chapters of educational research

Introduction to Educational Research

Student resources, chapter summary, chapter 2 • overview of the educational research process .

• Identifying and limiting a research topic or problem
• Formally stating and refining research questions
• Reviewing existing literature related to the problem
• Writing a literature review
• Developing a research plan
• Implementing the plan and collecting data
• Analyzing the collected data
• Stating findings, conclusions, and recommendations
• The topic should be of personal interest to you and should be manageable.
• Care must be taken in formally stating research questions, as they will guide the remainder of the study.
• Related literature can inform specification of the problem, development of research questions, and determination of research designs and analyses.
• Many critical decisions about the research method must be made, including those related to data, participants, instrumentation, timeframe, research ethics, and data analysis.
• Categories of techniques include observational techniques, interviews, existing data, and data collected through standard educational processes.
• Quantitative data analysis involves statistical techniques and is typically accomplished using statistical analysis software.
• Qualitative data analysis is an inductive process that must be facilitated in the mind of the researcher.
• Analysis of data collected in mixed-methods studies involves both kinds of data analysis and essentially merges the results.
• Findings, conclusions, and recommendations should be stated so they follow logically from all that has preceded in the study.
• The purpose behind stating conclusions and recommendations is to take the answers to the research questions and contextualize them with respect to the broader field of education.
• Extreme caution must be used so that conclusions and recommendations are not stated so globally that they extend beyond the parameters of the study.
• It is important to keep in mind that there is not a single way to research any given topic. Different approaches, methodologies, and data can be used to investigate the same or similar research topics.

Scientific Research in Education (2002)

Chapter: 4 features of education and education research, 4 features of education and education research.

In Chapter 3 the committee argues that the guiding principles for scientific research in education are the same as those in the social, physical, and life sciences. Yet the ways that those principles are instantiated—in astrophysics, biochemistry, labor economics, cultural anthropology, or mathematics teaching—depend on the specific features of what is being studied. That is, each field has features that influence what questions are asked, how research is designed, how it is carried out, and how it is interpreted and generalized. Scholars working in a particular area establish the traditions and standards for how to most appropriately apply the guiding principles to their area of study (Diamond, 1999).

In this chapter, we describe how our principles of science translate in the study of education—a rich tapestry of teaching, learning, and schooling. In particular, we briefly discuss five features of education that shape scientific inquiry, and describe how these features affect research. We argue that a key implication of these features of education is the need to account for influential contextual factors within the process of inquiry and in understanding the extent to which findings can be generalized. These features sharpen the conception of scientific research quality we develop in Chapter 3 . We also discuss three features of education research that are essential to understanding the nature and conduct of the professional work.

To set the stage for our discussion of the particulars of scientific education research, we reiterate our position that there are substantial similarities between inquiry in the physical and social worlds. We have argued in

previous chapters that our principles of science are common across disciplines and fields and that the accumulation of knowledge progresses in roughly the same way. Furthermore, profoundly different methods and approaches characterize each discipline and field in the physical sciences, depending on such things as the time frame, the scale of magnitude, and the complexity of the instrumentation required. The same is true in the social sciences and education, where questions ranging from individual learning of varied subject matter to fundamental social patterns to cultural norms determine the length of time, the number of people, and the kind of research instruments that are needed in conducting the studies.

Differences in the phenomena typically under investigation do distinguish the research conducted by physical and social scientists. For example, the social and cultural work of sociologists and cultural anthropologists often do not lend themselves to the controlled conditions, randomized treatments, or repeated measures that typify investigations in physics or chemistry. Phenomena such as language socialization, deviancy, the development of an idea, or the interaction of cultural tradition with educational instruction are notoriously impervious to the controls used in the systematic investigations of atoms or molecules. Unlike atoms or molecules, people grow up and change over time. The social, cultural, and economic conditions they experience evolve with history. The abstract concepts and ideas that are meaningful to them vary across time, space, and cultural tradition. These circumstances have led some social science and education researchers to investigative approaches that look distinctly different from those of physical researchers, while still aligning with the guiding principles outlined in Chapter 3 .

Another area that can notably distinguish research between the social and physical sciences concerns researcher objectivity in relation to bias. In some physical and life sciences, investigators are often deliberately kept ignorant of the identity of research participants, and controls are instituted through such devices as double-blind or randomization procedures. This strategy is often used in medical trials to ensure that researchers’ perspectives are not influenced by their knowledge of which participants received which treatment, and similarly, that this knowledge does not alter the behavior of the research participants. In many areas of the social sciences, in contrast, the investigator is recognized as an “engaged participant

observer,” involved with the experience and action of those observed (Blumer, 1966; Denzin, 1978; Kelly and Lesh, 2000). In such “naturalistic research paradigms” (Moschkovich and Brenner, 2000), investigators do not seek to distance themselves from research participants, but rather to immerse themselves in the participants’ lives, with conscious attention to how the investigator affects and contributes to the research process. Such strategies were developed to allow the researcher to observe, analyze, and integrate into the research process unexpected, constantly changing, and other potentially influential aspects of what is being studied. These approaches are often particularly important in studying how changes in school subject matter or the development of new technologies can be incorporated into educational practice. In collecting and coding such qualitative data, convergence can be demonstrated with repeated instances, more than one observer, and multiple raters. Also essential to the process is the examination of competing interpretations, contrasting cases, and disconfirming evidence. Regularity in the patterns across groups and across time—rather than replication per se—is a source of generalization. The goal of such scientific methods, of course, remains the same: to identify generalized patterns.

