Abstract
Prior literature suggests a social network perspective is instructive for understanding and building research-use capacity. Although educators’ professional networks have been found to contribute the implementation of reform, professional learning, and instructional improvement, evidence about their role in supporting schools’ use of research remains thin. This chapter presents the application of network methods—specifically, ego-network methods—to understanding the flow of research-based ideas and practices into schools, drawing on the work of the Center for Research Use in Education. An ego-network approach proved useful in unpacking educators’ networks for connecting with research, including helping us to better understand the ecology of research mediation in education, to operationalize network concepts, and to develop indicators of educator and school-level capacity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
It is not possible to determine whether non-response indicates failure to complete the item or the absence of any ties to educational research resources.
- 2.
Individuals are excluded for privacy purposes and organization names that reveal sample participants are given pseudonyms.
References
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINet for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies.
Brown, C., & Poortman, C. L. (Eds.). (2018). Networks for learning: Effective collaboration for teacher, school and system improvement. Routledge.
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structure holes. Harvard University Press.
Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399. https://doi.org/10.1086/421787.
Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203–235. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373708321829.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553.
Crossley, N., Bellotti, E., Edwards, G., Everett, M. G., Koskinen, J., & Tranmer, M. (2015). Social network analysis for ego–nets: Social network analysis for actor-centred networks. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473911871.
Daly, A. J., & Finnegan, K. (2011). The ebb and flow of social network ties between district leaders under high stakes accountability. American Education Research Journal, 48(1), 39–79. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210368990.
Daly, A. J., Finnigan, K. S., Jordan, S., Moolenaar, N. M., & Che, J. (2014). Misalignment and perverse incentives: Examining the politics of district leaders as brokers in the use of research evidence. Educational Policy, 28(2), 145–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813513149.
DeBray, E., Scott, J., Lubienski, C., & Jabbar, H. (2014). Intermediary organizations in charter school policy coalitions: Evidence from New Orleans. Educational Policy, 28(2), 175–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813514132.
Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C., § 6301. (2015). https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf.
Farrell, C. C., & Coburn, C. E. (2017). Absorptive capacity: A conceptual framework for understanding district central office learning. Journal of Educational Change, 18(2), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-016-9291-7.
Finch, W. H., & French, B. F. (2014). Multilevel latent class analysis: Parametric and nonparametric models. The Journal of Experimental Education, 82(3), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2013.813361.
Finnigan, K. S., Daly, A. J., & Che, J. (2013). Systemwide reform in districts under pressure: The role of social networks in defining, acquiring, using, and diffusing research evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(4), 476–497. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231311325668.
Granovetter, M. S. (1977). The strength of weak ties. In Lienhardt, S. (Ed.), Social networks: A developing paradigm (pp. 347–367). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-442450-0.50025-0.
Harrison, C., Davidson, K., & Farrell, C. (2017). Building productive relationships: District leaders’ advice to researchers. International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2017v12n4a770.
Henry, K. L., & Muthén, B. (2010). Multilevel latent class analysis: An application of adolescent smoking typologies with individual and contextual predictors. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511003659342.
Huberman, M. (1990). Linkage between researchers and practitioners: A qualitative study. American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 363–391. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312027002363.
Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2019). Social network analysis (Vol. 154). Sage.
Mäkikangas, A., Tolvanen, A., Aunola, K., Feldt, T., Mauno, S., & Kinnunen, U. (2018). Multilevel latent profile analysis with covariates: Identifying job characteristics profiles in hierarchical data as an example. Organizational Research Methods, 21(4), 931–954. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118760690.
Malin, J. R., Brown, C., & Trubceac, A. S. (2018). Going for broke: A multiple-case study of brokerage in education. AERA Open, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858418769297.
Massell, D., Goertz, M. E., & Barnes, C. A. (2012). State education agencies’ acquisition and use of research knowledge for school improvement. Peabody Journal of Education, 87(5), 609–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.723506.
May, H., Farley-Ripple, E. N., Blackman, H. W., Tilley, K., Wang, R., Maynard, R. A., Louis, K. S., & Karpyn, A. (2018) Survey of evidence in education. Center for Research Use in Education, University of Delaware (IES Grant R305C150017).
Mills, K. J., Lawlor, J. A., Watling Neal, J., Neal, Z. P., & McAlindon, K. (2020). What is research? Educators’ conceptions and alignment with United States federal policies. Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426419X15468576296175.
Moolenaar, N. M. (2012). A social network perspective on teacher collaboration in schools: Theory, methodology, and applications. American Journal of Education, 11, 7–39. https://doi.org/10.1086/667715.
Muthén, B., & Asparouhov, T. (2008). Growth mixture modeling: Analysis with non-Gaussian random effects. Longitudinal Data Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420011579.ch6.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed). Muthén & Muthén.
Neal, J. W., Neal, Z. P., Kornbluh, M., Mills, K. J., & Lawlor, J. A. (2015). Brokering the research—practice gap: A typology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 56(3–4), 422–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-015-9745-8.
Neal, J. W., Neal, Z. P., Mills, K. J., Lawlor, J. A., & McAlindon, K. (2019). What types of brokerage bridge the research-practice gap? The case of public school educators. Social Networks, 59, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2019.05.006.
Penuel, W. R., Riel, M. R., Krause, A., & Frank, K. A. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional interactions in a school as social capital: A social network approach. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 124–163.
Perry, B. L., Pescosolido, B. A., & Borgatti, S. P. (2018). Egocentric network analysis: Foundations, methods, and models (Vol. 44). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316443255.
Pil, F. K., & Leana, C. (2009). Applying organizational research to public school reform: The effects of teacher human and social capital on student performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1101–1124. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.47084647.
Spencer, G., & Louis, K. S. (1980). Training and support of educational linking agents: Data from the RDU program. Abt Associates Inc.
Spillane, J. P., Hunt, B., & Healey, K. (2009). Managing and leading elementary schools: Attending to the formal and informal organization. International Studies in Educational Administration, 37(1), 5–28.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2002). No child left behind: A desktop reference. Office of the Under Secretary.
Williams, D., & Cole, L. (2007). Teachers’ approaches to finding and using research evidence: An information literacy perspective. Educational Research, 49(2), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880701369719.
Yoon, S. A., & Baker-Doyle, K. J. (Eds.). (2018). Networked by design: Interventions for teachers to develop social capital. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315122991.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B: Model Comparison Fit Statistics for MLPA
No. of profiles | AIC | BIC | SABIC | LMR LRT (p) | BLRT (p) | Entropy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Level-1 | ||||||
2 | −532.78 | −488.49 | −520.24 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.84 |
3 | −1107.52 | −1045.52 | −1089.97 | 0.0938 | <0.001 | 0.91 |
4 | −1556.68 | −1476.97 | −1534.12 | 0.0030 | <0.001 | 0.93 |
5 | −1888.10 | −1790.68 | −1860.52 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.94 |
Level-2 with 4 level-1 profiles | ||||||
2 | −3061.73 | −2949.07 | −3018.95 | 0.91 | ||
3 | −3067.13 | −2934.0 | −3016.56 | 0.92 | ||
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Farley-Ripple, E.N., Yun, JY. (2021). An Ego-Network Approach to Understanding Educator and School Ties to Research: From Basic Statistics to Profiles of Capacity. In: Weber, M.S., Yanovitzky, I. (eds) Networks, Knowledge Brokers, and the Public Policymaking Process. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78755-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78755-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78754-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78755-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)