{"id":12249,"date":"2013-07-02T00:00:06","date_gmt":"2013-07-02T04:00:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/researchimpact.ydsinc.ca\/to-know-is-not-enough-research-knowledge-and-its-use\/"},"modified":"2021-11-23T16:45:21","modified_gmt":"2021-11-23T21:45:21","slug":"to-know-is-not-enough-research-knowledge-and-its-use","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/researchimpact.ca\/fr\/archive\/to-know-is-not-enough-research-knowledge-and-its-use\/","title":{"rendered":"To Know is Not Enough: Research Knowledge and Its Use"},"content":{"rendered":"

Levin, B. (2013). To know is not enough: Research knowledge and its use. Review of Education<\/em>, 1<\/em>(1), 2-31. DOI: 10.1002\/rev3.3001\u00a0http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/rev3.3001\/pdf<\/a>
\nAbstract<\/strong>
\nThis paper is about the relationship between research, policy and practice in education. It outlines reasons for the increased interest in research and its impact and describe some of the difficulties in studying this relationship. A conceptualization of the knowledge mobilization process is presented that identifies three overlapping and interacting domains – the production of research, the end use of research, and the intermediary processes that link these two. The paper reviews current research and develops ideas about all three of these aspects, identifying areas of understanding and gaps in current knowledge.<\/em>
\nThis journal club previously reviewed<\/a> a paper from Ben Levin and you can read more about the work of his team on the knowledge mobilization blog, Mobilize This! where we covered a study<\/a> recently released by Amanda Cooper (now Faculty of Education, Queen’s University).
\nIn this article Ben brings together some of the evidence (or lack thereof) about connecting research to policy and practice in education. He also introduces some thinking about the role of the internet and social media as tools for knowledge mobilization. He writes, \u00ab\u00a0a conceptualization of the knowledge mobilization process is presented that identifies three overlapping and interacting domains – the production of research, the end use of research, and the intermediary processes that link these two.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> It’s another framework designed to help us think through the elements of successful knowledge mobilization. While I have previously lamented<\/a>\u00a0about the proliferation of frameworks and the paucity of empirical research to critically assess these frameworks, Ben agrees with me. In the article he comments about frameworks and \u00ab\u00a0the irony has been noted more than once that the debate over the use of research is itself not well informed by research<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0. In other words (also from Ben), \u00ab\u00a0where is the evidence that evidence works?\u00a0\u00bb
\nBen reviews some of the drivers of an increased interest in knowledge mobilization. These include a growing interest on behalf of the academic to provide research to decision makers. As well, research funders and Foundations are putting increasing emphasis on articulating the impacts of research. The Connections<\/a> theme is one of three streams of activities funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Every grant application, even a modest $25,000 meeting grant, must have a statement of the expected outcomes of the funded activity (the impact) and how the applicant will achieve that impact (the knowledge mobilization strategy). This focus on impact is also pursued by the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council and the evaluation of research impact in the UK is being driven by the Research Excellence Framework (REF 2014<\/a>).
\nHowever, despite this increased interest in knowledge mobilization there are challenges to researching and practicing it:<\/p>\n