Scottish education system: knowledge utilisation study

3. Literature Review

3.1 Introduction

The main aims of the literature review for this study were to provide an overview of what is currently known about how research evidence is used within the Scottish education system. Theoretical literature and empirical evidence from outside of Scotland was used to support and develop this understanding.

The role of research in education in Scotland is one that is often discussed. The ways in which teachers and practitioners engage not only with, but in, research is of increasing interest to local and national governments, regulatory bodies and academic institutions, as well as the practitioners themselves. Previous research in Scotland (Chapman et al., 2015) highlights how the use of educational research varies between practitioners, between schools and between local authorities. This section summarises the key findings from the review. The findings are arranged under the following themes that align with relevant research questions for the study:

• national policy stance and context
• importance of practitioner engagement with research
• extent of practitioner engagement with research
• factors influencing practitioner research engagement.

3.2 National policy stance and context

Since the Governmental acceptance of the recommendations of the Donaldson report, there has been a general agreement that practitioners in Scotland should engage in professional learning in a regular and meaningful way as part of their normal activity (Donaldson, 2010). Indeed, teachers’ roles have developed to incorporate a greater focus on professional development, with practitioner enquiry being a key theme in their professional identify (Forde, 2015; De Paor and Murphy, 2018).

Within the Curriculum for Excellence, the Building the Curriculum documents contain overarching guidance on various aspects of the curriculum, including the use of data. “Curriculum for Excellence – Building the Curriculum 5: A Framework for Assessment” is made up a number of individual documents relating to assessment, quality assurance and moderation, profiling and standards^[1]. These provide the overarching framework for assessment and the use of data within CfE. In particular, “Building the Curriculum 5: A Framework for Assessment: Recognising achievement, profiling and reporting” illustrates the wide range of information and evidence that can be used to assess learners’ progress and achievements. These guidance documents, therefore, reflect the Scottish Government’s expectation that teachers should be able to gather and use information such as: 

“Pupil progress records (PPRs), Individualised Educational Programmes (IEPs); Coordinated Support Plans (CSPs); class teacher assessment records, whole school/centre; monitoring, tracking and profiling records over time, attainment data including SQA; information, personal, pastoral and learning support needs information and strategies” 

(Scottish Government 2010. p7)

Education Scotland has produced national guidance on Curriculum for Excellence (Education Scotland 2016), which also clarifies expectations around assessment and the use of appropriate data and information. In 2017, the Scottish Government published the National Improvement Framework for Scottish Education, which aims to ensure the better use and national reporting of data on key improvement priorities. This, together with the other inter-related national policy and guidance documents, again reinforced the emphasis on the role of data within the education system. Indeed, the latest iteration of the National Improvement Framework highlights the importance of data and ‘all available evidence on educational performance’ within the developing RICs (Scottish Government 2012). 

In the recent Research Strategy for Scottish Education (2017), the Scottish Government recognises the role of independent research in supporting continuous improvement in the education system.  The strategy draws on recommendations from a report by the OECD (2015) which recommended that developing an evidence base from evaluation and research was essential in establishing and embedding ‘what works’ within the education sector in Scotland. Before publication of the Research Strategy, a round table discussion of educational researchers and Scottish Government representatives noted that there was a professional gap between practitioners and researchers and that dialogue between practitioners and researchers is an influential factor in translating research into classroom practice (Royal Society of Edinburgh, 2016). The literature indicates that there is a lack of dialogue between the academic and practitioner communities (Williams and Coles, 2007). This is exacerbated by teachers’ level of understanding of statistical and quantitative research methods and perceptions regarding what ‘research’ is. In their study of teachers’ engagement with research in the Republic of Ireland, De Paor and Murphy (2018), found that teachers often believed that research could only be valuable if it was genuinely ‘scientific’ and heavily quantitative in nature. However, as we shall see, the findings presented in this report suggest a somewhat different perspective amongst Scottish practitioners.

