Table Of Content

I!nternational Journal of Education Policy & Leadership, December 3, 2013. Volume 8, Number 7. !1 RESEARCH USE BY LEADERS IN CANADIAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AMANDER COOPER Queen’s University BEN LEVIN OISE, University of Toronto ! This paper, part of a larger study, investigates the ways research is used by leaders in Canadian schools and districts, an area in which there is relatively little empirical evidence. The paper analyzes survey results from 188 education leaders in 11 school districts across Canada about school and district practices related to the use of research. Results indicate a growing awareness in districts of the importance of research use, reported district capacity, and many kinds of support available for research-related activities; however, actual research use remains modest. Districts appear to have relatively weak processes and systems for finding, sharing, and using relevant research.     Cooper, A., & Levin, B. (2013). Research Use by Leaders in Canadian School Districts. International Journal of Education Policy & Leadership 8(7). Retrieved from www.ijepl.org . Introduction Levin, 2013). Although there are many terms currently in use for this work, such as knowl- Recent years have seen growing agreement edge transfer, knowledge exchange, and that use of research could help improve policy knowledge translation, the Social Sciences and and practice in many sectors internationally Humanities Research Council of Canada de- (Davies, Nutley, & Smith, 2000; Lemieux- fines these efforts as knowledge mobilization Charles & Champagne, 2004; Nutley, Walter, (KMb).1 Canada has made a major contribu- & Davies, 2007; Pfeffer & Sutton, 2000). The tion to the growing body of empirical evidence literature has a rapidly growing number of de- accruing across public service sectors (Cooper scriptions, analyses, and evaluations of efforts & Levin, 2010); in fact, in a recent review of to improve the way research is taken up in the research, Mitton, Adair, McKenzie, Patten, policy and practice in fields such as health, and Perry (2007) found that more than half of social policy, education, criminology, and envi- the authors of high-quality studies relating to ronment. Governments in the United King- knowledge transfer and exchange were located dom, United States, Canada, and elsewhere in in Canada. Europe, Australia, and New Zealand (among The need to improve the use of research is others) are increasingly committed to using particularly salient in education, which has evidence-based policies and practices to im- often failed to make use of research as a guide prove public service sectors (for a comparison for policy or practice (Levin, 2010). Many fac- of these efforts by country, please see Qi & tors contribute to this situation. In some cases, Research Use by Leaders in Canadian School Districts !2 the empirical evidence needed simply does not The larger study looks at current practices exist or is not in a format that practitioners in the districts regarding research, investigates can find or apply. In other cases, however, leaders’ knowledge of some key findings re- credible bodies of evidence do exist but are garding secondary education, and studies the not incorporated into the daily lives of educa- impact of some interventions to try to tors and schools, sometimes because they are strengthen practices regarding research use. unknown, sometimes because they are not This paper reports on school and district prac- seen as practical, and sometimes because they tices regarding the use of research, based on a do not accord with conventional professional survey of 188 superintendents, principals, and wisdom or public belief. others with designated leadership roles in sec- Although many studies have addressed the ondary schools across Canada. efforts of researchers to make their work more accessible to practitioners, much less is known Conceptual Framework about how much research use is actually oc- For this study, knowledge mobilization is con- curring in education (Biddle & Saha, 2002; ceptualized as efforts to integrate research evi- Cooper, Levin & Campbell, 2009; Levin, dence (defined as findings deriving from wide- 2004, 2008). Insufficient attention has been ly accepted, systematic, and established formal paid to tracking the extent and nature of re- processes of inquiry) into policy and practice. search-related activities in schools and school This study also investigates the use of local districts; there is only limited evidence regard- data on guiding policy and practice. Although ing research use by leaders or teachers in other forms of knowledge, such as practitioner school districts. This study provides some experience, are also important to education baseline data on these questions. The research policy and practice, these colloquial forms of question for this portion of the study was: ! knowledge are not the focus of this research. Similarly, the “use” of research can also take How