[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-595561-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-595561-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","educational-research-in-educational-practice-predictors-of-use","Educational Research in Educational Practice - Predictors of Use","","This study investigates predictors of school practitioners’ use of educational research (N = 2,425). The proposed model significantly but modestly explained practitioners’ infrequent use of educational research. Among four factors, “opinions about research” showed the strongest explanatory power for use of research-based information (RBI). Results are discussed in relation to existing knowledge on how school practitioners use educational research, with implications for future research and practice.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/educational-research-in-educational-practice-predictors-of-use/595561/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/educational-research-in-educational-practice-predictors-of-use/595561.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Well Done","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What does the study examine?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The study examines predictors of school practitioners’ use of educational research and related research-based information (RBI).","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How large is the sample?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The study reports a sample of 2,425 school practitioners (N = 2,425).",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which factor explains use the most?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Among the four factors examined, “opinions about research” has the most explanatory power for practitioners’ use.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},595561,1792231380,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},5909892210082,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/56001069da27c9f41e8?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1789614185077863061","Educational Research in Educational Practice:  \nPredictors of Use  \nLarysa V. Lysenko  \nConcordia University  \nPhilip C. Abrami  \nConcordia University  \nRobert M. Bernard  \nConcordia University  \nChristian Dagenais  \nUniversité de Montréal  \nMichel Janosz  \nUniversité de Montréal  \nCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation 37:2 (2014)©2014 Canadian Society for the Study of Education/ Société canadienne pour l’étude de l’éducation  \n[www.cje-rce.ca](www.cje-rce.ca)  \nAbstract  \nThis study investigates the predictors of school practitioners’(N = 2,425) use of educational research. The suggested model explained significantly but modestly the infrequent use of educational research by practitioners. Of the four factors in the study,“opinions about research” had the most explanatory power. The results are discussed in connection with existing knowledge about school practitioners’ use of educational research and implications for further research and practice.  \nKeywords: factor analysis, multiple regression, predictors of use, school practice, use of research-based information (RBI)  \nRésumé  \nCette étude examine les facteurs prédictifs de l’utilisation des connaissances issues de la recherches éducatives par les praticiens scolaires (N = 2425). Le modèle proposé a expliqué de façon significative, mais modestement, l’utilisation peu fréquente de la recherche éducative par les praticiens. Des quatre facteurs “opinions sur la recherché” est celui qui est le plus corrélé à l’utilisation des recherches éducatives par les praticiens scolaires. Les résultats sont analysés en relation avec les connaissances actuelles sur l’usage scolaire dela recherche éducative par les praticiens. Les implications pour les recherches futures et pour la pratique sont également explicités.  \nMots-clés: analyse factorielle, facteurs prédictifs de l’utilisation, pratiques scolaires, regression multiple, utilisation des connaissances issues de la recherches  \nCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation 37:2 (2014) [www.cje-rce.ca](www.cje-rce.ca)  \nIntroduction  \nThe first decade of the 21st century has been marked by renewed calls for educational practice that is based on the results of educational research. In one notable example of many such efforts, Hattie (2009) summarized more than 800 research syntheses of educational research and pointed to effective strategies and techniques for teaching and learning. Despite considerable efforts of many, the unsystematic use or non-use of educational research to inform educational practice continues to deter the progress and success of educational ventures (e.g., OECD, 2000, 2007, 2010) .  \nMuch has been written about the issues that account for the disconnect between educational research and practice. First, ever-changing and ambiguous goals and expectations with regard to educational standards favour the use of practical wisdom (Lortie, 1975) . Second, the evidence accumulated through decades of educational research largely exists in a disassembled state, making it difficult for practitioners’ to access it, to consolidate it, and to use it (OECD, 2000) . Third, practitioners perceive their educational problems as extremely complex and unsolvable by research, due to the insufficiency of existing theories of learning, child development, and so on. Fourth, the ongoing qualitative–quantitative methodological debate makes it difficult for school practitioners to decide on the best-quality evidence (Kennedy, 1997) . Finally, there is a widespread and time-honoured tradition of privileging knowledge generated in academia over evidence coming from practical contexts, which deepens the gap between research and practice. Professional judgement based on the practitioners’“soft” data or tacit knowledge is often denied a place in actionable knowledge, consequently narrowing the practitioners’role to only that of a consumer of externally produced knowledge (Hammersley, 2004) .  \nNumerous ","cbCaiaG6jKb8kqFt","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiaG6jKb8kqFt","pdf",321021,26,"English","# Introduction\n# Use of Research by School Practitioners\n# Abstract\n# Keywords","[{\"question\":\"What does the study examine?\",\"answer\":\"The study examines predictors of school practitioners’ use of educational research and related research-based information (RBI).\"},{\"question\":\"How large is the sample?\",\"answer\":\"The study reports a sample of 2,425 school practitioners (N = 2,425).\"},{\"question\":\"Which factor explains use the most?\",\"answer\":\"Among the four factors examined, “opinions about research” has the most explanatory power for practitioners’ use.\"}]","Educational Research in Educational Practice - Predictors of Use | PDF",1792081386,66]