In recent years, UK politicians and governments, according to Payne (2013), have placed a greater value on certain types of research and data. Organisations such as Skills Development Scotland (SDS) and the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) have worked with the Scottish Government in recent years to develop ideas about desirable data, evidence and capacities needed to assess effectiveness with the context of the Curriculum for Excellence and strategies such as the Scottish Attainment Challenge (Payne, 2013). Ozga (2004) has written that policy makers in Scotland and beyond have looked at ways to use evidence to inform practice in education and that this has developed a focus on ‘what works’. In their review, the OECD stated that in Scotland:

Insufficient use is made of assessment information to support children’s learning progress and curriculum development. Too many teachers are unclear what should be assessed in relation to the Experiences and Outcomes, which blurs the connection between assessment and improvement. 

OECD 2015 p.11

The OECD review also recognised the importance of systematic formative evidence and professional judgement, however, some academic researchers such as Payne (2013) have expressed their concerns about the heavy reliance and emphasis on quantitative data in Scottish Education policy. Although the Scottish Government appreciates the value and importance of educational research, Payne (2013) suggests that their focus on quantitative data, and their understanding of ‘real’ research, i.e.: empirical and often quasi-experimental based, has implications for the expectations and perceptions of teachers and practitioners regarding the nature of research (Payne 2013).

The landmark report into teacher education in Scotland by Graham Donaldson paraphrases Cochran-Smith (2009) to stress that:

If we are to achieve the aspiration of teachers being leaders of educational improvement, they need to develop expertise in using research, inquiry and reflection as part of their daily skill set. Outstanding teachers often use research and data to identify areas for improvement and take direct action to address any underperformance.

Donaldson 2010. p70

The GTCS Standards for Registration have embedded the expectation that teachers will have a level of research awareness as part of their professional role. For example, item 2.3.2 states that teachers should have “Have knowledge and understanding of the importance of research and engagement in professional enquiry” (GTCS 2012, p. 12) and that registered teachers should:

“Know how to access and apply relevant findings from educational research; know how to engage critically in enquiry, research and evaluation individually or collaboratively, and apply this in order to improve teaching and learning”.

GTCS 2012 p.12

Muschamp (2013) believes that research should play an integral role in teaching and cites Hargreaves (1996) who also reports that there is a strong role for research in educational practice, arguing that education should become an evidence-based profession, much like that of medicine. However, Hargreaves argues that there should not be a reliance on narrow data collection. Humes (2007) asks whether teaching can ‘ever become a fully research-based profession in the way that, arguably, medicine is?’ (p. 81). In a literature review of how knowledge is mobilised into action, Chapman also cautioned that:

… Education is underpinned by a differing set of values and beliefs that lead to certain assumptions about the nature of the teaching and learning process which are quite distinct from effective processes associated with medical healthcare. As Mitton et al. (2007) helpfully remind us, there is not one ‘off the shelf’ set of recommendations for developing or recommending knowledge into action strategies.

Chapman et al 2015

3.3 Importance of practitioner engagement with research

The concept of the teacher as researcher has been evident in the US since the 1950s (Corey, 1949). During the late 1960s and 1970s in the UK the concept of teacher action research developed largely independently from that of the United States as ideas of curriculum development in the UK changed to recognise the importance of teacher agency and reflective and reflexive practice. A key proponent of the concept was Lawrence Stenhouse who saw the effective teacher as someone who conducts and engages with research (Stenhouse, 1975). More recent literature argues that being actively and collaboratively engaged in inquiry is critical to school and teacher effectiveness (Elliott, 2009; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012). Some such as Hamersley (1993) argue that teacher research can be useful but is limited and ‘does not substitute for educational research of a more conventional kind’ (Hamersley 1993 p. 441). Rütten and Gelius (2014) argue that it is vital for practitioners, in their case allied health professionals, to engage with research and draw from innovations and tested interventions in order to improve their practice.

Reeves et al (2010) reported on a pilot project funded by the Scottish Government and GTCS that looked at how practitioner research could contribute to requirement of the Chartered Teacher Initiative on pupil learning. Their study found that participants reported the practitioner research experience improved their understanding of learning theory and wider literature, improved their analytical skills and reflection and increased their attention to issues of evidence and pupil learning. Participants valued their enquiry projects, seeing them as developing their teaching. While Reeves et al (2010) state that this finding requires further research to corroborate the impact on classroom practice and they argue that the political framing of such activity is crucial. They stress that if practitioner research is used as part of a strategy to tackle promoting attainment then it cannot be ‘disembodied from the particularities of classroom life’ or ignore aspects of professional judgement in favour of privileging that evidence seen as objective and generalisable. Ozga (2004) also refers to how the Chartered Teacher Initiative reflected the Scottish educational policy stance on aligning the use of research evidence with the development of the teacher profession. This is also reflected in teachers’ performance measurement and review.

