Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Językoznawstwo baner

No. 1/16 (2022)

Articles

Towards research-literate language educators: Unveiling difficulties and delineating pathways of evidence-informed practice

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25312/2391-5137.16/2022_08dbkc  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2022-06-10

Abstract

The aim of our text is to show the potential benefits of developing research literacy of teachers in general and language teachers in particular. We argue that research-literate teachers may effectively draw upon empirical studies and make informed decisions in the classroom, which has the potential to optimise students’ benefits. We emphasise the fact that, by referring to their experiential knowledge, teachers can also assume the role of active researchers who communicate their observations and validate particular teaching techniques or activities for different contexts and needs. By attempting to clarify basic misunderstandings, we see the need for ‘evidence-informed’ practice in teaching, which stems from an ‘evidence-based’ approach popular in medicine, psychology and psychotherapy. Finally, we demonstrate the suitability of various designs of empirical studies to answer different types of research questions, which we exemplify by high-quality studies from language education. Concluding, we call for tighter cooperation and bidirectional exchange of the know-how between teachers and academics.

References

  1. Adesope O.O., Lavin T., Thompson T., Ungerleider C. (2011), Pedagogical Strategies for Teaching Literacy to ESL Immigrant Students: A Meta-Analysis, ”British Journal of Educational Psychology”, 81(4), p. 629–653. [Google Scholar]
  2. Alderson J.C., Wall D. (1993), Does washback exist?, “Appl. Linguist.”, 14, p. 115–129. [Google Scholar]
  3. Amir A., Mandler D., Hauptman S., Gorev D. (2017), Discomfort as a means of pre-service teachers’ professional development – an action research as part of the ‘Research Literacy’ course, “European Journal of Teacher Education”, 40(2), p. 231–245. [Google Scholar]
  4. APA (2002), Criteria for Evaluating Treatment Guidelines, “American Psychologist”, 57(12), p. 1052–1059. [Google Scholar]
  5. APA (2006), Evidence-based practice in psychology, “American Psychologist”, 61(4), p. 271–285. [Google Scholar]
  6. APA (2017), Ethical Principles of Psychologist and Code of Conduct, https://www.apa.org/ethics/code [Google Scholar]
  7. Bailey K.M. (1996), Working for washback: a review of the washback concept in language, “Lang. Test.”, 13, p. 257–279. [Google Scholar]
  8. Barnes M. (2016), The washback of the TOEFL IBT in Vietnam, “Austral. J. Teacher Educ.”, 41(7), p. 157–174. [Google Scholar]
  9. Becher A., Lefstein A. (2020), Teaching as a Clinical Profession: Adapting the Medical Model, “Journal of Teacher Education”, p. 1–2. [Google Scholar]
  10. Beretvas S.N. (2005), Methodological Challenges Encountered in Summarizing Evidence- [Google Scholar]
  11. Biesta G. (2014), The beautiful risk of education, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  12. Burch D. (2013), Taken in Vein, “Natural History”, 121(5), p. 10–13. [Google Scholar]
  13. Center on Education Policy (2019, December), A Stronger Future for Evidence Based School Improvement in ESSA, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED602940.pdf [Google Scholar]
  14. Chalmers I. (2005), If evidence–informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory?, “Evidence and Policy”, 1(2), p. 227–242. [Google Scholar]
  15. Civil Rights Project (2019), The Striking Outlier: The Persistent, Painful and Problematic Practice of Corporal Punishment in Schools, https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/school-discipline/the-striking-outlier-the-persistent-painful-and-problematic-practice-of-corporal-punishment-in-schools/COM_Corporal-Punishment_FINAL-Web.0.pdf [Google Scholar]
  16. Connolly P., Keenan C., Urbanska K. (2018), The trials of evidence-based practice in education: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials in education research 1980–2016, “Educational Research”, 60(3), p. 276–291. [Google Scholar]
  17. Cook S.C., Schwartz A.C., Kaslow N.J. (2017), Evidence-Based Psychotherapy: Advantages and Challenges, “Neurotherapeutics: the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics”, 14(3), p. 537–545, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-017-0549-4 [Google Scholar]