is the use of research integrated into the many forms (Nutley et al., 2007), but in this work of secondary school leaders in Canadian paper the focus is on practices and systems in school districts? ! schools and districts for finding, sharing, and using external research evidence and internal This paper describes one part of a broader data to make decisions about school policy empirical study conducted in 11 school dis- and practice. tricts across Canada of the ways research is This research begins with the framework encountered and used two by leaders in Cana- developed by Levin (2004) and similar fram- dian secondary schools (fuller results are re- ing by Nutley et al. (2007) suggesting that use ported in Levin, Cooper, Arjomand and of research in complex systems depends on Thompson, 2010). The broader study is also characteristics of the research (e.g., accessibili- connected to a larger project in which the ty, clarity of message, and perceived quality), sponsoring organization (Canadian Education characteristics of the system and the people in Association (CEA)) worked with a network of it (e.g., research knowledge, interest level, 10 school districts with approximately 100 supporting processes, and structures), and the secondary schools across Canada that were role of third parties (including professional interested in substantial change in secondary experts, professional development providers, education. As part of that larger project, the and various communications media) as pro- sponsors were interested in whether a stronger moters and distributors of knowledge (Figure connection to the growing evidence regarding 1, next page). effective practices in secondary schools (Na- This paper focuses on the second of these tional Research Council, 2003; Levin, 2012) three elements: the ways in which organiza- would be a useful way to promote change. tions foster and support the finding, sharing, Amanda Cooper and Ben Levin !3 and use of evidence relevant to the organiza- and individual factors regarding research use tion’s work. Much of the available literature in organizations and sets the stage for the find- addresses characteristics of the research and ings. the work of researchers. This is not surprising Interest in improving connections between considering that this is the area that academics research, policy, and practice has been growing and researchers know best, and this work has in education and other sectors (Davies et al., yielded useful ideas on how research can be 2000; Lemieux-Charles & Champagne, 2004; made more relevant, available, and appealing Nutley et al., 2007). Although there is broad to practitioners and policymakers (e.g., Cord- agreement across sectors that “evidence- ingley, Bell, Evans, & Crawford, 2004; Nutley based” policy and practice are essential to im- et al., 2007; Sudsawad, 2007). However, no proving outcomes, there is still frequent dis- matter what researchers and their sponsoring cussion of the gap that exists between re- institutions do, the use of research takes place search, policy, and practice in all areas of pub- in policy and practice settings. This means lic policy (Davies et al., 2000; Lemieux- that the characteristics of organizations and Charles & Champagne, 2004; Pfeffer & Sut- professions, such as the culture, standard prac- ton, 2000; Sudsawad, 2007). Consequently, a tices, and institutional structures of the field, growing body of work investigates and ex- are important to understanding the ways in plores issues relating to research use (or the which research is used, yet this is an area in lack thereof). which our knowledge remains limited. The relationships between research, policy, Factors affecting KMb exist at multiple lev- and practice are complex and are certainly not els: individual, organizational, and environ- unidirectional. Virtually every analysis of the mental (Berta & Baker, 2004). This part of the literature also notes that the increased interest paper begins with an overview of the societal is not yet matched by enough solid empirical context surrounding research use in public evidence, especially in education, where em- services and the education sector. Next, the pirical inquiry is much more limited than in literature related to the key dimension of the health. Efforts to increase the use of evidence conceptual framework is explored, the charac- are themselves not yet soundly based on good teristics of the system and the people in it. evidence. This literature addresses both organizational Figure 1: The Use of Research in Complex Systems Research Use by Leaders in Canadian School Districts !4 Still, the body of empirical and conceptual compared with behavioral measures (Dobbins, work, largely arising from the health sector Rosenbaum, Plews, Law, & Fysh, 2007; Davies (e.g., Amara, Ouimet, & Landry, 2004; & Nutley, 2008). A consistent finding in the Belkhodja, Amara, Landry, & Ouimet, 2007; literature is that simply providing information Lavis, Ross, & Hurley, 2002; Lavis, 