Leadership Symposium Early Bird Deadline Is Today | Join K-12 leaders nationwide for three days of empowering strategies, networking, and inspiration! Discounted pricing ends today, Feb. 23. Register now.
Opinion
Policy & Politics Opinion

Scholars Aren’t Studying the Questions Education Leaders Care About Most

School people want (and need) practical insight
By Rick Hess — January 11, 2024 5 min read
Illustration of an archer aiming away from the back of a target.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A few years ago, University of Southern California ed. school dean Pedro Noguera and I wrote a book called A Search for Common Ground. The practical work of bridging divides has drawn pretty extensive interest from state leaders, school systems, advocates, and the like. But you know where there’s been zero interest? From education researchers and schools of education.

That came to mind as I prepared this year’s RHSU Edu-Scholar rankings of the nation’s most influential education scholars. I found myself noodling on the disconnect between education’s doers and university-based researchers. For instance, even among these scholars who had an outsized public influence in 2023, it was tough to find many immersed in the questions that loom largest when I talk to state leaders or superintendents.

That’s a problem in a field that (unlike, say, math or poetry) is explicitly charged with being useful to practitioners and policymakers. That gap isn’t new (see Arthur Bestor’s Educational Wastelands from 1953 for a sense of how far back this goes), but I fear it’s been getting worse. I say this as someone who’s had a front-row seat, teaching at a half-dozen universities, publishing When Research Matters, compiling the Edu-Scholar rankings for more than a decade, convening AEI’s K-12 Working Group for nearly two decades, and toiling at the intersection of research and policy since the last century.

When I talk to K–12 officials, the top-of-mind issue may be the looming expiration of federal pandemic aid. Yet, questions about where those funds have gone, whether they’ve made a difference, and how to handle the requisite cuts just aren’t a focus for more than two or three of the 200 Edu-Scholars. While there are lots of education economists and finance specialists, they gravitate to analyses that feature causal claims, racial disparities, and for which timeliness isn’t a concern. This work yields some interesting results but ones which tend to be more useful for New York Times think pieces than real-world decisionmaking.

To learn more about the methodology used by Rick Hess and his panel of 40 education scholars, visit. To see how the scholars ranked overall, visit.

Educators and policymakers want guidance on artificial intelligence and the use of smartphones in schools. Yet, there’s no one on the Edu-Scholar list who studies these topics (and, again, really no more than a couple scholars who can be said to focus on education technology). Ed tech is, of course, a maddening thing to study. There’s little or no good data, and the field evolves at a crazy pace. But, absent good research, practitioners and policymakers in search of insight have no choice but to rely on self-interested industry figures and consultants of sometimes suspect provenance.

Then there are the heated debates around gender, race, and politicized curricula. These tend to turn on a crucial empirical claim: Right-wingers insist that classrooms are rife with progressive politicking and left-wingers that such claims are nonsense. Who’s correct? We don’t know, and there’s no research to help sort fact from fiction. Again, I get the challenges. Obtaining access to schools for this kind of research is really difficult, and actually conducting it is even more daunting. Absent such information, though, the debate roars dumbly on, with all parties sure they’re right.

I could tell similar tales about reading instruction, school discipline, chronic absenteeism, and much more. In each case, policymakers or district leaders have repeatedly told me that researchers just aren’t providing them with much that’s helpful. Many in the research community are prone to lament that policymakers and practitioners don’t heed their expertise. But I’ve found that those in and around K–12 schools are hungry for practical insight into what’s actually happening and what to do about it. In other words, there’s a hearty appetite for wisdom, descriptive data, and applied knowledge.

The problem? That’s not the path to success in education research today. The academy tends to reward esoteric econometrics and critical-theory jeremiads. A couple decades ago, the education academy had its share of quantheads and grand theorists but also far more room for scholars characterized by a practical, plain-spoken, observational bent (like Richard Elmore, Gerald Grant, Sarah Lawrence Lightfoot, or Charles Payne). That kind of work was accessible, descriptive, and not especially political.

Today, elite journals rarely publish such work (it’s not “sophisticated” enough); there’s not much funding for it (it’s not what interests the fashionable set); and hiring committees tend to dismiss it (the scholars don’t mouth the proper shibboleths). This has had unfortunate consequences.

There are many reasons for the shift, including the ubiquity of powerful data tools and the way that social media and digital platforms have enabled “outsiders” to publish and promote their analyses (eroding the stature of scholars who do less reified work).

But I think two other, complementary dynamics are especially important. The ascendance of critical theory in education research means that key gatekeepers think topics like ESSER funding and AI are only important to the extent they’re examined through the lens of diversity, equity, and inclusion. And, as academe has become more ideologically homogeneous over time, those who may not be wholly in step with new orthodoxies have taken refuge behind increasingly elaborate methodological sophistication.

