Dissemination and Impact: Issues, Lessons, and Future Directions

Research for Action: Cross-National Perspectives on Connecting Knowledge, Policy, and Practice for Children

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages

  Chaskin, Robert J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago   (United States)

Author keywords

Case studies; Policy; Practice; Research; Social welfare; Social work

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920598951     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195314083.003.0008     Document Type: Chapter

References (64)

1. Addams, J. (1895). Hull House Maps and Papers. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell & Co.
2. Agyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for Action: A Guide to Overcoming Barriers to Organizational Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3. Agyris, C. & D. A. Schön (1978). Organizational Learning. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
4. Alter, C. & M. Egan (1997). "Logic Modeling: A Tool for Teaching Practice Evaluation." Journal of Social Work Education 33(1): 103-118.
5. Backer, T. E. (1995). "Assessing and Enhancing Readiness for Change:Implications for Technology Transfer." in Reviewing the Behavioral Science Knowledge Base on Technology Transfer (T. E. Backer, S. L. David, & G. Soucy, eds.). Washington, D.C.: NIDA.
6. Berlin, S. & J. C. Marsh (1993). Informing Practice Decisions. New York:Macmillan.
7. Billups, J. O. & M. C. Juliá (1996). "Technology Transfer and Integrated Social Development: International Issues and Possibilities for Social Work." Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare 23: 175-188.
8. Blumer, H. (1971). "Social Problems as Collective Behavior." Social Problems 18(3): 298-306.
9. Brown, P. (1995). "The Role of the Evaluator in Comprehensive Community Initiatives," in New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives Volume 1: Concepts, Methods, and Contexts (J. P. Connell, A. C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr, & C. H. Weiss, eds.). Washington, D.C.: The Aspen Institute.
10. Bullock, R., D. Gooch, M. Little, & K. Mount (1998). Research in Practice:Experiments in Development and Information Design. Aldershot, UK:Ashgate.
11. Bullock, R. & M. Little (1995). "Linking Research and Development: Return Home as Experienced by Separated Children," in The Art and Science of Child Care (M. Colton, H. Ghesquiere, & M. Williams, eds.). Aldershot, UK: Arena.
12. Campbell Collaboration (2006). http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/
13. Caplan, N. (1979). "The Two-Communities Theory and Knowledge Utilization." American Behavioral Scientist 22: 459-470.
14. Caplan, N., A. Morrison, & R. Stambaugh (1975). The Use of Social Science Knowledge in Policy Decisions at the National Level. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
15. Casas, F. (1995). "Social Research and Policy Making," in The Art and Science of Child Care (M. Colton, H. Ghesquiere, & M. Williams, eds.). Aldershot, UK:Arena.
16. Connell J. P. & A. C. Kubisch (1998). "Applying a Theory of Change Approach to the Evaluation of Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Progress, Prospects, and Problems," in New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives Volume 2: Theory, Measurement, and Analysis (K. Fulbright-Anderson, A. C. Kubisch, & J. P. Connell, eds.). Washington, D.C.: The Aspen Institute.
17. Cyert, R. & J. G. March (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
18. Dixon, N. (1999). "Learning Across Organizational Boundaries: A Case Study of Canadian Museums," in Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization: Developments in Theory and Practice (M. Easterby-Smith, J. Burgoyne, & L. Araujo, eds.). London: Sage.
19. Easterby-Smith, M. & L. Araujo (1999). "Organizational Learning: Current Debates and Opportunities," in Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization: Developments in Theory and Practice (M. Easterby-Smith, J. Burgoyne, & L. Araujo, eds.). London: Sage.
20. Elliot, H. & J. Popay (2000). "How Are Policy Makers Using Evidence? Models of Research Utilisation and Local NHS Policy Making." Journal of Epidemiological Community Health 54: 461-468.
21. Fetterman, D. M. (1996). "Empowerment Evaluation: An Introduction to Theory and Practice," in Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment and Accountability (D. M. Fetterman, S. J. Kaftarian, & A. Wandersman, eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Finger, M. & S. Bürgin Brand (1999). "The Concept of the 'Learning Organization' Applied to the Transformation of the Public Sector" in Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization: Developments in Theory and Practice (M. Easterby-Smith, J. Burgoyne, & L. Araujo, eds.). London: Sage.
23. Freire, P. (1990). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: The Continuum Publishing Company.
24. Grantmakers for Effective Organizations (2004). Leveraging What You Know:Knowledge Management Strategies for Funders. Washington, D.C.: GEO.
25. Habermas, Jrügen (1989). The Theory of Communicative Action, 2 volumes. Boston: Beacon Press.
26. Havelock, R. (1969). Planning for Innovation Through Dissemination and Utilization of Knowledge. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
27. Herie, M. & G. W. Martin (2002). "Knowledge Diffusion in Social Work: A New Approach to Bridging the Gap." Social Work 47(1): 85-95.
28. Hess, P. M. & E. J. Mullen (1995). Practitioner-Researcher Partnerships:Building Knowledge From, In, and For Practice. Washington, D.C.: NASW Press.
29. Huberman, M. (1987). "Steps Toward an Integrated Model of Research Utilization." Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 8(4): 586-611.