2006; about research findings and implications does Lemieux-Charles & Champagne, 2004; Au- not change people’s behavior. Knowledge of thor, 2004; Mitton et al., 2007; Nutley et al., research findings is also insufficient because it 2007), is increasing our understanding of the does not necessarily translate into policy and relationships among research, policy, and prac- practice, a subject of frustration for many re- tice in education and in other fields. Empirical searchers. work from the health sector and social policy Rather, behavior is rooted in social settings, are outlined because evidence in education is which means that interpersonal connections virtually nonexistent and this field is just are vital to changing what people do. The pri- emerging. Education is just beginning to grap- mary determinants of practice, whether by ple with the many issues and challenges sur- professionals or anyone else, are related to rounding research use both methodologically people’s habits and their social settings or, to and practically. put it another way, what their friends, col- Work on KMb to date can be read as having leagues, and superiors value (Cordingley, both optimistic and pessimistic conclusions. 2008; Nutley et al., 2007; Levin, 2004, 2008; On one hand, it is clear that research does af- Maynard, 2007). As examples, Strauss, Tetroe, fect policy and practice in all fields, sometimes and Graham (2009); Morris and Clarkson in important ways (Levin, 2004, 2008). It is (2009); and Maynard (2007) all discuss the quite easy to point to policies and practices gaps between knowledge of effective health that have changed based on better evidence— care and actual practice, ascribing these gaps everything from antismoking regulations to in part to lack of effective structures in the seat belts in cars to improving prenatal nutri- health system to connect the two. tion to ending corporal punishment in Bhattacharyya, Reeves, and Zwarenstein schools. On the other hand, it is equally clear (2009) also note that health care practice falls that research is rarely the determining factor far short of available evidence and then outline either of policy or of professional practice, es- the various implementation steps that may pecially in the short term. The literature con- help remedy the situation. They show that sistently shows policies and practices persist- with careful implementation work, the adop- ing despite strong evidence to the contrary tion of effective practices can be improved sig- across sectors and, in other cases, very limited nificantly. adoption of policies or practices shown to be Belkhodja et al. (2007) talk about the “ab- effective (Maynard, 2007; Pfeffer & Sutton, sorptive capacity” of organizations in regard to 2000). The research suggests that although research, comparing this to processes of learn- awareness and training of professionals is nec- ing in individuals. Their survey of a large essary to change practice, so too are changes number of managers in various health care or- in structures, processes, and routines in order ganizations in Canada found quite low levels to encourage more use of research. of research absorption in most organizations. Some empirical work has addressed issues They identify specific knowledge integration of organization practices and research use. In activities and research backgrounds of man- health, research has established that there is agers as important influences on research take- considerable knowledge of research by many up, noting how these elements are connected leaders in policy organizations such as min- to organizational culture and learning. istries and delivery organizations such as hos- The more limited evidence from the educa- pitals (Lavis et al., 2002). However, self-report tion sector is quite consistent with findings is likely to overestimate research use when from the health sector. Many articles have Amanda Cooper and Ben Levin !5 been written lamenting the gap between re- ria. The same is true in education; expert search and practice in education (e.g., Schaps, opinion is not always consistent with evi- 2008). Other research (e.g., National Research dence. This may be one reason that education Council, 2003) shows that there are many ar- is so susceptible to adoption of practices that eas of education in which effective practices turn out to be ineffective fads and are soon are not widely used (such as practices known abandoned. to increase student engagement), whereas inef- Educators, like other professionals, have fective practices (such as tracking or retention relatively limited direct knowledge of current in grade) remain in wide use despite the gen- research. Their beliefs and practices are pri- eral availability of contrary knowledge. The marily determined by personal experience and research showing the poor effects of retention the views and practices of colleagues (Cord- in grade, for example, goes back decades. ingley et al., 2004). Educators do not typically A number of studies