Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.



Evidence based policy and practice

Marleen Baillieul

on 12 July 2011

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of EBPP

Evidence Based Policy and Practice Task force:
Analysis of knowledge brokerage by cities Task force:
Analysis of networking by cities Methodology:
peer review Data supply
(research institutions, education networks / schools, local governments) Data demand
(research institutions, education networks / schools, local governments) January 2010 - March 2011

8 meetings => 4 peer review end results:
* sustainable network(s)
* tools for peer reviewing
* tool for assessment of policy networks
* tool for categorising practices in data use
* insights in brokerage role of cities
* products:
book, containing:
- theoretical frameworks
- research
- toolkit for peer reviewing
- policy advices
- practices
website: CompareLocalEducation.eu Main conclusions: a lot of findings
but even more questions
- further research is needed
- further networking is needed to exchange more practices
- Quotes: AIMS:
in order to tackle educational policy challenges in middle-sized European cities

=> forming sustainable network(s)
=> tools , more specificly use of data
=> key elements of brokerage role of cities
=> key elements of practices in data use
=> methodology of peer reviewing based on experience and literature Theoretical framework with insights in data brokerage by cities Listing up practices 1. literature study on peer reviewing 2. A grasp out of the characteristics of peer reviewing between cities: 3. a grasp out of the recommendations and guidelines in the ICEA toolkit: - members of the delegation hardly know each other
- the level of expertise amongst the members is very different
- the level of language knowledge varies
- restricted possibilities for the host city to organise these visits (staff, time etc)
- a lack of time in the agenda of the visits to include several preparatory meetings or feedback sessions
- most of the visitors come from abroad and prefer to make a physical visit instead of a review in a closed room (context!)
- … - two-way communication win-win situation
- Trust and open communication
- Divide roles
- It takes time to organise peer reviewing
- The better the peers are prepared, the better the reviews go
- a process manager
- use a template of a slide show … A grasp out of the common denominators in the networking of these 4 cities:
S: networking pays of (diff points of view, diff power relations, diff mandates, , keeping the focus, a joint commitment,...)
W: Loss of autonomy, extra workload, change of power balance with nex coming of leaving members, loss of feeling responsible,...
O: 1 + 1 > 2, being member = improving status, win-win / learning from others, ...
T: a wicked problem can not be solved => public opinion!, loss of independence, winning is smt only for happy few, influence of politics, lobbyists, other parties, other govnt levels,... results: insights in the brokerage role of cities: a grasp out of the conclusions: All 3 kinds of brokerage activities were found => growing awareness 1. DATA GATHERING AND KNOWLEDGE BUILDING
- all cities involved
- sometimes perceived as self-evident => not aware of brokering
- access to numerous data sources (schools, stat services, even commercial companies,..) (quant + qual data)
- main expectation: contribute to the own organisational functioning
- for others (e.g. schools): making data available, but not that much to build knowledge ALTHOUGH city adm welcome the idea of being able to build knowledge for other stakeholders see book or website 1. DATA GATHERING AND KNOWLEDGE BUILDING
- Access to high amount of data (stat, school, city, surveys, commercial,...)
- Qualitative and quantitative
- Cities not always aware of own brokering act
- Data mainly used for reflection on own functioning
to lesser extend for brokerage
- Idea of brokers role to schools is welcome 2. KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE BETWEEN DEMANDS AND SUPPLIES
- mainly for own demand
- much supply that is not demand related, unclear what demands are
- some schools not aware of receiving data
- promising exemples: networking!
- brokers role without providing data 3. DEVELOPING CAPACITY SUPPORT TO END-USERS
- Growing need for training and support of end users
- Until now no intiatives for training
- Gap between data specialists and most of the end users in city adm and schools Results and effects of brokerage activities

- promising initiatives in brokerage by cities
o Reflection own functioning
o Information of policy
o Monitoring effectiveness
- Discussing data can help to identify ones ideas and vision.
- Data mainly used for shared decision making without immediately leading to concrete actions.
- Instrumental use in schools mainly pupil oriented Main conclusions:
- trust
- data literacy
- matching demand and supply
Full transcript