  18. Cooper A., Klinger D.A., McAdie P. (2017), What do teachers need? An exploration of evidence-informed practice for classroom assessment in Ontario, “Educational Research”, 59:2, p. 190–208. [Google Scholar]
  19. Education Endowment Foundation (2020), Teaching and Learning Toolkit, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/teaching-learning-toolkit/ [Google Scholar]
  20. Egeberg H.M., McConney A., Price A.E. (2016), Classroom Management and National Professional Standards for Teachers: A Review of the Literature on Theory and Practice, “Australian Journal of Teacher Education”, 41(7), p. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  21. Evans C., Waring M., Christodoulou A. (2017), Building teachers’ research literacy: integrating practice and research, “Research Papers in Education”, 32(4), p. 403–423. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gale T. (2018), “What’s Not to like about RCTs in Education?” [in:] A. Childs, I. Menter (Eds.), Mobilising Teacher Researchers: Challenging Educational Inequality (p. 207–223), Abingdon: Routledge, http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/158072/1/158072.pdf [Google Scholar]
  23. Georgiou D., Mok S.Y., Fischer F., Vermunt J.D., Seidel T. (2020), Evidence-Based Practice in Teacher Education: The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Practical Knowledge, “Frontiers in Education”, 5:559192, https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.559192 [Google Scholar]
  24. Goodwin A.P., Ahn S. (2010), A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties. A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties, “Annals of Dyslexia”, 60, p. 183–208. [Google Scholar]
  25. Guest G., Namey E.E. (2015), Public Health Research Methods, London: SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
  26. Han J., Yao J. (2013), A Case Study of Bilingual Student-Teachers’ Classroom English: Applying the Education-Linguistic Model, “Australian Journal of Teacher Education”, 38(2), p. 118–131. [Google Scholar]
  27. Harlen W., Deakin-Crick R. (2002), A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students’ motivation for learning, [in:] EPPI-Centre (Ed.), Research evidence in education library, London: Institute of Education Social Science Research Unit. [Google Scholar]
  28. Harmer J. (2015), The Practice of English Language Teaching, London: Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hau F.F.-W., Wong A.M.-Y., Ng M.W.-Y. (2021), Does Enhanced Conversational Recast Promote the Learning of Grammatical Morphemes in Cantonese-Speaking Preschool Children? Answers from a Single-Case Experimental Study, “Child Language Teaching and Therapy”, 37(1), p. 43–62. [Google Scholar]
  30. Isaacs A.N. (2014), An overview of qualitative research methodology for public health researchers, “International Journal of Medicine and Public Health”, 4(4), p. 318–323. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kanner L. (1943), Autistic disturbances of affective contact, “Nervous Child”, 2, p. 217–250. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kelly G. (2000), How to teach pronunciation, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lagay F. (2002), The legacy of humoral medicine, “AMA Journal of Ethics”, 4(7), p. 206–208. [Google Scholar]
  34. Lindhiem O., Bennet C.B., Trentacosta C.J., McLear C. (2014), Client Preferences Affect Treatment Satisfaction, Completion, and Clinical Outcome: A Meta-Analysis, “British Journal of General Practice”, 64(628), p. 506–517. [Google Scholar]
  35. Llewelyn S., Macdonald J., Aafjes-van Doorn K. (2016), Process–outcome studies, [in:] J.C. Norcross, G.R. VandenBos, D.K. Freedheim, B.O. Olatunji (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of clinical psychology: Theory and research, American Psychological Association, p. 451–463. [Google Scholar]
  36. Mausethagen S., Raaen F.D. (2017), To jump the wave or not: teachers’ perceptions of research evidence in education, “Teacher Development”, 21(3), p. 445–461. [Google Scholar]
  37. McKnight L., Morgan A. (2019, March 25), The problem with using scientific evidence in education (why teachers should stop trying to be more like doctors), “Australian Association for Research in Education”, https://www.aare.edu.au/blog/?p=3874 [Google Scholar]
  38. Merriam S.B. (1998), Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education: Revised and Expanded from Case Study Research in Education, (2nd edition), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
