Public Policy and Higher Education E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Serie: J-B ASHE-ERIC Report Series (AEHE)
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 176

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2015

Beschreibung

Conducting "policy relevant" research remains elusive yet important since evidence-based policymaking results in better public policy decisions. But how can this be done? What are some promising practices to help make academic scholarship more policy relevant? This monograph provides strategies that--when addressed--should improve the chances of a study becoming relevant to policy audiences. It provides: * practical examples, * theoretical perspectives, * discussions of key stakeholders, and * promising research strategies for framing work in policy relevant ways. By being more intentional about the policy relevance of our work and connecting research with emerging policy debates, we can increase the likelihood that future policy solutions will be evidence-based and informed by the most recent and rigorous research in our field. This the 2nd issue of the 41st volume of the Jossey-Bass series ASHE Higher Education Report. Each monograph is the definitive analysis of a tough higher education issue, based on thorough research of pertinent literature and institutional experiences. Topics are identified by a national survey. Noted practitioners and scholars are then commissioned to write the reports, with experts providing critical reviews of each manuscript before publication.

Leseprobe

ASHE Higher Education Report: Volume 41, Number 2

Kelly Ward, Lisa E. Wolf-Wendel, Series Editors

Public Policy and Higher Education: Strategies for Framing a Research Agenda

Nicholas W. Hillman, David A. Tandberg,

Brain A. Sponsler

Public Policy and Higher Education: Strategies for Framing a Research AgendaNicholas W. Hillman, David A. Tandberg, Brain A. Sponsler ASHE Higher Education Report: Volume 41, Number 2 Kelly Ward, Lisa E. Wolf‐Wendel, Series Editors

Copyright © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company. All rights reserved. Reproduction or translation of any part of this work beyond that permitted by Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act without permission of the copyright owner is unlawful. Requests for permission or further information should be addressed to the Permissions Department, c/o John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River St., Hoboken, NJ 07030; (201) 748‐8789, fax (201) 748‐6326, www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Cover image by © iStock.com/retrorocket

ISSN 1551‐6970       electronic ISSN 1554‐6306       ISBN 978‐1‐119‐06781‐8

The ASHE Higher Education Report is part of the Jossey‐Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and is published six times a year by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company, at Jossey‐Bass, One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, California 94104‐4594.

Individual subscription rate (in USD): $174 per year US/Can/Mex, $210 rest of world; institutional subscription rate: $352 US, $412 Can/Mex, $463 rest of world. Single copy rate: $29. Electronic only–all regions: $174 individual, $352 institutional; Print & Electronic–US: $192 individual, $423 institutional; Print & Electronic–Canada/Mexico: $192 individual, $483 institutional; Print & Electronic–Rest of World: $228 individual, $534 institutional.

CALL FOR PROPOSALS: Prospective authors are strongly encouraged to contact Kelly Ward ([email protected]) or Lisa E. Wolf‐Wendel ([email protected]).

Visit the Jossey‐Bass Web site at www.josseybass.com.

The ASHE Higher Education Report is indexed in CIJE: Current Index to Journals in Education (ERIC), Education Index/Abstracts (H.W. Wilson), ERIC Database (Education Resources Information Center), Higher Education Abstracts (Claremont Graduate University), IBR & IBZ: International Bibliographies of Periodical Literature (K.G. Saur), and Resources in Education (ERIC).

Advisory Board

The ASHE Higher Education Report Series is sponsored by the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), which provides an editorial advisory board of ASHE members.

Amy Bergerson

University of Utah

Bryan Brayboy

Arizona State University

Ryan Gildersleeve

University of Denver

Michael Harris

Southern Methodist University

Elizabeth Jones

Holy Family University

Adrianna Kezar

University of Southern California

Kevin Kinser

SUNY – Albany

Peter Magolda

Miami University of Ohio

Dina C. Maramba

SUNY – Binghamton

Susan Marine

Merrimack College

Christopher Morphew

University of Iowa

Robert Palmer

SUNY – Binghamton

Michael Paulsen

University of Iowa

Todd Ream

Taylor University

Barbara Tobolowsky

University of Texas at Arlington

Carolyn Thompson

University of Missouri, Kansas City

Diane Wright

Florida Atlantic University

Contents

Executive Summary

Can Research Be Useful in Public Policymaking?

How Can Research Be More Policy Relevant?

Foreword

Introduction

Goals of This Monograph

What Is Public Policy?

