Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Utilization of research findings: A matter of research tradition

  • Feature Articles
  • Published:
Knowledge and Policy

Abstract

Differences between the realist and pragmatist research traditions are seen to explain different levels of utilization of research findings.

The realist tradition, which views knowledge as a true representation of reality with the role of research being to reveal its underlying causal relations, is less associated with high levels of utilization. In the pragmatist tradition, on the other hand, knowledge is a personal construction of reality, not necessarily its true representation, but rather a fruitful one that leads to desired consequences in a given context. This tradition is associated with higher levels of utilization.

An example of a research study for the development of educational indicator systems illustrates the impact of a shift from one tradition to the other on the level of utilization of the research findings.

Pragmatically developed indicator systems usually address specific aims, and often reflect preferred policy while following up its execution. These are fairly simple systems of indicators that have main effects on the variability of educational outcomes. Thus they are easy to be interpreted and translated into policy decisions.

On the other hand, indicator systems developed in the realist tradition make theoretical rather than pragmatic contributions to our understanding of school effectiveness issues. This approach offers multivariate, multilevel, and interactive models that represent the entire schooling phenomenon. These models are hard to interpret and less applicable for policy recommendation. The coupled process for development of an indicator system for both pragmatic and theoretical aims illustrates the tension inherent in such a dual approach and its impact on the usability of its findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aitkin, M.A., Bennett, N.S., & Hesketh, J. (1981). Teaching styles and pupil progress: A reanalysis.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 170–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aitkin, M.A., & Longford, N. (1986). Statistical modelling issues in school effectiveness studies.The Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 149, (1), 1–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitkin, M. & Zuzovsky, R. (1994). Multilevel interaction models and their use in the analysis of large scale school effectiveness studies.School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5 (1), 45–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, R., & Dreeben, R. (1983).How schools work: A study of reading instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, J.M., & Trice, H.M. (1982). The utilization process: A conceptual framework and synthesis of empirical findings.Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 591–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, R. (1978).A realist theory of science. Sussex: Harvester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, R. (1989).Reclaiming reality: A critical introduction to contemporary philosophy. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bidwell, C.E. (1983).Discussion of papers’ symposium on school effects research. Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Montreal.

  • Bidwell, C.E., & Kasarda, J.D. (1975). School district organization and student achievement.American Sociological Review, 40, 55–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bidwell, C.E., & Kasarda, J.D. (1980). Conceptualizing and measuring the effects of school and schooling.American Journal of Education, 88, 401–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blank, R.K. (1993, Spring). Developing a system of education indicators: Selecting implementing and reporting indicators.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15 (1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B.S. (1976).Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burstein, L. (1988). Educational quality indicators in the United States: Latest developments.Studies in Educational Evaluation, 14, 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, N. (1977). Social research and national policy. What gets used: By whom, for what purpose and with what effect? In M. Guttentag & S. Saar (Eds.),Evaluation Studies Review Annual (Vol. 2). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherryholmes, C.H. (1992). Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism.Educational Researcher, 21 (6), 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherryholmes, C.H. (1994). More notes on pragmatism.Educational Researcher, 23 (1), 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, F.M. (1987).Ontario science education report card. Canadian national comparisons. Ontario: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L.J., & Snow, R.E. (1977).Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York: Irvington Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuttance, P. (1985). Frameworks for research on the effectiveness of schooling. In D. Reynolds (Ed.),Studying school effectiveness. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuttance, P. (1994). Monitoring educational quality through performance indicators for school practice.School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5, (2), 101–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dar, Y., & Resh, N. (1986).Classroom composition and pupil achievement. A study of the effect of ability-based classes. London: Gordon & Breach Science Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dar, Y., Resh, N., & Erhard, R. (1989).Learning achievement in junior high schools in reading comprehension and science. Report ISSN 0972-2329. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University, School of Education. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Draper, N., & Smith, H. (1981).Applied regression analysis (2nd edition). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreeben, R. (1983).School production and school effects. Paper presented at a symposium on school effects research. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.

