Cited by 360Educational Assessment and ImprovementTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesEducational Research and Methods

The Use of Research to Improve Professional Practice: a systematic review of the literature

HEMSLEY-BROWN, JANE, SHARP, CAROLINE·2003·Oxford Review of Education

Abstract

In a keynote address to the Teacher Training Agency Annual Conference, Professor David Hargreaves suggested that teaching could become an evidence-based profession if educational researchers were made more accountable to teachers. This systematic literature review set out to explore: how teachers use research; which features of research encourage teachers to use research findings in their own practice; whether medical practitioners make greater use of research findings than teachers; and approaches to dissemination. Two key ideas emerge from this review. First, there appear to be common barriers to research use in both medicine and in education. Findings suggest that there is a need to create a culture in the public sector which supports and values research. There are, however, a number of factors, which appear to be more specific to the education field. Key differences in the way that research knowledge is constructed in the social sciences has led to researchers being challenged about their findings, particularly in relation to the context, generalisability and validity of the research. For these reasons the development of communication networks, links between researchers and practitioners, and greater involvement of practitioners in the research process, have emerged as strategies for improving research impact.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0305498032000153025

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Across public sector human service organizations, those with a strong focus on development of new knowledge and understanding of best practices, as well as incentives to adopt best practices, are likely well poised to explore appropriate practices and implementation strategies.

    “Across public sector human service organizations, those with a strong focus on development of new knowledge and understanding of best practices (i.e., “learning organizations,” (Senge 2006), as well as incentives to adopt best practices are likely well poised to explore appropriate practices and implementation strategies”

    From Advancing a Conceptual Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors (2011) · cites this paper as Hemsley-Brown and Sharp 2003

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
HEMSLEY-BROWN, J., & SHARP, C.
Affiliations
National Foundation for Educational Research (GB)
Venue
Oxford Review of Education
Published
2003-12
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
449-471
ISSN
  • 0305-4985 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3915
OpenAlex
W2134795844
Cited by
360
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 18
FWCI
1.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oxford Review of Education (publishedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
Keywords
evidence-based practice, research dissemination, barriers to research use, research-practice collaboration, research accountability, research impact, research validity, physicians, practitioner involvement in research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review