Theories of the Policymaking Process

Traditional Views of Policy-Relevant Research

Toward an Expanded View of Policy-Relevant Research

Summary

Note

Sources of Higher Education Policy

State Policy Actors in the Postsecondary Context

Federal Policy Actors in the Postsecondary Policy Context

Summary

Note

Supplying Policy-Relevant Research

Problem Identification

Research Design

Policy Implications

Dissemination of Results

Utilization of Results

Summary

Bearing More Fruit? The Prospects of Conducting Policy-Relevant Research

The Limitations of “Using” Academic Research in Policymaking

Does the Use of Research Lead to Better Policymaking?

Narrowing the Gap: Framing Studies in Their Appropriate Policy Context

Summary

Summary and Reflections

Trends in Policy Scholarship in Higher Education

Can Higher Education Research Be More Policy Relevant?

Final Reflections

Note

References

Advert

Name Index

Subject Index

About the Authors

About the ASHE Higher Education Report Series

Call for Proposals

End User License Agreement

List of Tables

Introduction

Table 1

Table 2

Supplying Policy-Relevant Research

Table 3

Summary and Reflections

Table 4

List of Illustrations

Introduction

Figure 1 Heuristic of the “Stages” of Public Policymaking

Figure 2 Heuristic of the Streams Model of Policy Adoption

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Sources of Higher Education Policy

Pages

vi

vii

viii

ix

x

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

Executive Summary

As a research community, higher education scholars have many opportunities to engage our work with public policymaking. In fact, our field's top journals and professional associations urge us to conduct research that is policy relevant. But what does it mean to be “policy relevant”? And how would one go about conducting a policy‐relevant study? These questions have no easy or “right” answers, but this monograph offers guidance to researchers interested in spanning academic and policy communities. The ability to connect research with public policymaking is one of the greatest challenges facing social science research, and the march for evidence‐based policymaking is sure to press on in the years to come. But the ability to connect policy with scholarship is crucial if we are to test and build new theories, employ new analytical techniques, and come to new understandings of how our work is useful beyond the ivory tower.

This monograph wrestles with these challenges and stems from ongoing conversations we have had regarding the state of affairs in higher education scholarship. We were struck by the amount of criticism leveled against our field, which we later learned is common across the social sciences (and not just unique to higher education). Some of these criticisms are warranted, but they are often made without advice for building our field's capacity to engage with public policy scholarship. We wrote this monograph because we are unsatisfied with critiques that are unaccompanied by advice—it is unproductive to offer critiques without also offering solutions. This monograph tries to outline some solutions. We acknowledge many graduate programs are already training students in these techniques and scholars are already employing them, so our goal is not to start a conversation about policy‐relevant research (this discussion began decades ago). Instead, we set out to make policy relevance more pervasive across the field and to offer strategies for framing our collective work in more policy‐relevant ways.

Can Research Be Useful in Public Policymaking?

The divide between academic research and public policymaking (whether perceived or real) is a timeless issue for social scientists. The appropriate distance between academics and policymaking is left for the reader to decide. Similarly, the assumption that a narrower gap between academic research and policymakers will yield “better” policies is up for debate. We acknowledge these tensions, which is why we include differing perspectives on the role of research in policymaking. We include skeptics who argue academic researchers should not study whatever is the hot policy issue of the day; after all, policies are fleeting and what is relevant today may be irrelevant tomorrow. We also include perspectives that argue for more proactive scholarship, where academics must get ahead of policy issues and answer questions long before they are asked. There is a wide range between these two perspectives, and the merits of either approach will change depending on the policy context. Nevertheless, we wrote this from the perspective that researchers could be more proactive and that public policymaking is generally enhanced when the gap between research and policymaking is narrowed.

That said, we are not blind to the politics, and the monograph wrestles with the idiosyncrasies of the policymaking process. For example, the timing and timeliness of a policy will determine whether a study is relevant. Policy relevance is also determined according to whatever research is available for a policymaker at a given time, which means academic research competes with other information (i.e., advocacy research, anecdotes, political ideology, etc.) for a policymaker's attention. Also, relevance follows different rhythms (and with different reward structures) in research and policymaking, making the gap between research and policy dependent upon the policy context. These are important factors researchers should anticipate when asking research questions, framing their study, and interpreting their results.

How Can Research Be More Policy Relevant?