Christie and Menter (2009) provide insights on building teachers’ capacity to engage with and conduct their own research. They reflect on initiatives such as the ‘Schools of Ambition’ and the Applied Education Research Scheme (AERS) in Scotland. They suggest that indicates a ‘key element of effective capacity building lies in collaborative approaches’. Christie and Menter argue there are sound reasons for using collaborative approaches to build teachers’ research capacity and skills.

Collaborative approaches to research are arguably more ecologically valid, especially where research teams include the professional practitioners who actually mediate the learning processes. Furthermore, collaborative approaches are arguably both economically and political sound. Collaborative approaches offer the potential for pooling scarce resources in terms of methodological knowledge and skill and they articulate well with a wide range of political policy.

Christie and Menter (2009 p350)

Such arguments align well with aspects of the SIPP collaborative model and its rationale. The benefits of collaborative teacher enquiry for effective practice have been consistently demonstrated in the international research literature (e.g. Fullan, 2013, Chapman et al. 2012, Chapman and Hadfield 2010, Ainscow et al., 2012, Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1993, p. 18-19). The literature reveals that practitioner inquiry can support school development in challenging times but only if it facilitates teacher agency rather being a top-down imposition (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 2009). Chapman et al (2011) in their evaluation of the English Extra Mile initiative argue that school improvement that is informed by action research and that tackles inequality is much more likely to emerge as a result of collective capacity, that empowers teachers, rather than through centrally driven, top-down mandates underpinned by accountability mechanisms. 

Judkins et al. (2014) reported the perceived benefits of using research as: encouraging more deep reflection on teaching practice; challenging thinking; providing new and innovative ideas to inform teaching and learning and encouraging teachers to look beyond school and gain a wider perspective. Teachers also reported benefits of their use of research for learners as being improved achievements and attitude, teachers creating more varied and innovative lessons and learners being more engaged.

Forde (2015) notes that there has been a growing appreciation of teacher research in Scotland, but there remains confusion over what this is and the ways in which it may support professional practice. With the introduction of Curriculum for Excellence, Forde (2015) argues teachers’ roles have developed, to incorporate a greater focus on professional development, with practitioner enquiry being understood as a dominant theme of this. 

De Paor and Murphy (2018), state that ‘teacher research has been identified as a transformative model of (continuous professional development)’ (p. 169). This is further supported by Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1993, p. 18-19), who claim ‘teachers who engage in self-directed inquiry into their own work in classrooms find the process intellectually satisfying’. 

To understand some of the challenges involved in initiatives seeking to promote practitioner enquiry and engagement, Reeves and Drew (2013) carried out research, in which they explored the impact of various aspects of practitioner enquiry in Scotland. Through three studies, carried out between 2003 and 2010, Reeves and Drew (2013) identified a number of issues relating to the use of practitioner enquiry as a basis for professional learning. Firstly, they recognised the iterative relationship between professional learning and everyday practice. Just as professional learning influences practice, practice, they argue, can be seen to influence professional development. The two processes should not be seen as mutually exclusive, but rather, co-dependant. Developing an appreciation of the complex relationship between professional learning and the complexities of practice is, they claim, essential in securing sustainable change. This can be seen as reflected in how research is perceived by practitioners. As discussed by Brown (2007), the relevance of research to everyday practice is important for practitioners, but the importance of practice for research is less well considered.

Describing practitioner enquiry as a means to support professional learning is further considered by Reeves and Drew (2013), who describe the typical perception of enquiry and learning as being evaluative and having a specific end-point. What is important, they argue, is appreciating the cyclical nature of enquiry, as knowledge feeds into and influences practice, which, in itself, generates new knowledge. What is needed, they argue, is ‘a system which is capable of continually creating, disseminating and testing knowledge across and around the network of activities that it performs’ (Reeves and Drew, 2013, p. 46). 

