SAVE | EMAIL | PRINT | MOST POPULAR |  RSS | | REPRINT
|
Executing Evidence-Based Practice
February 26, 2008
Communities of practice (CoPs), in which individuals collaborate with each other to support long-term learning, sounds great. But do CoPs work for learning and development professionals? An evidence-based practice approach is a way to boost efficacy.
By Benjamin E. Ruark
Not long ago, I had a brief discussion with one of our industry's luminaries about the criticality of adopting Evidence-Based Practice (EBP). This individual said we definitely should put more emphasis on research. He parroted all the right encouragements to my argument for EBP adoption. It's what he wasn't saying that bothered me; he wasn't getting EBP's potential to end the learning and development riddle of accountability once and for all. That got me wondering, and finally, I got why he wasn't getting it.
Mystery Jigsaw Puzzle
For every CoP, EBP represents a mystery jigsaw puzzle that must be solved. The puzzle's image remains a mystery until all, or most of its pieces, are fitted together. In bullet points, assembling the puzzle goes something like this:
• You can't know beforehand what image or configuration the puzzle will take on.
• Research findings on the many relevant factors of effectiveness for your CoP comprise your puzzle's composition of pieces.
• Initially unknown to you, pieces will relate in unique ways that eventually reveal meaningful patterns.
• The more research you undertake, the more your findings (on causation and correlation) about what works begin to emerge.
• At some point EBP principles specific to your CoP materialize into a "big picture" solution for heightened efficacy. This new set of evidence-supported (meta-) principles can then be lined up so each one builds on the effectiveness of its predecessor.
For EBP to work, a reciprocal arrangement between all parties within a CoP is required. Managers and practitioners cannot just be reviewer-users of what works research; they also must be contributors—actively conducting research. Since workplace learning and performance is more a cousin than a sibling of higher education, we can't depend solely on academia to elevate our practice. It's up to our CoP to contribute to, and apply, new evidence that will advance effectiveness.
Solved Mystery Jigsaw Puzzle: How One CoP Got It
Community corrections is a CoP that got the wakeup call on research evidence. For decades this CoP struggled under diverse attempts to reduce recidivism among ex-offenders. Some of these attempts were poorly researched, or not researched at all, yet asserted as best practices. Recidivism rates were high, and threat of harm a concern among the public, and both national and state governments. A noted researcher, Robert Martinson, published a controversial paper on prison reform in 1974 that set a path of retreat for the rehabilitation community. Martinson summed up his assessment by announcing, "nothing works."
When the dust finally settled, a select group of researchers began looking more closely at small successes, and relating them to one another. Pieces of this CoP's puzzle found to work prompted further and expanded study. More what works findings were successfully gathered and aggregated until a multi-layered, bigger picture of correctional efficacy emerged.
A significant paradigm shift resulted: practitioners and researchers became more evidence-prone in both laboratory and field experimentation. They realized the discrete pieces of evidence didn’t exist in isolation—rather, they cohered into a gestalt solution to the puzzle of reducing recidivism. Their research endeavors ranged from assessment tools and treatment methods to wholly structured programs, and targeting specific client sub-populations.
By contrast, this is the state of our learning and development CoP: we have no jigsaw puzzle in progress. We're only familiar with some of its more conspicuous "trees." We don't know its meta-principles; and by extension, we can't know their order for evolving a more effective practice.
However our CoP's jigsaw puzzle should someday unfold, truant research subjects from workplace learning and performance deemed to be ripe for new or expanded research are:
• Content-specific research (conducting lit reviews and synthesizing the findings).
• Dashboard measures for calculating ROI (and practical methods of gathering and evaluating data).
• Implementation of start-up training (qualitative and quantitative research).
• Instructional design methods (by delivery system).
• Instructional delivery methods.
• Instructional media and learning optimization.
• Learning, learning styles, and learner populations.
• Managing client expectations and relationships.
• Skills transfer and transfer strategies/models.
• Training facilitation and coaching.
• Training needs (front end) analysis.
• Workplace consulting and coaching strategies/techniques.
Making Sense of the Pieces
The wakeup-call our learning and development community has yet to answer is one of solving its own jigsaw puzzle. Additionally, we currently have no flagship Workplace Learning & Performance Institute similar to those serving other disciplines. But maybe that can happen.
Research has two sides:
1. The review-apply side: where significant findings point practitioners to methods, tools, mechanisms, and programs yielding greater effectiveness.
2. The conduct-research side:where the efficacy of methods, tools, mechanisms, and programs is tested under controlled conditions. Research rigor (quality) determines the credibility and generalize-ability of the findings we generate.
For side no. 1, in a training curriculum for National Institute of Corrections (NIC), Bogue (2006) identified four key review skills NIC managers and staff need to acquire to guide their membership's application of evidence-backed research findings: FIND research; FILTER research; ASSESS research; and TRANSLATE research. Research's side no. 2 is yet to be authoritatively defined, but might take a form similar to that below:
• SPECIFY research problem/opportunity
• FRAME as a research question/subject
• DECIDE research design
• CONDUCT research
• ANALYZE research results
• INTERPRET/REPORT research findings
We can't begin to assemble, much less solve, our mystery jigsaw puzzle until we acquire skill sets that allow assembly to begin. At least for now, maybe more of us get EBP's potential to transcend our current level of practice.
Benjamin Ruark is a senior instructional and performance transfer designer with experience in more than a dozen industries representing manufacturing, services, and IT/software. He has written numerous articles on training, EBP, lean manufacturing, and performance engineering.
|
SAVE | EMAIL | PRINT | MOST POPULAR | RSS |
|
|
| Back to Training Index |
|
|