report that both man- read research directly (Hemsley-Brown, 2004); agers and professionals tend to rely more on their knowledge of external research findings their own experiences and the views of col- comes primarily through work practices such leagues than they do on research evidence as professional development events (Levin et (Dobbins et al., 2007; Maynard, 2007). As Pf- al., 2010). On the other hand, there is evi- effer and Sutton (2006, p. 5) note, “deci- dence that educators report understanding the sions….are frequently based on hope and fear, importance of research (e.g., Biddle & Saha, what others seem to be doing, what senior 2002) and believe that they are making use of leaders have done and believe has worked in it. the past, and their dearly held ideologies – in Professional development and learning in short, on lots of things other than facts.” In an education are not necessarily well grounded in extensive review of the research on research evidence, either (Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, & use, Mitton et al. (2007) reported that views of Fung, 2007). One reason for this is that educa- other colleagues were the most powerful factor tion also has a long tradition of considering in affecting practices but that explicit mecha- teaching as a craft rather than a science, hence nisms within the organization to connect re- the belief that teachers can and should have search to people were also important. their own approaches to teaching. Yet we also know that experience can be Cordingley et al. (2004) reviewed evidence inconsistent with bodies of available research on teachers’ adoption of new practices and the and can be a poor guide for decision making. role of research. They noted that personal rec- Summarizing a substantial body of evidence ommendations from colleagues affected what from psychology, years ago, Kiesler and research was even considered by teachers let Sproull (1982) showed that people are not alone whether it was accepted. Aspects of the good at using experience to derive sound con- organization such as networks, professional clusions. A more recent analysis with very development, or leadership could affect the similar results can be found in Tavris and way teachers use research, but this does not Aronson (2008). often occur. Coburn and Talbert (2006) also Evidence to this effect abounds. Feinstein studied the use of evidence in school districts (1988, cited in Maynard, 2007) wrote that “the and concluded that it was greatly affected by exercise of judgment is rarely a good substi- structures within the district such as net- tute for evidence.” An American physician as- works, dissemination practices, and the role of serted that “the agreement of experts has been leadership. Individuals’ conceptions of valid a traditional source of errors through medical evidence, evidence use, and research-based history.” Examples spring readily to mind, practice varied according to the nature of indi- such as the rejection of hand washing by viduals’ roles and work. They conclude that physicians or, more recently, the rejection of “organizational structure shapes individual the view that ulcers could be caused by bacte- beliefs by influencing patterns of social inter- Research Use by Leaders in Canadian School Districts !6 action through which they develop” (p. 472) more than 50,000 with 30 secondary schools). and leaders play a key role in fostering or in- The total potential pool of respondents (super- terrupting use of research (p. 491). intendents, principals, and vice principals of All of this suggests that organizational prac- secondary schools and others in leadership tices may have an important role in affecting roles as defined in each district) was estimated the way in which people in organizations at approximately 350. The survey was con- think and work and that it may be possible to ducted online using the web application Sur- shift patterns of practice by creating organiza- vey Wizard. Each district provided a contact tional supports and incentives that give greater person for the study. The contact person pro- prominence to the consideration of research vided eligible respondents with the URL for findings and their implications (Cordingley, the survey, thus ensuring that it was fully 2008; Levin, 2008; Walter, Nutley, & Davies, anonymous to the researchers. However, this 2003). This is why research practices and sys- approach also made it more difficult to follow tems within schools and districts are impor- up with nonrespondents. tant. This study was approved by the Research Very little empirical work has been done to Ethics Board at the University of Toronto and map those structures or assess their impacts. embodied standard ethical practices for re- This study, then, sought to measure the degree search. Participants volunteered and were free to which participating schools and districts to decline to answer any question or withdraw were involved in using research and the kinds from the study at