Researcher Perspectives on Strengthening IES’s Research Grant and Training Programs - October 16, 2014 - Technical Working Group Summary

Oct 15, 2026

Technical Working Group Summary detailing discussions at the Institute of Education Sciences on October 16, 2014, convened to identify critical education research problems and methods needed to improve IES research training programs for the next generation of researchers. The summary emphasizes increasing rigor while also expanding considerations for timely, relevant, and practice-informed evidence. It includes participant suggestions for prioritizing topics, optimizing funding, accelerating dissemination, and strengthening implementation research, replication, meta-analysis, measures, and long-term data systems.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages15

Reading Time38 min

AccessFree to download

Technical Working Group Summary

Purpose and Context

Session Structure

Suggestions for Strengthening Research and Training

Characteristics of Influential Research

Researcher Perspectives on Strengthening IES’s Research Grant and Training Programs October 16, 2014 Technical Working Group Summary The National Center for Education Research (NCER) and the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER), in the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) at the U.S. Department of Education, convened a Technical Working Group on October 16, 2014. The purpose of this Technical Work Group (TWG) meeting was to elicit views on the most critical education problems and issues on which highquality research is needed, the development or adaptation of new methodological approaches for addressing these issues, optimizing IES research training programs to support the preparation of the next generation of researchers, and ways to prioritize the use of limited funds to support credible research that impacts policy and practice.1 This effort was, in part, a response to a 2013 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that found that IES has, through its grant making and training activities, substantially improved the quality and rigor of education research since its inception in 2002, but recommended that IES involve stakeholders to ensure that the research it supports is timely and relevant. The Technical Working Group discussion was organized into five broad sessions: (1) characteristics of influential research; (2) critical, unaddressed issues in education research; (3) advancing research methods; (4) improving IES’s training programs; and (5) targeting resources. The TWG consisted of a group of experts in the field of education research focused on a range of topics and working in academic settings and research organizations. Collectively, the participants’ research represents a range of backgrounds, expertise, and methodologies and includes general and special education student populations from early childhood through postsecondary education.2 It was noted that the increased use of rigor in education research has led to more credible results for the field regarding the effects of programs, as well as in the development of programs and the exploration of data. However, participants noted that there are additional considerations in producing amore complete body of research that is timely, relevant, and likely to be used in practice. The TWG members made several suggestions to ensure that the high-quality research supported by IES (NCER and NCSER) continues as well as becomes even more timely and relevant to practice and policy in the future. 􀁸 Identify priority research topics and invest in them to yield short-term and long-term answersand support sustained efforts in a few areas that will really make an impact. 􀁸 Increase funding to provide information in areas of immediate need (for example, to better understand special populations, to examine change and continuity, to understand the impact of leadership, and to support early career researchers) . 􀁸 Promote smaller and collaborative research partnership projects focused on a particular topic or emergent gap in practice or knowledge and provide more flexibility in funding them. 􀁸 Disseminate research findings more quickly and facilitate the use of findings by practitioners. 1 Refer to the agenda included in Appendix A. 2 Refer to the list of participants and descriptions of their expertise included in Appendix B. 􀁸 Place more emphasis on implementation research and advance methods related to implementation science. 􀁸 Promote replication studies and meta-analyses to build a body of evidence. 􀁸 Promote the use of other methodologies such as factorial and single-case designs, as well as well-designed qualitative research. 􀁸 Place more emphasis on improving measures. 􀁸 Invest in connecting data systems and on gathering information over longer periods of time. The following includes a brief summary of each session of the TWG discussions. Characteristics of Influential Research What research studies have had the mo

FAQs

What was the purpose of the October 16, 2014 Technical Working Group meeting?

To elicit views on the most critical education problems needing high-quality research, to develop or adapt methodological approaches, and to optimize IES research training programs. It also aimed to prioritize limited funds for credible research that affects policy and practice.

How did participants describe influential education research?

Influential research was characterized as cumulative evidence with clear practical implications. It should be meaningful, brief, and simple for practitioners, and able to be “sold” beyond academia.

What recommendations did the TWG make to improve IES-supported research going forward?

Recommendations included prioritizing research topics, increasing targeted funding for immediate needs and early career researchers, promoting smaller collaborative partnership projects, disseminating findings faster, and placing more emphasis on implementation research, replication studies, meta-analyses, improved measures, and longer-term connected data systems.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Riley West