Abstracts
Résumé
Cet article concerne les retombées d’un réseau de mobilisation des savoirs (RMS) sur l’équité visant à contrer les barrières systémiques à l’apprentissage des élèves ontariens. Les retombées de ce RMS ont été initialement analysées quantitativement, laissant moins de place à la perception des partenaires. Cherchant à compléter le portrait des retombées, une analyse qualitative de dix entretiens avec des partenaires impliqués a permis d’en identifier de nouvelles, notamment l’importance des relations comme moteur, mais surtout comme retombées centrales de la mobilisation des savoirs. Cet article témoigne de l’apport de l’évaluation qualitative dans l’évaluation des retombées des RMS. Des recommandations sont émises pour favoriser l’évaluation qualitative, en plus de considérations pour favoriser les retombées de RMS en contexte de diversité.
Mots-clés :
- Réseau de mobilisation des savoirs,
- éducation,
- équité,
- évaluation qualitative,
- diversité,
- retombées
Abstract
This article explores the benefits of a knowledge mobilization network (KMN) on equity aimed at countering systemic barriers to learning for Ontario students. The impact of this KMN was initially analyzed quantitatively, leaving less room for the perception of the partners. Aiming for a more comprehensive picture, a qualitative analysis of ten interviews with partners helped to identify new impacts, especially the importance of relationships as a driving force of the network and as a central benefit of knowledge mobilization. This paper highlights the contribution of qualitative evaluation to assess the impact of KMN. Recommendations are made to promote qualitative evaluation and the impact of KMN in a context of diversity.
Keywords:
- Knowledge mobilization network,
- education,
- equity,
- diversity,
- qualitative evaluation,
- benefits
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Anderson-Butcher, D., Lachini, A. L., Ball, A., Barke, S. et Martin, L. D. (2016). University–school partnership to examine the adoption and implementation of the Ohio community collaboration model in one urban school district: A mixed-method case study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 21(3), 190-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2016.1183429
- Bartholomew, S. S. et Sandholtz, J. H. (2009). Competing views of teaching in a school–university partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 155-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.07.001
- Bélanger, N. et Dulude, E. (2021). Investigating the challenges and opportunities of a bilingual equity knowledge brokering network: A critical and reflective perspective from university partners. Policy Futures in Education, 21(1), 58-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103211041484
- Best, A. et Holmes, B. (2010). Systems thinking, knowledge and action: Towards better models and methods. The Policy Press, 6(2), 145-159. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426410X502284
- Bosma, L. M., Sieving, R. E., Ericson, A., Russ, P., Cavender, L. et Bonine, M. (2010). Elements for successful collaboration between k-8 school, community agency, and university partners: The lead peace partnership. Journal of School Health, 80(10), 501-507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00534.x
- Bowen, S. et Zwi, A. B. (2005). Pathways to “evidence-informed” policy and practice: A framework for action. PLoS Medicine, 2(7), 600–605. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020166
- Briggs, G., Briggs, A., Whitmore, E., Maki, A., Ackerley, C., Maisonneuve, A. et Yordy, C. (2015). Questing Your Way to a Knowledge Mobilization Strategy. Community First: Impacts of community engagement. https://carleton.ca/communityfirst/wp-content/uploads/KMB-Questing-Your-Way-to-a-KMb-Strategy-Jun-29-2015.pdf
- Briscoe, P., Pollock, K., Campbell, C. et Carr-Harris, S. (2016). Finding the sweet spot: Network structures and processes for increased knowledge mobilization. Brock Journal of Education, 25(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v25i1.432
- Campbell, C., Pollock, K., Briscoe, P., Carr-Harris, S. et Tuters, S. (2017). Developing a knowledge network for applied education research to mobilize evidence in and for educational practice. Educational Research, 59(2), 209-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2017.1310364
- Coburn, C. E., Penuel, W. R. et Geil, K. E. G. (2013). Research-Practice Partnerships. A Strategy for Leveraging Research for Educational Improvement in School Districts. William T. Grant Foundation. https://wtgrantfoundation.org/library/uploads /2015/10/Research-Practice-Partnerships-at-the-District-Level.pdf
- Conseil de recherche en sciences humaines du Canada. (2021). Définitions. https://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/programs-programmes/definitions-fra.aspx#km-mc
- Cooper, A. (2014). Knowledge mobilization in education across Canada: A cross-case analysis of 44 research brokering organizations. Evidence et Policy, 10(1), 29-59. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426413X662806
- Daly, A. J. et Finnigan, K. S. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 11(2), 111-138. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-009-9102-5
- Davies, H. T. O. et Nutley, S. M. (2008). Learning more about how research-based knowledge gets used: Guidance in the development of new empirical research. William T. Grant Foundation. https://wtgrantfoundation.org/resource/ learning-more- about-how-research-based-knowledge-gets-used-guidance-in-the-development-of-new- empirical-research
- Denzin, N. K. et Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4e ed.). SAGE Publications.