The School Improvement Partnership Programme (SIPP)^[2] in Scotland conducted as a pilot between 2013-15 included Collaborative Action Research (CAR) as an integral component. The SIPP was a collaborative school improvement model that promoted working across classrooms, schools and local authorities to tackle educational inequity with teachers working together using CAR to innovate, test and refine new approaches to tackle the attainment gap.  A team of University of Glasgow researchers worked with Education Scotland and local authorities to broker and facilitate partnerships within and across schools in a number of Scottish local authorities. This group supported teachers in building their capacity to conduct CAR to assess the impact of their innovation projects. The SIPP model encouraged staff to learn from each other, experiment with their practice and monitor and evaluate change. 

The evaluation of the SIPP found that practitioner engagement with research was facilitated by establishing the key overall principles for CAR; local authorities and head teachers ensuring time for teachers to develop professional dialogue, networks and plan their enquiry projects; promoting leadership at all levels; ensuring practitioner ownership of the enquiry process and supporting practitioners to develop appropriate enquiry methods (Chapman et al, 2016).

3.4 Extent of practitioner engagement with research

There is little empirical evidence in the literature regarding the scale and nature of practitioner engagement with external research in either Scotland or elsewhere. What evidence there is suggests that the use of evidence and engagement in research in educational practice in the UK remains limited and is often lacking in depth (Goldacre 2013; Rickinson, 2005). The literature tends to focus specifically on the extent of practitioner action research, including its benefits and the factors that promote it. Judkins et al. (2014) report that evidence-informed practice in education in the UK is in its inception and evidence is patchy and dependent on individuals' enthusiasm and experience of enquiry.

3.5 Factors influencing practitioner research engagement

In comparison to available literature on the extent and nature of practitioner engagement with research there is more literature on the factors that facilitate practitioners’ own research and, to some extent, their engagement with external research evidence.

Perceived relevance of research evidence and activity

A common theme in the UK and international literature is that practitioners seek knowledge that can be seen to have a clear and applied use for their practice. It appears that research is most valued when it deals with specific aspects of practice; is focussed on classroom activity; and when its application results in effective learning of students (Brown, 2007; Galton, 2000; Ozga 2004). Brown (2007) found, however, that practitioners in England were less likely to be interested in research that supported teachers in interpreting data, or in designing their own research project. As we shall see in Chapter 4, this is at odds with research elsewhere in this report, which indicates that teachers can value engaging in their own research. However, again, the important motivating factor is that such engagement will help improve their practice and ultimately benefit learners.

Relatedly, practitioners’ sustained investment in enquiry and research has been found to be supported by access to what they perceive to be meaningful data that helps them make a difference to learners’ outputs (Schneller and Butler, 2015). 

An evaluation of the School Improvement Programme (SIPP) in Scotland found that establishing collaborative enquiry teams of practitioners working within and across schools promoted teacher’s confidence to engage with research and use data. This included accessing and acting on external research evidence (Chapman et al 2016, 2015). Judkins et al. (2014) also found that teachers are more likely to engage with research if they are practitioner researchers themselves.

Research/ information and data literacy

Practitioners’ information literacy may be a factor limiting their use of research information, further exacerbated by perceived challenges of lack of time and lack of ready access to information sources (Williams and Coles, 2007). In their research, Williams and Coles (2007) surveyed 312 teachers and 78 head teachers from nursery, primary and secondary schools in Scotland, England and Wales and supplemented this with qualitative research. The research found that practitioner attitudes to the use of research evidence was generally positive but there were inhibiting factors such as lack of time and difficulty in accessing sources. The study found that information literacy was an important skill in supporting research engagement. The researchers reported teachers were:

Less confident in finding and using research information than they are in dealing with information generally…they expressed concerns about the construction of effective search strategies and were generally less confident in evaluating and using research information.

Williams & Coles, 2007 p.204.

Williams and Cole (2007) found that UK teachers valued the internet as a source of ideas and knowledge This was partly because of ease of access but also, it is argued, because of ‘issues of trust’ and credibility (Williams and Coles, 2007, p. 205). However, the authors stress that teachers need to be aware of a broader range of sources than they currently use. They suggest the need for more effective local information dissemination and networking strategies. In this regard, Williams and Coles (2007) commend the establishing of portals and consolidated sites to provide access to relevant research evidence and information. However, they also stress such sources are only likely to make a significant difference if there is:

…The development of a research culture and ethos (e.g. Hargreaves, 1999; Nutley & Davies, 2000), but also on the development of an information culture and ethos.