  39. Minalla A.A. (2018), The Effect of WhatsApp Chat Group in Enhancing EFL Learners’ Verbal Interaction outside Classroom Contexts, “English Language Teaching”, 11(3), p. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  40. Morgan W.P. (1896), A Case of Congenital Word Blindness, “The British Medical Journal”, 2(1871), p. 1378. [Google Scholar]
  41. Nelson J., Campbell C. (2017), Evidence-informed practice in education: meanings and applications, “Educational Research”, 59:2, p. 127–135. [Google Scholar]
  42. Neufeld K. (1990), Preparing Future Teachers as Researchers, “Education”, 110(3), p. 345–351. [Google Scholar]
  43. Nevo I., Slonim-Nevo V. (2011), The Myth of Evidence-Based Practice: Towards Evidence-Informed Practice, “The British Journal of Social Work”, 41(6), p. 1176–1197, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcq149 [Google Scholar]
  44. Ng B-Y. (1999), Hysteria: A cross-cultural comparison of its origins and history, “History of Psychiatry”, 10(39), Special Section: Transcultural Psychiatry, p. 287–301. [Google Scholar]
  45. Nicolson R.I., Fawcett A.J., Brookes R.L., Needle J. (2010), Procedural learning and dyslexia, “Dyslexia”, 16(3), p. 194–212. [Google Scholar]
  46. Nordenstrom J. (2007), Evidence-Based Medicine: In Sherlock Holmes’ Footsteps, Boston: Blackwell Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  47. OFSTED, The Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (2010), Reading by six: How the best schools do it, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/379093/Reading_20by_20six.pdf [Google Scholar]
  48. Preference Collaborative Review Group (2009), Patients’ preferences within randomised trials: systematic review and patient level meta-analysis, “BMJ: British Medical Journal”, 338, p. 85–88. [Google Scholar]
  49. Rahimi M., Karkami F.H. (2015), The Role of Teachers’ Classroom Discipline in Their Teaching Effectiveness and Students’ Language Learning Motivation and Achievement: A Path Method, “Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research”, 3(1), p. 57–82. [Google Scholar]
  50. ResearchEd (n.d.), What is researchED?, https://researched.org.uk/ [Google Scholar]
  51. Sackett D., Rosenberg W.C., Gray J.A.M., Haynes R.B., Richardson W.S. (1996), Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t, “BMJ”, 312, p. 312–371. [Google Scholar]
  52. Saint-Georges C., Chetouani M., Cassel R., Apicella F., Mahdhaoui A., Muratori F., Laznik M., Cohen D. (2013), Motherese in Interaction: At the Cross-Road of Emotion and Cognition? (A Systematic Review), “PLOS ONE”, 8(10), p. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sari M. (2006), Teacher as a Researcher: Evaluation of Teachers’ Perceptions on Scientific Research, “Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice”, 6(3), p. 880–887. [Google Scholar]
  54. Sharples J. (2013), Evidence for the Frontline, London: Alliance for Useful Evidence, https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2013-06/apo-nid34800.pdf [Google Scholar]
  55. Society for Prevention Research (2004), Standards of Evidence Criteria for Efficacy, Effectiveness and Dissemination, https://www.preventionresearch.org/StandardsofEvidencebook.pdf [Google Scholar]
  56. Sousa A.C. (2011), From Refrigerator Mothers to Warrior-Heroes: The Cultural Identity Transformation of Mothers Raising Children with Intellectual Disabilities, “Symbolic Interaction”, 34(2), p. 220–243. [Google Scholar]
  57. Thornbury S. (1999), How to Teach Grammar, Harlow: Longman. [Google Scholar]
  58. Tuñón J. (2002), Creating a Research Literacy Course for Education Doctoral Students, “Journal of Library Administration”, 37(3–4), p. 515–527. [Google Scholar]
  59. Uchikoshi Y. (2005), Narrative development in bilingual kindergarteners: Can Arthur help?, “Developmental Psychology”, 41(3), p. 464–478. [Google Scholar]
  60. Van Zyl J., Nel K., Govender S. (2017), Reparative sexual orientation therapy effects on gay sexual identities, “Journal of Psychology in Africa”, 27(2), p. 191–197. [Google Scholar]
  61. Waring M., Evans C. (2015), Understanding Pedagogy: Developing a Critical Approach to Teaching and Learning, Abingdon: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  62. Wiliam D. (2010), Standardized Testing and School Accountability, “Educational Psychologist”, 45(2), p. 107–122. [Google Scholar]
  63. Woodbury M.G., Kuhnke J.L. (2014), Evidence-based Practice vs. Evidence-informed Practice: What’s the Difference?, “Wound Care Cana”, 12(1), p. 18–21. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.