30. Huberman, M. (1990). "Linkage Between Researchers and Practitioners: A Qualitative Study." American Educational Research Journal 27(2): 363-391.
31. Hutchinson, J. & M. Huberman (1993). "Knowledge Dissemination and Use in Science and Mathematics Education: A Literature Review." Washington, D.C.:National Science Foundation.
32. Kingdon, J. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, 2nd edition. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
33. Knott, J. & A. Wildavsky (1980). "If Dissemination Is the Solution, What Is the Problem," Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 1(4): 537-538.
34. Kondrat, M. E. (1994). "Culture and Power in Technology Transfer:Perspectives from a Critical Sociology of Knowledge." Social Development Issues 16(3): 45-67.
35. Kondrat, M. E. (1995). "Concept, Act, and Interest in Professional Practice:Implications of an Empowerment Perspective." Social Service Review 69(3):403-428.
36. March, J. G. & J. P. Olsen (1981). "Organizational Choice under Ambiguity," in The Sociology of Organizations, 2nd edition (O. Grusky & G. A. Miller, eds.). New York: Free Press.
37. Marsh, J. C. (2004). "Theory-driven Versus Theory-Free Research in Empirical Social Work Practice," in Using Evidence in Social Work Practice (H. Briggs & T. Rzepnicki, eds.). Chicago: Lyceum Books.
38. Martin, L. L. & P. M. Kettner (1996). Measuring the Performance of Human Services. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. McCrystal, P. & A. Godfrey (2001). "Developing a Researcher-Practitioner Partnership for the Effective Evaluation of Professional Social Work Training." Social Work Education 20(5): 539-549.
40. Milligan S., C. Coulton, P. York, & R. Register (1998). "Implementing a Theory of Change Evaluation in the Cleveland Community-Building Initiative: A Case Study," in New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives Volume 2:Theory, Measurement, and Analysis (K. Fulbright-Anderson, A. C. Kubisch, & J. P. Connell, eds.). Washington, D.C.: The Aspen Institute.
41. Monteith, M. (1998). "Developing a Strategy for Disseminating Research Findings," in Making Research Work: Promoting Child Care Policy and Practice (D. Iwaniec & J. Pinkerton, eds.). London: Wiley.
42. National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (1996). "A Review of the Literature on Dissemination and Knowledge Utilization." http://www.ncddr.org
43. Orthner, D. K., P. Cook, Y. Sabah, & J. Rosenfeld (2006). "Organizational Learning: A Cross-National Pilot-Test of Effectiveness in Children's Services." Evaluation and Program Planning 29(1): 70-78.
44. Paisley, W. (1993). "Knowledge Utilization: The Role of New Communications Technologies." Journal of the American Society for Information Science 44(4):222-234.
45. Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text, 3rd edition Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Pinkerton, J. (1998). "The Impact of Research on Policy and Practice: A Systemic Perspective," in Making Research Work: Promoting Child Care Policy and Practice (D. Iwaniec & J. Pinkerton, eds.). London: Wiley.
47. Preskill, H. & R. T. Torres (1999). Evaluative Inquiry for Learning in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Reid, W. J. (1994). "The Empirical Practice Movement." Social Service Review 68(2): 165-184.
49. Reid, W. J. (2002). "Knowledge for Direct Social Work Practice: An Analysis of Trends." Social Service Review 76(1): 6-33.
50. Richmond, M. (1917). Social Diagnosis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
51. Rogers, E. M. (1995). "Diffusion of Drug Abuse Prevention Programs:Spontaneous Diffusion, Agenda Setting, and Reinvention," in Reviewing the Behavioral Science Knowledge Base on Technology Transfer (T. E. Backer, S. L. David, & G. Soucy, eds.). Washington, D.C.: NIDA.
52. Rosenfeld, J. M. & N. Orlinsky (1961). "The Effect of Research on Practice." Archives of General Psychiatry 5: 176-182.
53. Rossi, P. H., H. E. Freeman, & M. W. Lipsey (1999). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 6th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Rzepnicki, T. L. & H. E. Briggs (2004). "Using Evidence in Your Practice," in Using Evidence in Social Work Practice (H. Briggs & T. Rzepnicki, eds.). Chicago: Lyceum Books.
55. Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
56. Scriven, M. (1991). "Beyond Formative and Summative Evaluation," in Evaluation and Education: A Quarter Century (M. W. McLaughlin & D. C. Phillips, eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
57. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. London: Century Books.
58. Stoeker, R. & E. Bonacich (1992). "Why Participatory Research?" The American Sociologist 23(4): 5-13.
59. Stone, D. (1989). "Causal Stories and the Formation of Policy Agendas." Political Science Quarterly 104(2): 281-300.
60. Szulanski, G. (2000). "The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82(1): 9-27.
61. Weiss, C. (1979). "The Many Meanings of Research Utilization." Public Administration Review 39(5): 426-431.
62. Weiss, C. (1980). "Knowledge Creep and Decision Accretion." Knowledge:Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 1(3): 381-404.
63. Weiss, C. (1995). "Nothing as Practical as Good Theory: Exploring Theory-Based Evaluation for Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families," in New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives Volume 1:Concepts, Methods, and Contexts (J. P. Connell, A. C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr, & C. Weiss, eds.). Washington, D.C.: The Aspen Institute.
64. Wingens, M. (1990). "Toward a General Utilization Theory: A Systems Reformulation of the Two-Communities Metaphor." Knowledge 12(1): 27-42.