Research article

Measuring the effectiveness of knowledge creation as a means of facilitating evidence-informed practice in early years settings in one London borough

---

Abstract

This paper examines our use of knowledge-creation activity as a way of developing evidence-informed practice among a learning community of 36 early years practitioners in one London borough. It also seeks to illustrate how we approached the idea of measuring evidence use and our engagement with, and adapted use of, two separate measurement scales: the 'ladder of research use' and Hall and Hord's (2015) Levels of Use scale. In doing so we examine the 'trustworthiness' of our approaches to measuring evidence use, which we explored via in-depth semi-structured interviews. Our findings would appear to be encouraging, suggesting that knowledge-creation activity provides an effective way of communicating research and keeping it top of mind; also that our interview data would appear to support the trustworthiness of our measurement scales as a means to ascertain levels of evidence use. At the same time the approach we have developed does have its limitations, namely that it is only really applicable to situations where researchers are working regularly with practitioners on areas of practice development, where the general desire is that these areas should become evidence-informed. However, we suggest that, in school systems such as that in England – where the expectation is that schools or alliances of schools should lead their own professional development activity, often in partnership with universities – it is likely that these instances will soon be increasing in number.

Keywords: EVIDENCE-INFORMED PRACTICE, EXPERTISE IN EVIDENCE USE, MEASURING EVIDENCE USE, KNOWLEDGE CREATION, EARLY YEARS, EARLY YEARS FOUNDATION STAGE, EYFS

How to Cite:

Brown, C. & Rogers, S., (2014) “Measuring the effectiveness of knowledge creation as a means of facilitating evidence-informed practice in early years settings in one London borough”, London Review of Education 12(3), 245–260. doi: https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.12.3.01