Uses of theory also tend to distinguish work in the social and physical sciences. Theory in the physical sciences leads to predictions about things that will happen in the future. Strong theories include causal mechanisms that predict what will happen and give insights into why. Theory in the social sciences is predictive, but more often it serves to understand things that happened in the past, serving a more diagnostic or explanatory purpose. Understanding the past often enables social science researchers to explain why things happened. Though understanding the past can sometimes predict the future, it does so only in broad outline and with a lesser degree of certainty. For instance, researchers have documented the regularity of certain misconceptions and patterns of error as students learn scientific or mathematical ideas. Although one cannot predict exactly when they will occur, awareness of them permits teachers to interpret student comments more effectively and to create assessment items to test for evidence of them.

A related and final point is that the level of certainty with which research conclusions can be made is typically higher in the physical sciences than in

the social sciences. As we discuss in Chapter 3 , many scientific claims have some degree of uncertainty associated with them—that is, they are probabilistic rather than deterministic. We include within our principles the idea that careful estimation and reporting of uncertainty is crucial to science. However, because theories that model social phenomena—human behavior, ideas, cultures—are not as well developed as those for some physical phenomena and because they are often out of the direct control of the researcher, results are always probabilistic and tend to be more tentative than in the physical sciences. In technical terms, this means that the “error limits” associated with scientific inferences (not unlike confidence intervals typically cited in public opinion polls) tend to be larger in social and behavioral research, often due to the “noise” caused by difficulties precisely measuring key constructs and major contextual factors. The influential role of context in many social and behavioral research inquiries is a fundamental aspect of studying humans. However, it does make replication—the key to boosting certainty in results and refining theory—more difficult and nuanced. In sum, the degree of precision associated with current social science findings tends to be lower than that in the physical and life sciences.

Although education research has its roots in the social and behavioral sciences, it is also an applied field—akin in important ways to medicine and agriculture. Some scholars have likened education research to the engineering sciences, arguing that it is an enterprise fundamentally aimed at bringing theoretical understanding to practical problem solving. Like other applied fields, education research serves two related purposes: to add to fundamental understanding of education-related phenomena and events, and to inform practical decision making. Both are worthy, both require researchers to have a keen understanding of educational practice and policy, and both can ultimately lead to improvements in practice. Education research with the sole aim of explaining, describing, or predicting closely resembles “traditional” scientific inquiry of the kind we describe in the previous chapter. Research whose direct aim is to aid educational practice, decision making, and policy in the near term also must meet scientific principles for rigor, but it has an action orientation. The dual purposes of education research suggest that there must be a balance of considerations of the factors of the validity of the knowledge claims, the credibility of the

research team, and the utility and relevance of the work to situations of educational practice.

Scientific education research, whether it is aimed primarily at uncovering new knowledge or meeting the dual goals of generating knowledge and informing practice, is influenced by the unique configuration of characteristic features of the educational enterprise.

FEATURES OF EDUCATION

Education is a complex human endeavor ultimately aimed at enhancing students’ cognitive, civic, and social learning and development. Like medicine, law, or farming, education is a craft—a practical profession requiring specialized skill. Researchers studying teachers have documented that teaching is a complex, interactive exchange as the teachers seek to engage students in learning new matieral; to relate it to their prior knowledge; to respond to the heterogeneous needs of children with varied backgrounds, interests, and ideas; and to assess the depth and endurance of student learning. Education can occur in school classrooms, private homes, museums, community centers and through information accessible on the Web. Even formal schooling varies in profound ways from community to community, and from preschoolers to adults. Its institutions are many and multilayered—elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, 2-year and vocational colleges, 4-year colleges and universities, and adult learning centers. As an institution, its clientele frequently move, for example, from one school or college to another. The variability and complexity of education is mirrored by the practice of education. In the exercise of their craft, educators draw on, and are influenced by, practical wisdom, professional relationships, and values, as well as scientifically grounded theory and fact. Indeed, it is this real world of research in education that led columnist Miller to lament, “If only education reforms came in a pill” (2001, p. A14).

The character of education not only affects the research enterprise, but also necessitates careful consideration of how the understanding or use of results can be impeded or facilitated by conditions at different levels of the system. Organizational, structural, and leadership qualities all influence how the complex education system works in practice. Results may have

“shelf lives” that vary with cultural shifts and resource changes (Cronbach, 1975).

In the section that follows we discuss some of the salient features of education and their effects on scientific research: values and politics; human volition; variability in education programs; the organization of schools; and the diversity of the many individuals involved in education.

Values and Politics

Aristotle once opined that it is impossible to talk about education apart from some conception of “the good life” (Cremin, 1990, p. 85). Indeed, education is a field in which values appropriately play a central role, because what people hope to attain in education—especially the education of children—is intimately connected with people’s views about individual human potential, their hopes and expectations of what society can become, and their ideas about how social problems can be alleviated. In this way, social ideals inevitably and properly influence the education system and in turn, the research that is carried out. More subtly, but crucially, these values also affect the choice of outcomes to study and measure, as they are proxies for the myriad goals of education: basic knowledge and skills, community service, job training, social development, and problem solving. We comment further on the implications of these disagreements about goals in discussing the role of a federal education research agency in Chapter 6 .

A more global implication of the role of values in education research concerns the extent to which research in education is truly akin to an engineering science. The question of why education research has not produced the equivalent of a Salk vaccine is telling. After all, medical research is something of an engineering science in that it brings theoretical understanding in the life sciences to bear on solving the practical problems of prolonging life and reducing disease. Education research is similar, with the key difference that there is less consensus on the goal. Medical research often has clearer goals—for example, finding a cure for cancer. Because values are so deeply embedded in education in so many different ways, education researchers do not have a singular practical goal that drives their inquiry (Bruner, 1996).

Local, state, and federal politicians, teacher unions, special interest groups, higher education faculty, and other interested citizens who have a stake in education are often moving in different directions and driven by different sets of incentives. These stakeholders make decisions that influence education policy and practice, and thus have an impact on the research that attempts to model and understand it. At any given time, schools and school systems may be responding to a configuration of possibly conflicting demands from these stakeholders, while trying to serve their primary clients—children, parents, and community members. This dynamic creates a turbulent environment for research. Furthermore, political motivations can affect the uses of research; some stakeholders may have strong incentives to resist the findings or interpretations of researchers or to over-interpret the results if they indicate even modest degrees of evidentiary support.