(Williams and Coles, 2007 p.205)

Building capacity and networks for research engagement

Canadian research conducted by Cooper et al (2017) found robust networks to share research evidence along with and leadership structures to help ‘filter’ research were important to translate research into action. Recommendations from this study included time was crucial along with training to build practitioners’ capacity regarding research literacy and evidence-informed practices.

Evidence from the Education Endowment Foundation (Speight et al 2016) reveals that teachers who took part in an action research project, the Research into Practice – Evidence-informed Continuing Professional Development project, to improve feedback to pupils struggled to engage with academic literature that could inform their practice. While attitudes toward using research evidence improved, there was no evidence teachers were more likely to use research to inform their teaching practice after being involved in the pilot. The teachers found it difficult to understand how best to use the literature and how it was relevant to what they did in their classroom. There were also challenges of finding time for teachers to implement lessons from research into their practice. This contrasts with findings from the evaluation of SIPP (Chapman et al 2016, 2015), which found teams of teachers could effectively develop enquiry networks that had a sustained and positive impact on their practice and learner outcomes. The difference between the pilots could be due to the differences in the nature of the practitioner action research and how this process was supported. The SIPP adopted a collaborative approach framed by particular principles and initial support from university researchers over a three-year period to build capacity. In contrast, the action research reported by EEF involved a one-year pilot. SIPP used the whole of the first year to establish shared understanding of the project approach, building trust and a networked infrastructure to support teachers’ collaborative action research. It also involved activity to ensure strategic buy in and allocation of time for teachers to plan and acquire and use evidence. As Speight et al (2016) note, their evaluation found that the strength of teacher networks and time available to use research findings appeared to be important factors influencing the Research into Practice pilot.

Research - practitioner dialogue and access to evidence

The dialogue between practitioners and researchers is an influential factor in translating research into classroom practice (Royal Society of Edinburgh, 2016). There appears to be a lack of such dialogue, which is exacerbated by practitioners’ understanding and/or confidence regarding statistical and quantitative research methods (De Paor and Murphy, 2018).

Potential issues regarding academic research ‘fitting’ with policy requirements can limit availability of evidence in the system, for example difference in priorities and timescales (Whitty, 2006; Humes, 2007). In Scotland, there have been efforts to bridge this divide with an increased focus on teacher research and with Government making research findings available (Forde, 2015; Chapman et al., 2015).

Importantly, Williams and Coles (2007) note from their UK study that it cannot be assumed research findings will reach even those teachers willing to seek out information and the research community should build into their research activity ‘appropriate dissemination strategies’ and produce outputs including reviews and summaries of research in an accessible format and style. But Williams and Coles conclude with a caution that even when teacher-friendly summaries and outputs are provided by academics:

 ‘… The provision of a targeted range of pre-digested information cannot compensate for the richness of the knowledge base available to a teacher with the motivation and skills to search more widely.’

Williams & Coles, 2007 p.205

Thus, implying that summary information alone is not sufficient and teachers also require access to more detailed knowledge along with a desire and skills to elicit such knowledge. 

Cooper et al (2017) in a Canadian study, found teachers acquired information, in this case about assessment practices, largely from other teachers, rather than from research. When asked what would promote access to research evidence, teachers requested research summaries, videos, engaging websites, professional readings, but most of all having opportunities to share ideas with colleagues. Like Williams and Cole, Cooper et al (2017) stress: 

Educational researchers have an important and increasing responsibility to ensure their research is shared with practitioners in a way that is relevant, meaningful, and easy to comprehend

Cooper et al (2017. p206)

Ozga (2004) reminds us he transfer of research evidence and related knowledge to education practice is complex and relies on particular conditions, stating that:

Educational research is difficult to transfer to practice because its findings may vary with context, or they may be interpreted differently, or they may contradict policy directions

Ozga (p1 2004)

She argues the complex interplay and relationship between researchers, policy makers and practitioners and their agendas should be considered when trying to understand the knowledge transfer and mobilisation.