any time. All participants of practices they had in place to support that remained anonymous in the electronic sur- goal. The literature does not provide many veys, so the researchers were unable to identify specific examples of changes to increase KMb ; any individual responses. they are typically discussed as broad categories The survey was administered from mid-May such as those mentioned earlier (professional to mid-June 2008, and 188 usable responses development, leadership and so on). In the were obtained after several rounds of re- implications section at the end of this paper, a minders issued by our district contacts. This is number of possibilities to increase research use more than half of the total population and (both individually and organizationally) are thus was a very good response rate for a sur- provided that arise from the findings. vey of this kind. However, because the survey data are fully anonymous, the characteristics Methods of respondents and nonrespondents cannot be compared. Because of the varying size of the An online survey was used to gather data from districts, the number of respondents in several education leaders (superintendents, principals, of the districts was too small to allow any in- and others with designated leadership roles in ferences about interdistrict differences, so schools or districts) about research practices in none are reported. However, on the whole, dif- their districts.. ferences between districts were small and always smaller than the differences among re- Sample spondents within districts. Eleven districts with a total of about 100 sec- Survey ondary schools initially agreed to take part in the survey. Ten of these districts had been par- In total, 85 survey items were derived from the ticipants in the larger project of the CEA. The literature on research take-up in organizations. districts were in four different provinces and The items explored district research practices ranged in size from very small (total enroll- by asking education leaders about research- ment of a few thousand with two or three sec- related activities that the literature suggests are ondary schools) to quite large (enrollments of Amanda Cooper and Ben Levin !7 connected to greater knowledge mobilization. • 55 percent were male. The survey asked about the following: • 30 percent were principals, 30 percent • Overall perception of research use in the were vice principals, 10 percent were su- district. perintendents, and 30 percent had other • Individuals’ research-related activities. roles. • Research-focused events or practices in the • 30 percent had been in their current roles district. for less than two years, 30 percent had • Extent of research use in various meetings. been in their roles from three to five years, • District research capacity. and 40 percent had been in their roles for • Use of data for school and district plan- six or more years. ning. • 70 percent of respondents had (61 percent) ! or were working on (9 percent) a master’s Several graduate students who were also degree, while 17 percent had a bachelor’s educational leaders piloted the survey. The degree, and 8 percent held or were work- survey items were revised based on their feed- ing on (4 percent) a doctorate. ! back. Research on knowledge mobilization faces In considering the next set of responses re- significant methodological challenges (Levin, garding research use, it is important to keep in 2008). Among these, the most problematic are mind that no baseline data in this area exist; the many different ways in which one might hence, it is difficult to assess what levels of re- define both “research” and “use” and the chal- search use would be considered moderate or lenge of assessing people’s practices in com- good. This study will help provide some evi- plex social settings such as schools. Many dence in this domain for future reference. studies of research use ask participants about their opinions and beliefs or ask generally Extent and Nature of Research use at the Or- whether research is used in their settings. ganizational Level However, the literature suggests that such responses are often inconsistent with actual be- Overall, the respondents were positive about havior (Davies & Nutley, 2008; Dobbins et al., the extent to which research is used in their 2007; Manfredo & Shelby, 1988; Lavis, districts. More than 80 percent of respondents Robertson, Woodside, McLeod, & Abelson, agreed (51 percent) or strongly agreed (34 2003). This survey was designed to minimize percent) that “the important role of research questions about general impressions or beliefs was evident in the ways their district related and focus more on the existence and frequen- research to practice.” Across districts the re- cy of specific practices or behaviors. While one sponses were highly positive, and mean scores still cannot be fully confident in the accuracy on items did not differ very much. of self-reporting, these kinds of responses are Respondents were asked