Another potential consequence of the role of stakeholders is that education research can be interrupted by a change in policy or political support for a particular type of reform. In California, the mathematics and science standards crafted in the late 1980s—which served as important examples for the current national mathematics and science standards—were abruptly changed because of political shifts. Just as the state was gearing up its curriculum, teaching, and accountability system to implement the new standards in a systematic way, the political environment changed, and so did the standards and accountability system (Kirst and Mazzeo, 1996). Research on the reform, too, ended abruptly. Such changes occur as a result of the democratic system of educational governance in the United States, and can have practical implications for research planning (e.g., limiting opportunities to conduct long-term studies).

Human Volition

Education is centrally concerned with people: learners, teachers, parents, citizens, and policy makers. The volition, or will, of these individuals decreases the level of control that researchers can have over the process. For example, in some cases, people cannot be randomly assigned to treatment groups; they will not agree to let themselves or their children be “controlled” for the purposes of experimental trials. This lack of control can also cause problems of noncompliance with research protocols and

instances of missing data because, for example, parents have the interests of their individual child in mind and may have priorities and needs that conflict with those of the research process.

Human movement and change have, for example, affected efforts to study the effects of education vouchers on student achievement. Many voucher studies (Witte, 2000; Peterson, 1998; Rouse, 1997; Peterson, Howell, and Greene, 1999; Myers, Peterson, Mayer, Chou, and Howell, 2000; Peterson, Myers, and Howell, 1999)—some designed as randomized trials and some not—face challenges because significant percentages of families did not return the year after baseline data were collected, did not fill out all the questionnaire items, or did not complete the standardized tests. A study of a New York City choice program (Barnard, Frangakis, Hill, and Rubin, 2002) featured a design that anticipated these noncompliance issues, and incorporated the use of sophisticated statistical (Bayesian) modeling to estimate the “treatment” effects of the program under these conditions.

A related point is that the U.S. population is a highly mobile one, with people often moving from one geographical area to another, from one home to another, and from one job to another. And their children follow suit, moving among classrooms, schools, districts, and states. According to data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, 16 percent of the population changed households between March 1999 and March 2000 (Schacter, 2001). This mobility characterizes not only precollege students, but college students as well: nearly one-third of students attend at least two institutions of higher education before completing their undergraduate studies (National Center for Education Statistics, 1996). Students are quite likely to experience different curricula, different teaching methods, and different standards for performance depending on the particular classroom, school or university, district, and state. Thus, researchers engaged in longitudinal research in schools are often faced with substantial shifts in the student population—and thus their study sample—which complicates the tracking of students’ learning trajectories over time.

Variability of Educational Programs

Researchers typically must accommodate a rapidly changing reform environment that tends to promote frequent changes in the core education

programs a learner encounters. The current education reform movement can be traced back 18 years ago to the report of a Presidential commission, A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). Since then, the nation has been in a constant process of reforming the schools, and there is no sign that this “tinkering towards utopia” (Tyack and Cuban, 1995) will end soon. Historically, education reform seems to be the norm, not the novelty, in U.S. education, dating back at least to the nineteenth century (Tyack and Cuban, 1995). As one reform idea replaces another, instability in curriculum, standards, and accountability mechanisms is the norm.

Even within reform movements, the state and local control of education significantly shapes the ways that instructional programs and other changes to schooling are implemented, making generalizations difficult. For example, charter schools—public schools that operate under contract with either a state agency or a local school board—take very different forms according to their states’ authorizing statutes and the particular contracts (charters) under which the schools operate (RPP International, 2000). While all charter schools are characterized by some degree of flexibility from state education statutes, their educational programming and student populations vary considerably across and within states. The statute that authorizes charter schools in the state of Minnesota, for example, specifically encourages serving children with special needs. By contrast, many (though not all) charter schools in Colorado were founded by well-to-do parents who wanted rigorous academic programs for their children. Consequently, trying to answer a seemingly straightforward question like “Are charter schools more effective in improving student achievement than traditional public schools?” is not particularly useful if one wishes to understand the impact of instructional innovation because the educational environments and programs that fall under the rubric of “charter schools” are so varied that there is no common instructional intervention to evaluate.

Evaluations of changes in curriculum are also influenced by variability in programs. The implementation of curricula is a cyclic process that is governed by a complex mix of state review, teacher input, district leadership, and public comment. Further, new initiatives often require a significant commitment of funds for professional development, which may or may not be available. High stakes accountability systems and national college

entrance exams also may complicate the evaluation of the effectiveness of curricular change. Like others we discuss in this chapter, these typical circumstances require that researchers be careful to specify caveats and conditions under which findings are produced.

Organization of Education

Formal schooling takes place in an interdependent, multilayered system. In the preK-12 system, for example, students are assigned to classes, classes are organized by grade level within a school, schools are organized into school districts, school districts may be organized within counties, and counties are subdivisions of states. In addition, within classrooms, students are often placed into different instructional groups based on instructional needs or related issues. And all are influenced by federal education policy. The implication for research is that to understand what is happening at one level, it is often necessary to understand other levels. Thus, a study of how students come to understand key themes in U.S. history, for example, may be influenced by a teacher’s approach to history instruction, the value a principal places on history within the curriculum (which influences how much time the teacher has to teach history and the child to learn it), the curriculum adopted by the district (and related decisions to implement the curriculum), and different familial and community factors (e.g., parent and community support of approach to history instruction). In subject areas such as science and mathematics, where accomplishment in later courses is heavily dependent on the quality of early learning, preK-12 school structures can be designed to either facilitate successful remediation or to systematically exclude increasing numbers of students form these courses over time. These differences demand that researchers consider the nature of the vertical organization of the system in their work.

