (2002) Evidence-based practice and decision analysis in social work: an implementation model Journal of Social Work 2, 1, 45-64
Welner, K.G., Hinchey, P.H., Molnar, A. & Weitzman, D. (2010, eds.) Think tank research quality: lessons for policymakers, the media and the public. Charlotte, North Carolina: IAP