about the frequen- less likely to be affected by social desirability, cy of various research-related practices in their are easier to check, and are easier to compare districts. The responses indicated that the dis- among respondents in the same organization. tricts already have a range of research-related activities. Two-thirds of respondents reported Findings that their district was involved in joint research projects with outside researchers. Among other research activities, 85 percent Characteristics of Respondents reported that districts encouraged research- One hundred eighty-eight education leaders related professional development, 83 percent responded to the initial survey. Basic demo- reported that the district supported action re- graphic information included the following: search, 61 percent said that the district provided funds for research generation and use, 78 Research Use by Leaders in Canadian School Districts !8 percent said that data were incorporated into and participate in research-related activities, district and school reporting requirements, 78 they have not necessarily capitalized on avail- percent said that the district sponsored re- able resources. Capacity is not synonymous search-focused events, 73 percent said that dis- with actual use. tricts provided opportunities for informal net- As shown in Figure 2, these districts did working related to research, 74 percent report- sponsor or organize a variety of research-related that research articles were circulated within ed events. the district, and 65 percent reported that dis- Nearly half of the respondents reported that tricts provided staff with time to engage in re- all three categories, research-focused events, search-related activities. There was little varia- research-related resources, and other formal tion in these practices among districts, which and informal networking opportunities, were is not surprising given high overall positive offered infrequently in their districts. responses. In some instances, leaders did not As noted in the literature review, research know if resources were available in their dis- also has increased impact when it is included tricts to support research generation and use in the routine events and processes of an orga- (27 percent), to build ongoing relationships nization. Figure 3 (next page) shows the re- with external researchers (22 percent), to pro- ported frequency of discussion of research vide informal networking opportunities (16 matters at various school and district events. percent), and to incorporate data into report- On the whole, these data suggest a modest ing (16 percent). use of research in regular meetings and events; One has to interpret these positive results there is no category of regular system events with caution because other survey results and where more than 40 percent of respondents interactions with participants during the in- report frequent discussion of research, except tervention phase of the study showed some professional development events, where over discrepancy between the reported importance 75 percent of respondents report that research of research and actual research use. Although is often or always discussed. Moreover, data districts reported that many practices to sup- from elsewhere in the survey (not reported port research use are available, other evidence here) showed that these educators consider suggests that the extent of research use in dis- professional development to be a less impor- tricts still remains modest2 despite increased tant source of information influencing their capacity. So while school districts in recent practice compared with personal experience years have increased their capacity to support and interaction with colleagues. Figure 2. Frequency of Education Leaders Reporting District Research Activities/Strategies Rarely or Yearly Monthly Weekly or Total Missing Never More Research-focused 74 (45.7) 61 (37.7) 9 (5.6) 18 (11.1) 162 (100) 26 events Research-related 30 (18.3) 49 (29.9) 71 (43.3) 14 (8.5) 164 (100) 24 resources Other formal or in- 31 (19.1) 46 (28.4) 72 (44.4) 13 (8.0) 162 (100) 26 formal networking opportunities Numbers in parentheses are row percentages. Amanda Cooper and Ben Levin !9 Figure 3. Frequency of Research Discussions at Various Events Reported by Education Leaders Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Total Missing Staff meetings 4 (2.3) 33 (19.3) 73 (42.7) 56 (32.8) 5 (3.0) 171 (100) 17 Principal meetings 0 (0.0) 13 (9.0) 66 (45.8) 53 (36.8) 12 (8.3) 144 (100) 44 Board meetings 2 (1.6) 20 (16.4) 62 (50.8) 31 (25.4) 7 (5.7) 122 (100) 66 Professional develop- 0 (0) 3 (1.8) 38 (22.5) 100 (59.2) 28 (16.6) 169 (100) 19 ment events Parent/community 5 (3.2) 42 (26.9) 90 (57.7) 19 (12.2) 0 (0) 156 (100) 32 events Informal networking 5 (3.3) 28 (18.5) 79 (52.3) 38 (25.2) 1 (0.7) 151 (100) 37 events Administrative meet- 2 (1.3) 17 (10.7) 74 (46.5) 60 (37.7) 6 (3.8) 159 (100) 29 ings Numbers in parentheses are row percentages. Research