Education researchers have long investigated the interrelationship of these various levels of the system. Statistical methods, for example, can help estimate educational effects on students’ history achievement while at the same time accounting for the effects of the multiple layers of the K-12 system (Bryk and Raudenbush, 1988). A study that examined the mechanism by which Catholic schools achieve equitable outcomes for students used such a technique (see Box 5-3 ).

The U.S. population is becoming increasingly diverse in a number of ways, and demographic projections indicate that the trend will continue (Day, 1996). Mirroring the diversity of the broader population, education takes place in specific neighborhoods with their particular geographical, historical, social, ethnic, linguistic, economic, and cultural mixes. For example, students representing dozens of native languages may attend a single school; in some school districts students speak more than 125 languages (Crawford, 1992). This linguistic diversity that characterizes many U.S. schools illustrates the influence of diversity on research. Students from immigrant families are often defined by a characteristic they commonly share—a lack of English fluency. Scratching just below the surface, however, reveals stark differences. Schools serve students who are new immigrants—often unfamiliar with American life beyond what they might have seen in movies—as well as many Hispanics, African Americans, Asian Americans, and American Indians whose families have lived here for generations and who have varying degrees of English proficiency.

Along with linguistic diversity comes diversity in culture, religion, and academic preparation. Some students visit their home country frequently, while others have no contact with their or their parents’ birthplaces. Some immigrant students have had excellent schooling in their home countries before coming to the United States; others have had their schooling interrupted by war; and still others have never attended school. Some are illiterate in their own language, and some have languages that were only oral until recently; others come from cultures with long literary traditions. The differences between these students—their age and entry into U.S. schools, the quality of their prior schooling, their native language and the number of native languages represented in their class, their parents’ education and English language skills, and their family history and current circumstances— will affect their academic success much more than their common lack of English (Garcia and Wiese, in press). Incorporating such linguistic and sociocultural contexts into the research process is critical to understanding the ways in which these differences influence learning in diverse classrooms.

In sum, the features that shape the application of our principles of science to education research—values and politics, human volition, variability in education programs, the organization of education institutions,

and diversity—underscore the important role of context. A specific implication of the role of contextual factors in education research is that the boundaries of generalization from scientific research need to be carefully delineated. Our discussion of diversity above is illustrative: to what extent, for example, is it possible to generalize results of research on suburban middle-class children of Western European descent to inner-city, low-income, limited-English students from Central America or Southeast Asia? Naïve uses and expectations of research that do not recognize such contextual differences can lead to simplistic, uninformed, and narrow interpretations of research and indiscriminate applications. To build theory, formulate research questions, design and conduct studies, and draw conclusions, scientific education research must attend to such contextual conditions.

This attention to context also suggests that advancing understanding in complex and diverse education settings may require close coordination between researchers and practitioners, interdisciplinary work, and the interplay between varying forms of education research. It also means a far greater emphasis on taking stock of the inherent diversity of the education experience and its results for different populations of students. In short, it requires specific attention to the contexts of research more frequently and more systematically than has been the case for much of the work in education to date (National Research Council, 1999c).

FEATURES OF EDUCATION RESEARCH

In addition to the features of education that influence research, there are also aspects of education research as a field that help clarify the nature of scientific inquiry in education. A perspective of education research as an enterprise points to some of the infrastructure supports that sustain it, a topic we take up in our consideration of the federal role in supporting education research ( Chapter 6 ). Three of these education research characteristics are noteworthy in this regard: its multidisciplinary nature, ethical considerations, and its reliance on relationships with education practitioners.

Multiple Disciplinary Perspectives

The variability and complexity of education are the grist for the academic’s disciplinary mill. Multiple scientific disciplines study education

and contribute knowledge about it. Economists study the incentive structures of schooling to understand the relationship between interventions designed to change behavior and educational outcomes. Developmental psychologists and subject-matter specialists study fundamental processes of cognition, language, and socialization. Physicists, chemists, and biologists study science curriculum, teaching, and assessment. Organizational sociologists study systems that are organized to meet education goals. Cultural anthropologists study the character and form of social interactions that characterize students’ formal and informal educational experiences. Political scientists study the implementation of large-scale institutional change, like charter schools.

The presence of many disciplinary perspectives in education research has at least three implications. First, since several disciplinary perspectives focus on different parts of the system, there are many legitimate research frameworks and methods (Howe and Eisenhart, 1990). But because many disciplines are focusing on different parts of the system, contradictory conclusions may be offered, adding fuel to the debates about both the specific topic and the value of education research. The challenge for the diverse field of education is to integrate theories and empirical findings across domains and methods. Researchers from a range of disciplines working together, therefore, can be particularly valuable. Ongoing work at the Park City Mathematics Institute (see http://www.admin.ias.edu/ma/ ) provides an example of the potential for interdisciplinary inquiry in education to enhance understanding and promote effective instruction. A diverse group of researchers (from mathematics education, statistics, and psychology) and practitioners (teachers and teacher educators) have joined to conduct research collaboratively on how students understand statistical concepts (e.g., distributions) in order to provide advice to curriculum developers (Jackson, 1996; Day and Kalman, 2001).

A second implication is that advances in education research depend in no small part on advances in related disciplines and fields. Work in the traditional scientific disciplines, as well as in such applied fields as public health may be necessary as infrastructure support for scientific studies in education.

Finally, this proliferation of frameworks, coupled with the sheer scope of the myriad fields that contribute to understanding in education, make

the development of professional training for education researchers particularly vexing. The breadth and depth of topical areas as well as multiple epistemological and methodological frameworks are nearly impossible to cover adequately in a single degree program. Conceptualizing how to structure the continuum of professional development for education researchers is similarly challenging, especially since there is little agreement about what scholars in education need to know and be able to do. 1 These unresolved questions have contributed to the uneven preparation of education researchers.