- Earl, L. et Hannay, L. (2011). Educators as knowledge leaders. Dans J. Robertson et H. Timperley (dir.), Leadership and Learning (p. 186−201). SAGE Publications.
- Groupe de travail. (2021). Rapport sur la pénurie des enseignantes et des enseignants dans le système d’éducation en langue française de l’Ontario. https://files.ontario.ca/edu-report-on-shortage-teachers-french-langauge-education-system-fr-2021-06-17.pdf
- Honig, M. I. (2006). Complexity and policy implementation: Challenges and opportunities for the field. Dans M. I. Honig (dir.), New Directions In Education Policy Implementation: Confronting Complexity (p. 1-23). State University of New York Press.
- Kramer, D. M. et Wells, R. P. (2005). Achieving buy-in: Building networks to facilitate knowledge transfer. Science Communication, 26(4), 428-444. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547005275427
- Leithwood, K. et Louis, K. S. (2012). Linking leadership to student learning. Jossey-Bass.
- Malik, S. (2016). Knowledge mobilization in Ontario: A multi-case study of education organizations. University of Toronto.
- Malik, S. (2020). Knowledge mobilization for impact: A multi-case study of education organizations. International Journal of Education Policy et Leadership, 16(6). https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2020v16n6a945
- Meyer, J. (2000). Using qualitative methods in health related action research. British Medical Journal, 320(178). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7228.178
- Miles, M. B., Huberman, M. et Saldana, J. (2019). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (4e ed.). SAGE Publications.
- Ministère de l’Éducation de l’Ontario. (2009). Comment tirer parti de la diversité. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/fre/policyfunding/ equity.pdf
- Ng-A-Fook, N., Kane, R. G., Butler, J. K., Glithero, L. et Forte, R. (2015). Brokering Knowledge Mobilization Networks: Policy Reforms, Partnerships, and Teacher Education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(122), 1-28. htttp://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2090
- Nutley, S., Jung, T. et Walter, I. (2008). The many forms of research-informed practice: A framework for mapping diversity. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(1), 53-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640801889980
- Paillé, P. et Mucchielli, A. (2021). L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales (5e éd.). A. Collin.
- Pattinson, S., Preese, D. et Dawson, P. (2016). In search of innovative capabilities of communities of practice: A systematic review and typology for future research. Management Learning, 47(5), 506-524. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507616646698
- Penuel, W. R. (2017). Research–practice partnerships as a strategy for promoting equitable science teaching and learning through leveraging everyday science. Science Learning In Everyday Life, 101, 520-525. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21285
- Phipps, D., Cummings, J., Pepler, D., Craig, W. et Cardinal, S. (2016). The co-produced pathway to impact describes knowledge mobilization processes. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 9(1), 31-40. https://doi: 10.54656/gokh9495
- Réseau de savoir sur l’équité-Equity Knowledge Network (2019). RSEKN Report.
- Rodway, J. (2015). Connecting the dots: Understanding the flow of research knowledge within a research brokering network. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.14507/epaa. v23.2180
- Savoie-Zajc, L. (2003). L’entrevue semi-dirigée. Dans B. Gauthier (dir.), Recherche en sciences sociales : de la problématique à la collecte des données (4e éd., p. 293-316). Presses de l’Université du Québec.
- Shewchuk, S. et Cooper, A. (2018). Exploring equity in Ontario: A provincial scan of equity policies across school boards. Canadian Journal of Education, 41(4), 917-953.
- Shore, C. et Wright, S. (2015). Governing by numbers: Audit culture, rankings and the new world order. Social Anthropology, 23(1), 22-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12098
- Skipper, Y. et Pepler, D. J. (2021). Knowledge mobilization: Stepping into interdependent and relational space using co-creation. Action Research, 19(3), 588-605. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750320960810
- Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 426-431. https://doi.org/10.2307/3109916