While there are certainly no guarantees, we identify several “traditional” and “expanded” perspectives that, when addressed, should improve the chances a policymaker will take interest in a research study. Traditional perspectives encourage researchers to identify a problem, focus on a strong research design, discuss policy implications, and then disseminate the results so policymakers can use them in ongoing debates. The expanded view complicates this by discussing how politics, power dynamics, certain methods, and timing all play roles in shaping whether (or if at all) the scholarship we supply will be in demand by state or federal policymakers. In addition to these strategies, we offer examples of “who” are the policymakers, “what” policies dominate their attention, and “how” research is used (or misused) in policymaking. We present strategies for framing research around important policy contexts (e.g., source of policy, level of governance, instrument types, policy goals, etc.), and we discuss theories and research designs that hold promise for policy scholarship (e.g., multiple streams, policy diffusion, quasi‐experimental design, comparative case studies, etc.).

Higher education is facing significant problems related to access, quality, and affordability, while policymakers are calling on colleges to be more accountable for their performance. States and the federal government invest billions of dollars each year in higher education, so it is no surprise that policymakers at each level of government are concerned about the future of higher education. If we are not more strategic and intentional about “how” our scholarship interacts with public policy, then we can expect to continue hearing critiques about how our field is a literature without an audience or one that bears no fruit. To the extent that our scholarly community can connect its research with emerging policy debates, we can increase the likelihood that future policy solutions will be evidence based and informed by the most recent and rigorous research in our field.

Foreword

A perennial issue related to higher education research is making it relevant to inform policy and practice. There are workshops, conferences, and webinars dedicated to making research practical, relevant, and useful to different publics. Of course, this makes sense. Higher education as a field of study is in place to help inform practice and to improve different aspects and outcomes related to higher education. The problem seems to be clearly identified: Higher education research needs to be more relevant. The solution, however, is not as clear. What does it mean to be relevant? For whom is research to be relevant? Who are the audiences who need higher education research (college presidents? student affairs practitioners? lobbyists? public policy makers? students?)? What's the key to making research relevant? These and other questions are often the subject of discussion to address problems of irrelevance for higher education researchers.

The focus of this monograph, Public Policy and Higher Education: Strategies for Framing a Research Agenda, is on making research relevant for public policy. As authors, Nicholas W. Hillman, David A. Tandberg, and Brian A. Sponsler do a masterful job of moving from identifying the problem to providing ideas on how to make research important and useful to public policy makers. Although their focus is on public policy, many of the ideas they put forth are helpful to anyone wanting to make their research more pointed and relevant regardless of audiences. The authors move the conversation about relevance from trite to action.

Relying on literature related to public policy and higher education, examples from the field, and the research experience of the authors, the monograph helps move the conversation about policy‐relevant research forward. The intent of the monograph is not to start or review the problem in detail, but instead to move the conversation forward in ways that provide strategies to pursue research that is applicable. The monograph includes a solid definition of public policy (a topic researchers tend to think they know, but the definitions provide much needed grounding), including sources and types of public policy. The authors also provide a detailed view of all aspects of the research process and how to make problems, research designs, analyses, and dissemination plans policy relevant. The bulk of the monograph is dedicated to guiding readers in the process of making research relevant for different aspects of public policy and at different stages of the research process.

The monograph is quite relevant and directive. The authors clearly describe the features of traditional and expanded strategies for conducting policy‐relevant research that can help readers navigate all aspects of the research process, from problem identification to utilization of research, in ways that can help guide the research process from one that is stuck in traditional ways of approaching problems that are not always relevant to one where policy environments are recognized as entangled with politics so research needs to be dynamic. The challenge put forth to researchers in the monograph is one of specificity. Too often researchers present the implications for their findings in general terms rendering the findings somewhat useless to particular audiences or, in some instances, any audience. Researchers would do well to follow the advice of Hillman, Tandberg, and Sponsler in their call to identify policy audiences and then to pursue research and findings that meet those particular needs.

By outlining theories and policy processes, the authors provide a compendium of information that is sure to be of use to those doing public policy research and to researchers looking to make their research relevant, regardless of audience. The monograph is also sure to be of use to early career researchers and graduate students who are trying to enter research conversations in ways that are pointed toward particular problems and audiences.

As higher education researchers, we tend to have good intent to make our research rigorous, applicable, and useful for particular audiences. But, it's easy to be rendered irrelevant when conversations become insular and focused on other researchers. The advice offered in this monograph will help guide higher education researchers in their quest to be relevant in all aspects of the research process.