Ethical Considerations

In modern education research, researchers often engage in fieldwork in schools, and with parents, students, and teachers. The need for care and oversight when studying vulnerable populations like children sometimes entails justifiable compromises in the conduct of scientific study and the progress of the scientific enterprise more generally. Ethical issues involving the protection of human participants in research—especially children— have real consequences for the types of designs, data collection, and consequently, results that can be generated from education research.

The need to ensure ethical research conduct may weaken the strength of the research designs that can be used. For example, ethical considerations prohibit withholding education to any student (a common “control” condition in the physical sciences). In studying the effectiveness of an educational program, then, comparisons must almost always be made to standard or existing practice. In this situation, the comparative effect of a new intervention will rarely be large when compared with the standard practice. Also, in some circumstances, researchers may not hide the purposes of a study from the subjects (a common practice in double-blind trials) for ethical reasons.

Ethical issues also have implications for data collection. Parents may refuse to allow their children to participate in a study because of privacy

concerns. Such events can complicate data collection, compromise sampling procedures, and thwart opportunities to generalize. Research ethics requires investigators to design their studies to anticipate these occurrences and to understand and describe their effects on the results of the study.

We briefly consider federal requirements governing research ethics in Chapter 6 , where we argue for a federal education research agency to take a leading role in facilitating ethical access to student data.

Relationships

As in other applied fields—such as agriculture, health risk reduction, crime, justice, and welfare—education research relies critically on relationships between researchers and those engaged in professional practice: teachers, administrators, curriculum developers, university deans, school board members, and a host of others. The education research enterprise could not function without these relationships, and its health is correlated strongly with the extent to which these practitioners are willing to participate in or otherwise support research.

Different kinds of research require different levels of participation along a continuum ranging from weak (i.e., short, distant, one-time interaction) to strong (long-term partnership or collaboration). For example, at the weak end of the continuum are research and statistics gathering activities like the National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) Common Core of Data or the National Assessment of Educational Progress. At the strong end of the continuum lie school reform studies like the one carried out by Bryk and colleagues (Bryk, Sebring, Kerbrow, Rollow, and Easton, 1998) in the Chicago school system. This research is carried out in a collaboration in which district and school personnel have vested interests in the research. Collaborations across disparate parts of universities—between educators and scholars in other disciplines, for example—are another instance of strong relationships that requires careful revision to typical institutional organization. We call these strong relationships partnerships.

Partnerships between researchers and practitioners have become attractive in recent years because the site of much education research has shifted from the laboratory to schools and classrooms (Shulman, 1997). In such field-based work, collaborations with practitioners can bring a form

of intellectual capital to the research that cannot be obtained in isolation of practice. Ideally, relationships generate a bidirectional flow to the work, with the research informing practice while craft knowledge and practical wisdom enrich the research. In some cases, important research cannot be conducted without this collaboration. These partnerships are not always easily formed, and often take long periods of time to establish. But they are often essential to develop the trust that is necessary for researchers to perform their jobs adequately and to engage education professionals in a mutually enriching dialogue about the role of research in practice. A current National Research Council effort is attempting to build the capacity of infrastructure for such long-term partnerships to foster research that is useful to practice (see National Research Council, 1999d), and others have suggested that research serve as a basis for long-term communications between researchers and practitioners (Willinsky, 2001). We argue in Chapter 6 that a federal education research agency should help broker such partnerships as part of its investment in strengthening the education research infrastructure.

Another way that some field-based researchers have recently attempted to bring educational practice closer to the research process is by embedding inquiry in “sites of practice” (National Research Council, 2001a). For example, to better understand the knowledge that teachers need to teach third grade mathematics effectively, researchers have grounded their work in concrete examples from teaching practice (e.g., samples of student work solving mathematical problems). Focusing research on these representations of the process of education in practice can generate important insights about the interactive nature of teaching and learning in classrooms (Ball and Lampert, 1999). Engaging in this kind of research, of course, depends on the willingness of school-based practitioners to participate and the establishment of relationships to facilitate it.

As we argue in Chapter 2 , with some exceptions, U.S. society has not developed an appetite for using education research as a tool for improving teaching, learning, and schooling (Campbell, 1969). This posture exacerbates the difficulties establishing the relationships necessary to conduct research. The problems with conducting randomized trials attest to this fact: there is little expectation that educational programs or interventions should be subjected to rigorous research (Cook 2001; Burtless, in press). In

our own work and in our colleagues’, we have found repeatedly that belief and anecdote are often the coin of the realm, and those with commercial interests are not expected by educators, policy makers or the public to use research to support what they sell. We believe that the expectation that research-based information will be available and should be part of the decision-making process needs to be cultivated both in the public and in the research community. With such expectations, it will become increasingly easy to establish the relationships—weak or strong—that are critical for conducting education research. Simply put, researchers need practitioners and practitioners need researchers. Without these relationships, a great deal of scientific research in education is likely to be piecemeal and opportunistic, and educators are unlikely to draw on scientific knowledge to improve their practices in any meaningful way.

This chapter provides a flavor for the particular character of scientific inquiry in education. We elaborate how the guiding principles and features of education are united within a variety of study designs in the next chapter, where we discuss, and provide examples of, how education researchers approach particular types of inquiries.

Researchers, historians, and philosophers of science have debated the nature of scientific research in education for more than 100 years. Recent enthusiasm for "evidence-based" policy and practice in education—now codified in the federal law that authorizes the bulk of elementary and secondary education programs—have brought a new sense of urgency to understanding the ways in which the basic tenets of science manifest in the study of teaching, learning, and schooling.