Promoting an environment for, and culture of, research engagement

Creating the right environment to nurture a culture of evidence-informed practice is a theme in the literature regarding promoting practitioner engagement with and in research. For example, practitioners are more likely to become engaged in research and enquiry when they feel ownership and have agency in their own learning and inquiry processes (Schneller and Butler 2015). 

Specialist and partner professionals are seen as have a key role in supporting practitioners’ research activity but also for building their capacity to be more research capable. For example, schools’ speech and language therapists (SLT) have been found to have a key role in demonstrating usefulness of research evidence, nurturing staff confidence to take risks with practice informed by research evidence (Judkins et al., 2014). The role of educational psychologists in building research capacity in the education system capacity and fostering practitioners’ research skills has been identified by Government.

Educational Psychologists are in a key position to support and carry out research to evolve an evidence base for educational practice, inform policy and strategy, explore new ideas and to evaluate and encourage reflective practice.^[3]

The likelihood of practitioner engagement with research has also been associated with levels of professional development. Galton (2000) concluded from a survey of 302 teachers that less experienced members of staff appeared to use research less frequently. Further, the least qualified and experienced members of staff were less likely to cite examples of relevant research. Galton, therefore, suggests professional development is critical in the use, appreciation and application of research. Galton’s research is likely to have less relevance to the situation in Scotland as it pre-dates the policy focus in Scotland on increasing the research content and emphasis within initial teacher education. 

Government and other organisations and institutions can shape practitioner thinking about educational research and influence structural factors, provide advice and practical support (Humes, 2007). There are some important initiatives to systematically support practitioner engagement and participation in research, for example, the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) conducted the Teacher Researcher Programme (TRP) 2003-14 but there is no empirical evidence available of its overall impact.

Humes (2007) argues that practitioners in Scotland and elsewhere, if they are to truly appreciate research as a professional activity, should be encouraged through a culture which values such enquiry as a long-term perspective. He further argues that it will be difficult to maintain teachers’ interest in such activities, if schools and local or national governments do not support this process. Humes (2007) considered a range of structural influences that influence educational research in Scotland, in particular, the variety of organisations and institutions that can foster and support practitioner engagement in research. One such example was given as the GTCS’ Teacher Researcher Programme (TRP). The TRP initiative was formed in 2003, to encourage practitioners to both engage with, and participate in, research activities (GTCS, 2004). The support offered to practitioners wishing to undertake research included financial assistance, access to facilities and resources and providing avenues with which to disseminate findings. The TRP was suspended in 2014, in order to revise the strategy, ensuring it was fully responding to the needs of the profession (GTCS, online).

Humes (2007) also notes the role of curriculum bodies, including what is now Education Scotland in establishing relationships between teachers and research. Humes commented that educational research, supported by systematic reviews of national and international evidence, supported both the implementation of the curriculum, as well as providing an opportunity to evaluate the impact of resources and interventions. Yet, despite the promise of a greater research agenda, Humes argued changes within the organisation had led to limited impact. The research for our study suggests that the evolving role of the Attainment Advisors in Education Scotland might lead to greater impact than has previously been reported. Payne (2013) argues that Education Scotland’s commissions little research within Scotland, instead promoting research conducted elsewhere. The reasons for this are not made clear but Payne suggests that this may go some way in explaining why teachers in Scotland spend little time in conducting their own research (Brown, 2007).

This lack of practitioner engagement with and in research has also been seen as linked to the level of activity in national associations. For example, the Scottish Education Research Association (SERA), formed in 1974, aims to contribute to ‘the improvement of education through promoting and sustaining high quality educational research’ (SERA, 2006, p.1). SERA has links with the both the British and European Educational Research Associations, as well as being a founding member of the World Educational Research Association in 2009. Amongst such agencies, SERA promotes the importance of educational research within an international context (Payne, 2013).

As a membership organisation, SERA is open to individuals with either a professional or academic interest in educational research in Scotland. As Nisbet (2005) identifies, the makeup of the core of this membership has fluctuated regarding representation from practitioners, researchers and policy makers. Recent trends have shown teachers and practitioners account for less than ten percent of all members, whilst the majority of memberships stem from academic disciplines (Payne, 2013). SERA membership has fallen in recent years (Payne, 2013) and the low percentage of teachers and practitioners who make up the membership may reflect the lack of engagement with research from professionals.