Capacity District Data Use When leaders were asked if their district had A growing dimension of use of evidence in ed- research infrastructure, such as dedicated staff, ucation involves the use of various kinds of 45 percent thought yes, 39 percent thought student achievement data to guide policy and no, and 16 percent did not know. In fact, all practice. The districts in this study reported the larger districts in the study did have such regular use of a number of data sources for a units, although most of them were quite small. variety of purposes, with a majority of respon- These responses were not consistent within dents reporting consistent use of all the data districts. That is, some respondents in districts sources mentioned in the survey. Data report- with research units did not know that they ex- ed as being used by most respondents were isted. Of those who did report that their dis- high school graduation rates (91 percent) and trict had a research unit, 40 percent did not elementary school literacy levels (84 percent). know how many staff were in it, even approx- Other kinds of data being analyzed regularly imately. Similarly, only about a third of re- included secondary school credit accumula- spondents knew whether the district posted tion (73 percent), suspension/expulsion num- research links and findings on its website. In- bers (68 percent), special education referral sofar as research units play an important role rates (60 percent), and achievement data by in the overall research enterprise in school dis- ethnicity and socioeconomic status (58 per- tricts, awareness of their existence and work cent). It should also be noted that 12 percent was fairly low in most districts. One exception to 26 percent of education leaders, depending was a school district that has made a consis- on the data source, did not know whether tent effort in knowledge mobilization: 94 per- these data sources were analyzed within their cent of respondents from this district knew districts. that the infrastructure existed, suggesting that Large numbers of respondents reported us- efforts to give a higher profile to research do ing these data or other research for district and have an impact. school improvement plans and annual reports (around 85 percent in each case). Still, even Research Use by Leaders in Canadian School Districts !10 Figure 4. Amount of Time Spent by Education Leaders per Month on Research-Related Activities None Up to 2 2–5 Hours 6–10 10+ Total Missing Hours Hours Hours Research-related events 43 (24.7) 39 (22.4) 32 (18.4) 30 (17.2) 30 (17.2) 174 (100) 14 Research-related reading 7 (4.0) 53 (30.5) 49 (28.2) 31 (17.8) 34 (19.5) 174 (100) 14 Research-related net- 39 (22.8) 49 (28.7) 37 (21.6) 25 (14.6) 21 (12.3) 171 (100) 17 working Numbers in parentheses are row percentages. for these relatively obvious uses, some respon- ing in three types of research-related activities: dents either did not use the data in their dis- reading, events, and networks. As Figure 4 tricts or did not know if the data and other shows, these time commitments are generally research were used in different types of re- modest. ports. Two other areas of data use were also Though a small number of respondents surveyed. Some 66 percent reported using data seemed to be quite intensively engaged in re- and other research to report to parents and the search-related activities, a much larger propor- community on system progress, while 28 per- tion reported very little or no such involve- cent reported that outcome data were used as ment. part of performance appraisal. The latter num- Respondents were also asked about their ber suggests a need for further exploration of individual participation in research-related ac- the extent and ways in which data on student tivities (Figure 5). outcomes are part of performance manage- On average, respondents reported attending ment in schools and districts. 1.5 research-focused events, with the highest participation levels in provincial events and Individual Participation in Research-Related professional conferences (such as those put on Activities and Events by principals’ organizations). However participation was very uneven; some respondents Education leaders were asked about how had attended no events at all, and no single much time they spend each month participat- Figure 5. Number of Research-Focused Events Outside of School District Attended by Education Leaders in Last Year One Two Three More Than Total Missing Three Provincial department/ministry– 46 (37.1) 41 (33.1) 12 (9.7) 25 (20.2) 124 (100) 64 sponsored events Professional conferences 61 (44.5) 43 (31.4) 16 (11.7) 17 (12.4) 137 (100) 51 Events sponsored by an education 70 (70.7) 22 (22.2) 4 (4.0) 3 (3.0) 99 (100) 89 institute such as college or university Events sponsored by another out- 49 (51.6) 29 (30.5) 7 (7.4) 10 (10.5) 95 (100) 93 side organization Academic research conferences 36 (80.0) 8 (17.8) 1 (2.2) 0 (0.0) 45 (100) 143 Numbers in parentheses are row percentages.