The significance of context for the emergence and implementation of research evidence: the case of collaborative problem-solving

Abstract One of the fundamental purposes of educational research is to provide evidence to facilitate effective practice. However, the evidence itself does not have much value for practitioners unless key information about the context from which the evidence was generated is also provided. In this paper, we use the word ‘context’ to refer to factors that are relevant for learning, including the interactions that learners experience with multiple people, artefacts, and environments. Unfortunately, in many educational research studies, either these factors do not get the required attention or information about them is presented in an incoherent structure. The resultant lack of information leads to two significant drawbacks. First, it creates confusion among practitioners who want to apply research evidence in their practice. Second, it leads to research studies that on the face of it are similar, but that in reality have resulted from evidence that has been collected in significantly different contexts being included under the same categories in reviews, meta-reviews, and best-evidence syntheses. In this paper, we draw on the concept of ‘relatability’ of evidence and present taxonomy for collaborative problem-solving (CPS) that can be used to provide the valuable information against which research evidence can be indexed. By addressing the need for more detailed information about the contextual factors from which the evidence is generated to bridge the gap between research and practice in CPS research, we aim to exemplify the approach that is needed in educational research more generally.

[1]  Peter Blatchford,et al.  Changes in grouping practices over primary and secondary school , 2003 .

[2]  I. Rasmussen,et al.  Facilitating students’ individual and collective knowledge construction through microblogs , 2015 .

[3]  Mutlu Cukurova,et al.  Solved! Making the case for collaborative problem-solving , 2017 .

[4]  Y. Lou,et al.  Within-Class Grouping: A Meta-Analysis , 1996 .

[5]  Cary J. Roseth,et al.  Promoting early adolescents' achievement and peer relationships: the effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. , 2008, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone: Overview and Meta‐analysis , 2002 .

[7]  Rosemary Luckin,et al.  Re-Designing Learning Contexts: Technology-Rich, Learner-Centred Ecologies , 2010 .

[8]  Catriona Louise De Bruin.  Conceptualizing effectiveness in disability research , 2017 .

[9]  Rosemary Luckin,et al.  Diagnosing Collaboration in Practice-Based Learning: Equality and Intra-individual Variability of Physical Interactivity , 2017, EC-TEL.

[10]  P. Dillenbourg.  What do you mean by collaborative learning , 1999 .

[11]  Geoffrey Petty.  Evidence Based Teaching: A Practical Approach , 2006 .

[12]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. , 2012 .

[13]  John Hattie,et al.  Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement , 2008 .

[14]  M. Bassey.  Pedagogic Research: on the relative merits of search for generalisation and study of single events , 1981 .

[15]  T. Kratochwill,et al.  Evidence-Based Practice: Promoting Evidence-Based Interventions in School Psychology , 2004 .

[16]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Cooperative Learning and Student Achievement , 1988 .

[17]  Tristram Smith,et al.  What is evidence-based behavior analysis? , 2013, The Behavior analyst.

[18]  Thomas R. Kratochwill,et al.  Evidence-based interventions in school psychology: Conceptual foundations of the Procedural and Coding Manual of Division 16 and the Society for the Study of School Psychology Task Force. , 2002 .

[19]  B. Nardi.  Studying context: a comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition , 1995 .

[20]  Cary J. Roseth,et al.  The relationship between motivation and achievement in interdependent situations , 2014 .

[21]  Frederick S. Breed,et al.  Classroom organization and management , 1934 .

[22]  R. Gersten,et al.  Research in Special Education: Scientific Methods and Evidence-Based Practices , 2005 .

[23]  Lev Manovich,et al.  The poetics of augmented space , 2006 .

[24]  Julian Williams,et al.  Is the educational ‘what works’ agenda working? Critical methodological developments , 2016 .

[25]  W. Damon,et al.  Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education , 1989 .

[26]  F. Dochy,et al.  A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? , 2013 .

[27]  Peter Blatchford,et al.  Effective Group Work in Primary School Classrooms: The SPRinG Approach , 2013 .

[28]  Riccio,et al.  The Importance of Context in the US Preexposure Effect in CTA: Novel versus Latently Inhibited Contextual Stimuli , 1996, Learning and motivation.

[29]  C. Symes,et al.  Spatial Theories of Education: Policy and Geography Matters , 2007 .

[30]  L. Lunsky.  Childhood and Society. , 1965 .