3.6 Literature review summary and implications

The main aims of the literature review were to provide an overview of what is currently known about how research evidence is used within the Scottish education system and what factors influences this. These findings would then inform the qualitative study (Strand 2). Before summarising the main themes across the research literature regarding how research evidence and data are used in the education system it is worth highlighting that the literature largely focuses on teachers’ use of extant knowledge resulting from academic research studies that can inform practice. Further, the majority of the literature focuses on the factors that influence teachers’ access and application of such research evidence. There is also a body of literature that does address teachers’ own classroom based research, but again, this largely examines those factors that inhibit or facilitate such practice. The key findings from our literature review can, therefore, be summarised as:

National policy stance and context 

• The policy context in Scotland has created an expectation that practitioners in Scotland should engage in professional learning in a regular and meaningful way as part of their normal activity. Correspondingly, teachers’ roles have developed to incorporate a greater focus on research engagement.

Importance of practitioner engagement with research

• Government, OECD and international research literature concur that teachers’ engagement with research is crucial for school and teacher effectiveness within the education system in Scotland. 
• The reported benefits of practitioners engaging with research include: encouraging deeper critical reflection on teaching practice; providing new and innovative ideas to inform teaching and learning; encouraging teachers to look beyond their own school and gain a wider perspective; and improved learner engagement and attitude and learners being more engaged. Teachers who engage in self-directed inquiry into their own work in classrooms can find the process intellectually satisfying.
• The literature indicates practitioner engagement with and in research can help support school improvement in challenging times when resources are limited but only if it facilitates teacher agency rather being imposed from above.

Extent of practitioner engagement with research

• There is little literature on the extent and nature of practitioner engagement with research in Scotland. There is some indication that the use of educational research in Scotland varies between practitioners, between schools and between local authorities; that evidence informed practice is in its inception; and use of evidence is dependent on individuals' enthusiasm and experience for the opportunity to engage with enquiry.

Factors influencing practitioner research engagement

• A considerable body of literature regarding the factors influencing practitioner engagement with research exists. A common theme is that practitioners seek knowledge which can be clearly seen to have an application to practice. Research is most valued when it demonstrates effective learning, deals with specific aspects of practice or is focussed on classroom activity.
• Practitioner engagement with research, particularly teachers’ own classroom-based research, can be facilitated by establishing a shared understanding of the value of research evidence; investing time in developing professional dialogue and networks to support research engagement; associating leadership development with use of research evidence and inquiry; ensuring practitioner ownership of the enquiry process and supporting practitioners to develop appropriate enquiry methods.
• While practitioner attitudes to the use of research evidence are generally positive, their level of information literacy and understanding and/ or confidence regarding statistical and quantitative research methods can be a factor limiting their use of research information and data. This exacerbates the reported challenges of finding time to access or conduct research and to access information sources.
• Teachers value social media as an accessible source of ideas and knowledge. The use of Twitter and Facebook requires users to have a level of critical awareness to assess the credibility and validity of the knowledge available.
• Establishing online portals to provide access to relevant research evidence and information is important. Such sources are only likely to make a significant difference if there is a culture of research engagement across the profession, time to access this material and if the available evidence is in a form teachers can readily understand and apply.
• Specialist and partner professionals are seen as having a key role in supporting practitioners’ research activity and also in building their capacity to be more research engaged. 

These findings provided insights that augmented the research questions pertinent for the Strand 2 qualitative research and were reflected in the topics covered in the interviews and focus groups. Conceptually, these findings can be grouped into two broad themes:

a) Practitioner agency and culture, Practitioners are more likely to be engaged in enquiry when they have high levels of ownership and agency regarding their professional practice and related research engagement. This is supported by a school and wider professional culture where such agency is valued, promoted and facilitated by leaders and policies. This emphasises the importance of:

b) Structural factors affect practitioners’ ability to engage in and with research beyond school-level data. This is particularly the case for engaging with extant academic evidence and conducting their own action research. Such factors include national and local policy and strategies that support practitioner research engagement by facilitating greater time to access, plan and engage with data and evidence. This also includes promoting meaningful academic-practitioner dialogue and local professional and networks and leadership at all levels.