I’ve found that those in and around K–12 schools are hungry for practical insight into what’s actually happening and what to do about it.

What can we do about this?

First off, there are efforts that have been designed to help on this count. Harvard University’s Strategic Data Project, UChicago’s Consortium on School Research, and the like embrace a healthy notion of “research-practice partnership.” These ventures are laudable, helping school systems analyze data and assess interventions. But they’re not quite what I have in mind. Such partnerships tend to be constrained by the formality of the relationship, frequently cumbersome bureaucratic processes, and a reliance on extant data systems. This isn’t a criticism of these efforts, just an observation of their limits.

What’s needed is a broader shift, one that’s more about culture than programming. It requires K–12 leaders, policymakers, and funders to make clear that they value education research that is timely and useful and to understand that this kind of work is tough, messy, and time-consuming.

When it comes to public universities, governing boards should be asking questions about what is and isn’t rewarded in hiring, granting tenure, and promotion. There’s a need for hard thinking about how to judge academic accomplishment, including how to credibly gauge educational utility and then accord more weight to it.

The nation’s state chiefs and superintendents should look to sponsor training and mentoring programs that place researchers (especially in their formative years) in settings where there’s a premium on speed, utility, and relevance.

One of the heartening things about the Edu-Scholar rankings is seeing how many thoughtful scholars are out there. I just wish more of them were more focused on the questions that educators and policymakers actually ask.

See Also

Image shows a multi-tailed arrow hitting the bullseye of a target.
DigitalVision Vectors/Getty
Policy & Politics Opinion The 2024 RHSU Edu-Scholar Public Influence Rankings
Rick Hess, January 4, 2024
2 min read
Image shows a multi-tailed arrow hitting the bullseye of a target.
DigitalVision Vectors/Getty
Policy & Politics Opinion The 2024 RHSU Edu-Scholar Public Influence Scoring Rubric
Rick Hess, January 3, 2024
10 min read

Related Tags:

A version of this article appeared in the January 17, 2024 edition of Education Week as School People Want (And Need) Practical Insight

Events

Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and other jobs in K-12 education at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Reading & Literacy Webinar
Science of Reading: Emphasis on Language Comprehension
Dive into language comprehension through a breakdown of the Science of Reading with an interactive demonstration.
Content provided by Be GLAD
English-Language Learners Webinar English Learners and the Science of Reading: What Works in the Classroom
ELs & emergent bilinguals deserve the best reading instruction! The Reading League & NCEL join forces on best practices. Learn more in our webinar with both organizations.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court Declines Case on Selective High School Aiming to Boost Racial Diversity
Some advocates saw the K-12 case as the logical next step after last year's decision against affirmative action in college admissions
7 min read
Rising seniors at the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology gather on the campus in Alexandria, Va., Aug. 10, 2020. From left in front are, Dinan Elsyad, Sean Nguyen, and Tiffany Ji. From left at rear are Jordan Lee and Shibli Nomani. A federal appeals court’s ruling in May 2023 about the admissions policy at the elite public high school in Virginia may provide a vehicle for the U.S. Supreme Court to flesh out the intended scope of its ruling Thursday, June 29, 2023, banning affirmative action in college admissions.
A group of rising seniors at the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology gather on the campus in Alexandria, Va., in August 2020. From left in front are, Dinan Elsyad, Sean Nguyen, and Tiffany Ji. From left at rear are Jordan Lee and Shibli Nomani. The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 20 declined to hear a challenge to an admissions plan for the selective high school that was facially race neutral but designed to boost the enrollment of Black and Hispanic students.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Education Funding ESSER Isn't the Only School Funding Relief That's Disappearing Soon
Federal relief aid, policies to prevent schools from losing enrollment-based funding, and support for vulnerable families are expiring soon.
10 min read
Vector illustration of a businessman's hand holding a slowly vanishing dollar sign.
iStock/Getty
Policy & Politics Opinion Scholars’ Writing Is Often Unclear. Why That Matters for the K-12 Field
Academic writing is often incomprehensible. Public-facing writing can help scholars break bad habits.
9 min read
Image shows a multi-tailed arrow hitting the bullseye of a target.
DigitalVision Vectors/Getty
Law & Courts School District Lawsuits Against Social Media Companies Are Piling Up
More than 200 school districts are now suing the major social media companies over the youth mental health crisis.
7 min read
A close up of a statue of the blindfolded lady justice against a light blue background with a ghosted image of a hands holding a cellphone with Facebook "Like" and "Love" icons hovering above it.
iStock/Getty