Scientific Research in Education describes the similarities and differences between scientific inquiry in education and scientific inquiry in other fields and disciplines and provides a number of examples to illustrate these ideas. Its main argument is that all scientific endeavors share a common set of principles, and that each field—including education research—develops a specialization that accounts for the particulars of what is being studied. The book also provides suggestions for how the federal government can best support high-quality scientific research in education.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

• Request info
• Majors & Degrees
• Prospective Students
• Current Undergraduate Students
• Current Graduate Students
• Online Students
• Alumni and Friends
• Faculty and Staff

USM School of Education Ranked in U.S. News & World Report 2024 Best Education Schools

Thu, 04/18/2024 - 08:41am | By: Karelia Pitts

The University of Southern Mississippi’s (USM) School of Education has been ranked No. 99 among the 2024 Best Education Schools in the nation by U.S. News & World Report.

Designed for prospective students looking to advance their education, the Best Education Schools rankings evaluate programs on nine distinct factors that include indicators related to student selectivity, faculty resources, research activity and peer assessment. The rankings evaluate all public and private institutions across the country to empower prospective students to choose the best fit for their educational needs and career goals.

“The USM School of Education has been intentional in its efforts to increase the societal impact it makes in the state and region. This ranking is clear evidence of their daily dedication to our mission of transforming the human condition through exemplary teaching, excellence in research, and meaningful service,” said Dr. Trent Gould, dean of Southern Miss’ College of Education and Human Sciences. “I couldn’t be prouder of this group of faculty and their commitment to this community and our K-12 partners.”

By collecting education school data annually, U.S. News is able to present the latest enrollment numbers, job placement rates, faculty statistics and other essential quality indicators that help prospective students make informed decisions. In 2023, USM ranked No. 138. The year-over-year climb that allowed USM to break into the top 100 schools was achieved in part by other colleges of education across the nation taking notice of the impact Golden Eagles are making and commending those efforts through the peer evaluation process.

“I am tremendously proud of the work being done in the School of Education and its commitment to student success,” said University Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs Dr. Lance Nail. “Thanks to the dedication of our faculty and staff, Southern Miss graduates are ready for success in classrooms across our state and nation.”

The USM School of Education offers an undergraduate program in elementary education as well as graduate programs in educational administration, higher education, elementary curriculum and instruction, special education, alternate route licensure, dyslexia therapy and educational research.

“We were founded with the audacious goal of establishing a state teacher training college, and these rankings demonstrate our ongoing excellence and steadfast commitment to providing high-quality instruction,” said University President Dr. Joseph S. Paul. “We are honored to be recognized on the national level and proud to be one of only two schools in the state to make the top 100 list.”

Prospective students can see how USM compares to other institutions and how the rankings are calculated on USNews.com .

To learn more about the USM College of Education and Human Sciences, call 601.266.4568.

About U.S. News & World Report

U.S. News & World Report is the global leader in quality rankings that empower consumers, business leaders and policy officials to make better, more informed decisions about important issues affecting their lives and communities. A multifaceted digital media company with Education, Health, Money, Travel, Cars, News, Real Estate, Careers and 360 Reviews platforms, U.S. News provides rankings, independent reporting, data journalism, consumer advice and U.S. News Live events. More than 40 million people visit USNews.com each month for research and guidance. Founded in 1933, U.S. News is headquartered in Washington, D.C.

Categories: Education and Human Sciences

Recent News Articles

Ato fraternity gives back to usm's dubard school, lucas recipient of mississippi pinnacle award for lifetime achievement, usm fraternity and sorority life chapter president spotlight: pi kappa phi's kane palazzo.

Teacher education students awarded inaugural innovation research fellowship

Allison Beasley, Dr. Don Thompson, Moises Campos-Crespo and Carter Spring at the College of Education and Human Development's Award Ceremony.

Dr. Mauro Andre and Carter Spring.

Moises Campos-Crespo and Dr. Luchara Wallace.

Allison Beasley was surprised with the fellowship by Dr. Don Thompson during the College of Education and Human Development's Award Ceremony.

KALAMAZOO, Mich.—Western Michigan University's College of Education and Human Development (CEHD) has selected three students to participate in a new fellowship. The Dr. Donald E. Thompson Innovation Research Fellowship  identifies students from teacher education programs who show promise as creative thinkers and innovative practitioners. Allison Beasley , Moises Campos-Crespo and Carter Spring , will receive  a full year of tuition  as they work on developing innovative ideas capable of positively  impacting K-12 education through research that challenges the current practices of teaching and learning.

"In 2020, my wife and I decided that we wanted to begin to do some things with education colleges across the country and Western was first,"  says  Dr. Don Thompson , dean emeritus of the CEHD.  "We wanted to make sure that we gave a gift to Western t hat supported students, and we also did that with nine other institutions around the country. But this one is the most important to us. "

Through the fellowship, students will be creating original research focused on creative concepts and innovative approaches to using technology in teaching and learning. Student's research will be supervised by a faculty member during the fellowship and will also serve as their mentors.

"My wife and I are so thankful to be able to give this gift and look forward to great things from all of the  fellows," says Thompson.

To learn more about the fellowship, visit CEHD's scholarship webpage .

About the fellows

Moises Campos-Crespo, holding check, was surprised with the fellowship during a Future Teachers of Color meeting.

• Moises Campos-Crespo is a special education student and member of TRIO Future Educator Success Program and Western's College Assistant Migrant Program. He also serves as the vice president of Future Teachers of Color. This RSO brings together future educators of color at WMU with a focus on various topics related to career preparation, academic success, mentorship, community service outreach and networking skills. Campos-Crespo will be mentored by Dr. Luchara Wallace , associate dean of the CEHD. 
• Carter Spring is a physical and health education and teacher education student and volunteer with RINGS Ministry in Battle Creek, Michigan. RINGS is a faith-based non-profit that provides free transportation to low-income families, especially single mothers, in the community by restoring and gifting cars. Prior to WMU, he was a member of the Kellogg Community College's cross country team that competed at the National Junior College Athletic Association Division III National Championship. Spring will be mentored by Dr. Mauro Andre , an assistant professor in the Department of Human Performance and Health Education.  

