Beyond research use: repositioning research and initial teacher education institutions within a research–policy–practice integration ecology

This discussion paper responds to the OECD report, “How can research and initial teacher education institutions support research use?” While the OECD report highlights the two institutions’ roles in knowledge mobilisation, the problem should not be framed merely as insufficient dissemination but rather as a reflection of how research, policy, and practice are often organised as separate domains. This paper thus proposes a shift from research use to research–policy–practice integration ecology. It recognises key sources of separation among the three fields, i.e. spatiotemporal misalignment, knowledge-discourse divide, and evaluation divergence. It then proposes a cyclical model of integration comprising three mechanisms and six steps: spatiotemporal co-fusion (co-setting goals and co-creating plans), knowledge-discourse co-construction (co-translating discourses and co-validating knowledge), and evaluation co-governance (co-evaluating outcomes and co-adjusting institutions). Conditions required for such integration are also identified. Within this integration ecology, research and initial teacher education institutions serve as pivotal hubs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education
Published
2026-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866x.2026.2759091
Primary Topic
Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Beyond research use: repositioning research and initial teacher education institutions within a research–policy–practice integration ecology

Xiaoyan Li, Xudong Zhu
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education
Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
article

Beyond research use: repositioning research and initial teacher education institutions within a research–policy–practice integration ecology

Xiaoyan Li, Xudong Zhu
article en

Abstract

This discussion paper responds to the OECD report, “How can research and initial teacher education institutions support research use?” While the OECD report highlights the two institutions’ roles in knowledge mobilisation, the problem should not be framed merely as insufficient dissemination but rather as a reflection of how research, policy, and practice are often organised as separate domains. This paper thus proposes a shift from research use to research–policy–practice integration ecology. It recognises key sources of separation among the three fields, i.e. spatiotemporal misalignment, knowledge-discourse divide, and evaluation divergence. It then proposes a cyclical model of integration comprising three mechanisms and six steps: spatiotemporal co-fusion (co-setting goals and co-creating plans), knowledge-discourse co-construction (co-translating discourses and co-validating knowledge), and evaluation co-governance (co-evaluating outcomes and co-adjusting institutions). Conditions required for such integration are also identified. Within this integration ecology, research and initial teacher education institutions serve as pivotal hubs.

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education
Beijing Normal University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon