“The statements of science are not of what is true and what is not true, but statements of what is known with different degrees of certainty.”
Richard Feynman
Motherhood and apple pie?
On the surface, it would be reasonable to assume that there is currently widespread agreement about the need for school leaders and teachers to draw on research and evidence to inform professional practice. Players as diverse as teacher unions, professional bodies and the Secretary of State for Education promote the value of schools becoming research engaged. Indeed, it would be odd to argue against the idea that teachers should be given opportunities to become research literate, so that their pupils can enjoy lessons informed by the best evidence.
Digging beneath the surface however, shows that there is less agreement about what being a research-engaged professional means. Questions are rightly raised about ‘What evidence?’ and ‘Whose evidence?’ Some also point out that the translation of research into practical classroom action is significantly more complex and nuanced that some advocates suggest.
There are other more disquieting issues too. Some argue that influential high-profile groups use evidence selectively to push ideological and political preferences. The increasing fragmentation of education in England and the demise of local authorities and national agencies, has given rise to an increasing number of diverse organisations seeking to influence policy and practice; almost all of them claiming to use evidence to legitimise their positions. It is unsurprising that the motivations of certain groups are questioned when teachers see politicians and others use evidence selectively to justify certain policies, while conveniently ignoring evidence that challenges their preferred direction of travel.
The increased attention being given to evidence in education has been accompanied by the growth of social media, particularly blogging and Twitter, as a channel communicating directly with schools, teachers and officials. Traditional channels have been disrupted. In many ways, this change can be welcomed as a democratisation of communication, giving voice to alternative perspectives beyond traditional elites and orthodoxies.