Kelly WardLisa E. Wolf‐WendelSeries Editors

Introduction

Over the past several decades, observers have levied sharp criticisms against the quality and direction of research that occurs within the field of higher education. One of the more visible critiques came from George Keller's (1985) metaphor that this research field is a “tree without fruit,” barren due to its inability to resonate with public policymakers and educational practitioners. He warns that the field could become a “literature without an audience” (p. 8) if we fail to make our work resonate beyond academic circles and into the realm of public policymaking. Keller is neither the first nor will be the last person to make this critique. For at least three decades since Keller's remarks, presidents of the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE) have urged scholars to make deliberate connections between their work and ongoing public policy problems (Ness, 2010a).

The disconnect between research and policy is not unique to higher education. Similar divides exist across the social sciences, where anthropologists, sociologists, economists, psychologists, and researchers in other disciplines have struggled to build bridges between research and policy (Furner, 2011). And due to this disconnect, professional organizations—like the National Research Council (NRC), which consists of some of the nation's most distinguished social scientists who provide policy advice to the federal government—encourage academics to make more intentional connections between their scholarship and ongoing public policy debates. Doing so could result in better public policy by having a more representative democracy that prefers evidence over politics in important policy debates (Bogenschneider & Corbett, 2010).

Consider the importance of having elected officials justify why they choose to support one policy proposal over another: there is any number of reasons why one might prefer a certain course of policy action. For example, the policymaker could have a strong personal preference for a particular course of action, or they could have heard a compelling anecdotal story that moved them to act. They could have based their support (or opposition) on assumptions about how the world works, or according to a fundamental political belief. While these could lead to sound policy decisions, there is sure to be a wide range of political disagreement about whether these reasons are sufficient justifications for creating public policy.

Politics and public policymaking are difficult (if not impossible) to disentangle from one another. The policymaking process is inherently political, and academic research can play a unique role in the policymaking process by taking a more politically neutral stance that is protected by academic freedom. For the sake of simplicity, we start with the assumption that policymakers could rely on social science expertise and academic research as a way to separate politics from policymaking. From this vantage point, “evidence-based” policymaking is preferred over “politically based” policymaking. This is the perspective Prewitt, Schwandt, and Straf (2012) encourage us to consider, where policy scholarship can be a neutralizing force to political debates:

When there is a scientific basis for a proposed policy…and the reason given for the policy is the effects it will produce, the use of science provides more dependable as well as more defensible reasons than does unsupported presumption or speculations. (p. 27)

Academic research can play an important role at the policy table, but getting one's research to that table can be challenging. This is because policymaking operates in a contested space where scientific evidence is not the only, or most salient, reason why a policymaker chooses a particular course of action. Think tanks, advocacy groups, lobbyists, and journalists often provide research that policymakers use in the policymaking process. We argue that academic research plays a unique and more objective role among these competing sources because it undergoes rigorous peer review, requires a greater degree of transparency in how the analysis was conducted, and is grounded in theory.

In this contested space, it is not sufficient simply to “supply” academic research to policymakers; academic research must also be in “demand” by policy audiences.1 Researchers constantly generate new knowledge and share it through academic journals, research conferences, and media outlets. When this work is framed in policy-relevant ways, it has a greater chance of being picked up by policy audiences. Policy audiences have an appetite for research that is timely, germane to the problem they are trying to solve, and easily accessible. But just because research is produced in policy-relevant ways does not necessarily mean policymakers will use it in current policy debates. Considering how rapidly issues rise and fall on policymakers’ radars, it is difficult to anticipate current and future demand for academic research. This can create a wide gulf between the “two communities” of researchers and policymakers (Ness, 2010a), which we will explore throughout this monograph. Some scholars argue this gap is necessary and desirable (Birnbaum, 2000; Labaree, 2008), while others seek to close it (Henig, 2008; Weimer, 2009). Readers should debate the merits of “doing” policy scholarship, but we assume readers are interested in bridging the two communities and closing the gap between academic research and public policymaking.

With this context in mind, how can one go about connecting academic research with the policymaking process? How can researchers situate their work so it is accessible, timely, and of importance to policymakers? In a word, how can academic research be more “policy relevant” in the field of higher education? These questions are at the heart of this monograph, and our goal is to offer guidance to graduate students, junior faculty members, and other researchers who are interested in framing their work in policy-relevant ways.