The Politics of Research Production, Promotion, and Utilization in Educational Policy

Educational Policy

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 131-144

  Lubienski, Christopher ^a   Scott, Janelle ^b   DeBray, Elizabeth ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

educational policy; evidence; policymakers

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898866534     PISSN: 08959048     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0895904813515329     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Asen R.,Gurke D.,Conners P.,Solomon R.,Gumm E.Research evidence and school-board deliberations: Lessons from three Wisconsin school districts.Educational Policy. 2013;27:33-63.
2. Ball S.,Junemann C.Networks, new governance and education. Bristol, UK: The Policy Press; 2012.
3. Brief of American Social Science Researchers in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles; 2012.
4. Coburn C.,Penuel W.Research-practice partnerships at the district level: A new strategy for leveraging research for educational improvement. New York, NY: William T. Grant Foundation; 2012.
5. Epstein D. M.Sister Aimee: The life of Aimee Semple McPherson. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich; 1993.
6. Finnigan K.,Daly A.,Che J.Systemwide reform in districts under pressure: The role of social networks in defining, acquiring, and diffusing research evidence.Journal of Educational Administration. 2013;51 (4).
7. Goldhaber D. D.,Brewer D. J.Does teacher certification matter? High school certification status and student achievement.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2000;22:129-145.
8. HannawayJ.SchneiderM. (2012). The federal role in research: Lessons from the field. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. Retrieved from http://www.aei.org/files/2011/05/23/Hannaway%20Schneider-Final%20Conference%20Draft.pdf.
9. Henig J.The end of exceptionalism: The changing politics of school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press; 2013.
10. Incentives and test-based accountability in public education. Hout M.Elliott S. W., ed. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences Press; 2011.
11. Race-conscious policies for assigning students to schools: Social science research and the Supreme Court cases. Linn R. L.Welner K. G., ed. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education; 2007.
12. Lubienski C.,Garn G.Evidence and ideology on consumer choices in education markets: An alternative analytical framework.Current Issues in Education. 2010;13 (3): 1-31.
13. LubienskiC.ScottJ.DeBrayE. (2011). The rise of intermediary organizations in knowledge production, advocacy, and educational policy. Teachers College Record. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=16487.
14. Lubienski C.,Weitzel P.,Lubienski S. T.Is there a "consensus" on school choice and achievement? Advocacy research and the emerging political economy of knowledge production.Educational Policy. 2009;23:161-193.
15. Massell D.,Goertz M. E.,Barnes C.State education agencies acquisition and use of research knowledge for school improvement.Peabody Journal of Education. 2012;87:609-626.
16. McDonnell L.,Weatherford S.Evidence use and the Common Core State Standards movement: From problem definition to policy adoption.American Journal of Education. 2013; (120).
17. Mickelson R.Twenty-first century social science on school racial diversity and educational outcomes.Ohio State Law Journal. 2008;69:1173-1226.
18. Oreskes N.,Conway E. M.Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press; 2010.
19. PhillipsL. (2012, October16). North Carolina sea level rises despite state senators. Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=north-carolina-sea-level-rises-desipte-senators.
20. Using science as evidence in public policy. Prewitt K.Schwandt T.Straf M., ed. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012.
21. Rich A.Think tanks, public policy, and the politics of expertise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004.
22. Scott J.,Jabbar H.The infrastructure of accountability. Anagnostopoulos D.Rutledge S.Jacobsen R., ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Ed Press; 2013:75-92.
23. Scott J.,Lubienski C.,DeBray E.,Jabbar H.Using research evidence in education: From the schoolhouse door to Capitol Hill. Finnigan K.Daly A., ed. New York: Springer; in press.
24. Specter M.Denialism: How irrational thinking hinders scientific progress, harms the planet, and threatens our lives. New York, NY: Penguin Press; 2010.
25. Stannard-StocktonS. (2011, March29). The three core approaches to effective philanthropy. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Retrieved from http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/the_three_core_approaches_to_effective_philanthropy.
26. StraussV. (2013, September27). Bill Gates: "It would be great if our education stuff worked but... "Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/09/27/bill-gates-it-would-be-great-if-our-education-stuff-worked-but/.
27. Tseng V.The uses of research in policy and practice.Social Policy Report. 2012;26 (2): 1-16.
28. Tyack D.The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1974.
29. Weiss C. H.The four "I's" of school reform: How interests, ideology, information, and institution affect teachers and principals.Harvard Educational Review. 1995;65:571-593.
30. Weiss C. H.Validity and social experimentation. Bickman L., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2000:283-302.