For more WMU news, arts and events , visit  WMU News  online.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Changing Partisan Coalitions in a Politically Divided Nation

4. age, generational cohorts and party identification, table of contents.

• What this report tells us – and what it doesn’t
• Partisans and partisan leaners in the U.S. electorate
• Party identification and ideology
• Education and partisanship
• Education, race and partisanship
• Partisanship by race and gender
• Partisanship across educational and gender groups by race and ethnicity
• Gender and partisanship
• Parents are more Republican than voters without children
• Partisanship among men and women within age groups
• Race, age and partisanship
• The partisanship of generational cohorts
• Religion, race and ethnicity, and partisanship
• Party identification among atheists, agnostics and ‘nothing in particular’
• Partisanship and religious service attendance
• Partisanship by income groups
• The relationship between income and partisanship differs by education
• Union members remain more Democratic than Republican
• Homeowners are more Republican than renters
• Partisanship of military veterans
• Demographic differences in partisanship by community type
• Race and ethnicity
• Age and the U.S. electorate
• Education by race and ethnicity
• Religious affiliation
• Ideological composition of voters
• Acknowledgments
• Overview of survey methodologies
• The 2023 American Trends Panel profile survey methodology
• Measuring party identification across survey modes
• Adjusting telephone survey trends
• Appendix B: Religious category definitions
• Appendix C: Age cohort definitions

Today, age is strongly associated with partisanship – and this pattern has been in place for more than a decade.

The Democratic Party holds a substantial edge among younger voters, while the Republican Party has the advantage among the oldest groups.

• About two-thirds of voters ages 18 to 24 (66%) associate with the Democratic Party, compared with 34% who align with the GOP.
• There is a similarly large gap in the partisan affiliation of voters ages 25 to 29 (64% are Democrats or lean that way vs. 32% for Republicans).
• Voters in their 30s also tilt Democratic, though to a lesser extent: 55% are Democrats or Democratic leaners, 42% are Republicans or Republican leaners.

Neither party has a significant edge over the other among voters in their 40s and 50s:

• Half of voters in their 40s associate with the Democratic Party, and 47% are affiliated with the Republican Party.
• The shares are reversed among voters in their 50s: 50% align with the Republicans, 47% with the Democrats.

Among voters ages 60 and older, the GOP holds a clear advantage:

• Republican alignment is 10 percentage points higher than Democratic alignment (53% vs. 43%) among voters in their 60s.
• Voters ages 70 to 79 are slightly more likely to be aligned with the GOP (51%) than the Democratic Party (46%).
• About six-in-ten voters 80 and older (58%) identify with or lean toward the GOP, while 39% associate with the Democratic Party.

Older voters overwhelmingly identify with a party; among younger voters, substantial numbers lean

In addition to the differences in the overall partisan tilt of younger and older voters, younger voters are considerably more likely than older voters to opt out of identifying directly with a party.

For instance, among voters 80 and older, 77% identify with a party (49% as Republicans, 28% as Democrats). About two-in-ten instead say they are “something else” or independent, with most of them leaning to one of the parties.

By comparison, only about half (52%) of voters under 25 identify directly with a party (38% Democrat, 14% Republican). About half instead say they are something else or independent, with 28% leaning Democratic and 20% leaning Republican.

The age differences in partisanship seen in the public overall are evident among both men and women.

For instance, both men and women under 30 align with Democrats by about a two-to-one margin.

Men and women voters ages 30 to 49 are fairly divided in their partisan allegiances, though the Democratic Party holds a modest edge among women in this age group.

Republicans have a substantial advantage among men 50 and older, while women this age are about equally likely to affiliate with each of the two parties.

Among White, Hispanic and Asian voters, older adults today are generally more Republican (and less Democratic) than younger adults.

But this is not the case for Black voters: 17% of Black voters under 50 identify as or lean Republican, compared with just 7% of Black voters 50 and older.

• In surveys dating back to the 1990s, younger Black voters consistently have either been somewhat more Republican than older Black voters (as in 1999, when 15% of those under 50 were or leaned Republican vs. 8% of those 50 and older), or there has been no difference in Black partisanship by age.

Looking at the partisanship of people born at roughly the same time (age cohorts) allows us to compare across generations over time. (For details on the age cohorts, visit Appendix C .)

Today, each younger age cohort is somewhat more Democratic-oriented than the one before it. But that has not always been the case. For instance, in the late 1990s, the balance of partisanship of voters across age groups (cohorts) varied only very modestly:

• In 1999, voters who were in their 70s at the time – those who were born in the 1920s and came of age during the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt – were 52% Democratic in their orientation, 46% Republican. The youngest age cohort at the time – voters in their 20s, born in the 1970s – had the exact same partisan makeup. Only one age cohort stood out as different – those born in the 1960s (then in their 30s) were more Republican, on balance, than other age groups.
• Ten years later, in 2009, the then-youngest age cohort (people born in the 1980s, then in their 20s) was clearly more Democratic-oriented than older groups, but there was little difference between the older cohorts (though those born in the 1960s remained slightly more Republican than both groups older and younger than them).

Now, and for the last several years, a starker – and more linear – age pattern is evident. Those born in the 1990s (now in their mid-20s to early 30s) are more Democratic than those born in the 1980s, who are in turn more Democratic than those born in the 1970s. And the oldest age cohorts are the most Republican-oriented.

Partisanship of age cohorts over time

Voters born in the 1940s (ages 74 to 83 in 2023) have had a Republican tilt for the last several years – but were evenly split in their partisanship a decade ago. The Democratic Party last had an edge among this group in the first year of the Obama administration.

Voters born in the 1950s (ages 64 to 73 in 2023) are more likely to be Republicans or Republican leaners (52%) than Democrats or Democratic leaners (44%). The GOP has held an edge with this group for the last several years, following growth in GOP affiliation over the last 15 years.