  • Dunn, W.N. (1980). The two-communities metaphor and models of knowledge use: An exploratory case study.Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1, 515–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egozi, M. (1980).The effect of class social composition on achievement of studies from different social classes. Jerusalem: Ministry of Education. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (1981). School district and school personnel in knowledge utilization. In R. Lehming & M. Kane (Eds.),Improving schools: Using what we know. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, Y. (1986). Some principles of postpostivistic philosophy of science.Educational Researchers, 15 (9), 12–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, Y. (1994). Realism, Dewey, and pragmatism, and educational research.Educational Researcher, 23 (1), 14–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, H. (1987).Multilevel models in educational and social research. London: Griffin.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, E.R. (1991). Realism in research.Educational Researcher, 20 (6), 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, E.R. (1992). Response to notes on pragmatism and scientific realism.Educational Researcher, 21, 18–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, E.R. (1994). Is John Dewey eternal?Educational Researcher, 23 (1), 15–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kean, M.H. (1983). Administrative uses of research and evaluation information. In E.W. Gordon (Ed.),Review of Research in Education, 10, Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, W., and Eshel, Y. (1980).Integrating Jerusalem Schools. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, J.K. (1980). Knowledge utilization: What is it?Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1, 421–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, V., & Bryk, A.S. (1989). A multilevel model of the social distribution of high school achievement.Sociology of Education, 62, 172–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewy, A., & Chen, M. (1977). Differences in achievement: A comparison over two ethnic groups’ achievement in Israeli elementary schools.Evaluation in Education, 1, 3–72. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K.S. (1983). Dissemination systems: Some lessons from programs of the past. In W.J. Paisley & M. Butler (Eds.),Knowledge utilization systems in education: Dissemination, technical assistance, networking. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K.S., & Dentler, R.A. (1988). Knowledge use and school improvement.Curriculum Inquiry, 18 (1), 33–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Love, J. (1985). Knowledge transfer and utilization in education. In E. Gordon (Ed.),Review of Research in Education, 12. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J., & Sugarman, J. (1993). Beyond methodology: Two conceptions of relations between theory and research in research on teaching.Educational Researcher, 22 (8), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, D.H., & Entwistle, S. (1983). The national diffusion network. In W.J. Paisley & M. Butler (Eds.),Knowledge utilization systems in education: Dissemination, technical assistance, networking. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meuret, D. (1990). The outlook for educational evaluation in France.International Journal of Educational Research, 14 (4), 395–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S.I., & Fredericks, M. (1991). Post positivist assumptions and educational research: Another view.Educational Researcher, 20 (4), 2–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minkowich, A., Davis, D., & Bashi, J. (1977).An Evaluation Study of Israeli Elementary Schools. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. E. (1981). Social science utilization in state legislatures. In D.C. Berliner (Ed.),Review of research in education (Vol. 9). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, C. (1970).The pragmatic movement in American philosophy. New York: George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuttall, D.L. (1990). Proposals for a national system of assessment in England and Wales.International Journal of Educational Research, 14 (4), 373–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Outhwaite, W. (1987).New philosophy of social sciences. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M.Q., Grimes, P.S., Guthrie, K.M., Brennan, N.J., French, B.D., & Blyth, D.A. (1977). In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In C.H. Weiss (Ed.),Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, MA.: Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, S.M., & Emerick, J.A. (1983). Advances in practice. In W.J. Paisley & M. Butler (Eds.),Knowledge utilization systems in education: Dissemination, technical assistance, networking. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C.S. (1931–1958).The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vols. 1–6 edited by Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss; Vols. 7–8 edited by Arthur W. Banks). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, C. (1990). Higher education indicators: An exercise in interpretation.International Journal of Educational Research, 14 (4), 353–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (1986). A hierarchical linear model: A review.Sociology of Education, 59, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruby, A. (1992). The Australian national project on indicators in education.International Journal of Educational Research, 14 (4), 401–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selden, R. (1988). Missing data: A progress report from the States.Phi Delta Kappan, 69 (7), 492–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieber, S.D. (1981). Knowledge utilization in public education: Incentives and disincentives. In R. Lehming & M. Kane (Eds.),Improving schools: Using what we know. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavelson, R., McDonnell, L., Oakes, J., Carey, N., & Pincus, L. (1987).Indicator systems for monitoring mathematics and science education. Santa Monica: Rand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Frassen, B.C. (1980).The scientific image. Oxford, England: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M.C., Haertel, G.D., & Walberg, H.Y. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning.Review of Educational Research, 63 (3), 249–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, I.R. (1978).Report of the 1977 national survey of science, mathematics and social studies education. Washington, DC: US Government Printing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuzovsky, R. (1987).Elementary schools in Israel and science achievement. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuzovsky, R., & Aitkin, M. (1990). Using a multi-level model and an indicator system in science education to assess the effect of school treatment on student achievement.School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1 (2), 121–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuzovsky, R., & Aitkin, M. (1991). Curricular changes and science achievement in Israeli elementary schools. In S.W. Raudenbush & J.D. Willms (Eds.),School classrooms and pupils (pp. 25–36). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuzovsky, R., & Aitkin, M. (1994). The coupled process of conceptualizing a model of school effectiveness and developing an indicator system for monitoring effectiveness.Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 19 (1), 65–81.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Center for Curriculum Research and Development at the School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Israel

    Ruth Zuzovsky (researcher)

Authors
  1. Ruth Zuzovsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The example is based on her research together with Professor Murray Aitkin, at the Department of Mathematics and Statistics at Tel Aviv University. The research was funded by the Israel Foundation Trustees—Grant 90 (1991–1992)—and the Israeli Ministry of Education and Culture.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zuzovsky, R. Utilization of research findings: A matter of research tradition. Knowledge and Policy 7, 78–93 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02696293

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02696293

Keywords

Search

Navigation