Compared with those born the decade after them, voters born in the 1960s (ages 54 to 63 in 2023) have tended to be more closely aligned with the GOP throughout their adulthood. Currently, the GOP has a 5 percentage point edge over Democrats among these voters (50% to 45%).

Voters born in the 1970s (ages 44 to 53 in 2023) have historically been more likely to align with Democrats than Republicans. Democrats have had a 3-point or greater edge among these voters in 17 out of 23 years since 2000. However, today these voters are about equally split between associating with Republicans (49%) and Democrats (48%).

Voters born in the 1980s (ages 34 to 43 in 2023) favor the Democrats in their affiliation and have done so since they first reached adulthood. But the gap between the two parties has narrowed considerably among these voters in the last few years. Currently, 52% of voters born in the 1980s associate with the Democrats and 44% with Republicans.

Voters born in the 1990s (ages 24 to 33 in 2023) are more aligned with the Democratic Party than those in older age cohorts. About six-in-ten voters born in the 1990s (62%) currently associate with the Democrats, and a similar share were Democrats or Democratic leaners when they first entered the electorate almost a decade ago. (Note: Most of those born in the 2000s are not yet eligible to vote.)

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Education & Politics
• Election 2024
• Gender & Politics
• Political Parties
• Race, Ethnicity & Politics
• Religion & Politics
• Rural, Urban and Suburban Communities
• Voter Demographics

What’s It Like To Be a Teacher in America Today?

Republican gains in 2022 midterms driven mostly by turnout advantage, more americans disapprove than approve of colleges considering race, ethnicity in admissions decisions, partisan divides over k-12 education in 8 charts, school district mission statements highlight a partisan divide over diversity, equity and inclusion in k-12 education, most popular, report materials.

• Party Identification Detailed Tables, 1994-2023

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

Ruraling Education Research pp 1–11 Cite as

Ruraling Education Research

• Philip Roberts 3 &
• Melyssa Fuqua 4  
• First Online: 16 May 2021

532 Accesses

2 Citations

In this chapter, the editors of this volume establish the grounding of, and need for, a repositioning and reconsideration of rural education research. With the term ‘ruraling’ created as a means to push back against the metrocentricity embedded in much education research, we pose an argument that rural education research is an established field of study. Finally, we introduce the chapters that follow, with their focus on research that champions rural places, spaces, and people. The contributing authors speak from their rural education research experiences at once to other rural education peers, but also to peers in the broader discipline of education research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

A full analysis of this research up to 2020 is under review at the time of writing.

For detail on this history, we refer the reader to Furlong and Lawn ( 2010 ) and Furlong ( 2013 ).

While an Australian example this applies equally internationally (Biddle & Azano, 2016 ).

Biddle, C., & Azano, A. P. (2016). Constructing and reconstructing the “rural school problem”: A century of rural education research. Review of Research in Education, 40 (1), 298–325.

Article   Google Scholar  

Biddle, C., Sutherland, D. H., & McHenry-Sorber, E. (2019). On resisting “awayness” and being a good insider: Early career scholars revisit Coladarci’s swan song a decade later. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 35 (7), 1–16.

Google Scholar  

Brennan, M. (2005). Putting rurality on the educational agenda: Work towards a theoretical framework. Education in Rural Australia, 15 (2), 11–20.

Brown, D. L., & Schafft, K. A. (2018). Rural people and communities in the twenty-first century: Resilience and transformation (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Butler, J. (2013). Critically queer. In D. E. Hall, A. Jagose, A. Bebell, & S. Potter (Eds.), The Routledge queer studies reader (pp. 18–31). New York: Routledge.

Corbett, M., & Gereluk, D. (2020). Rural teacher education: Connecting land and people . Springer.

Furlong, J. (2013). Education—An anatomy of the discipline: Rescuing the university project . Abingdon: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Furlong, J., & Lawn, M. (2010). Disciplines of education: Their role in the future of education research . Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.

Green, B. (2013). Literacy, rurality, education: A partial mapping. In B. Green & M. Corbett (Eds.), Rethinking rural literacies: Transnational perspectives (pp. 17–34). New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Green, B., & Reid, J. (2012). A new teacher for a new nation? Teacher education, ‘English’, and schooling in early twentieth-century Australia. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 44 (4), 361–379.

Gulson, K. N., & Symes, C. (Eds.). (2007). Spatial theories of education: Policy and geography matters . London: Routledge.

Halsey, J. (2018). Independent Review into Regional, Rural and Remote Education-Final Report . Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Reid, J., Green, B., Cooper, M., Hastings, W., Lock, G., & White, S. (2010). Regenerating rural social space? Teacher education for rural-regional sustainability. Australian Journal of Education, 54 (3), 262–267.

Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy . New York: Routledge.

Roberts, P. (2014). Researching from the standpoint of the rural. In S. White & M. Corbett (Eds.), Doing educational research in rural settings: Methodological issues, international perspectives and practical solutions (pp. 135–148). New York: Routledge.

Roberts, P., & Cuervo, H. (2015). What next for rural education research. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 25 (3), 1–8.

Roberts, P., & Downes, N. (2016a). Conflicting messages: Sustainability and education for rural-regional sustainability. Rural Society, 25 (1), 15–36.

Roberts, P., & Downes, N. (2016b, November 27–December 1) Constructing the rural school in Australia: A century of rurality and rural education research . Presentation in the Symposium ‘Where’s the rural in that?’ Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference. Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Roberts, P., & Green, B. (2013). Researching rural place: On social justice and rural education. Qualitative Inquiry, 19 (10), 765–774.

Schafft, K. A., & Jackson, A. (Eds.). (2010). Rural education for the twenty-first century: Identity, place, and community in a globalizing world . University Park, PA: Penn State University Press (Rural Studies Series).

Schulte, A. K., & Walker-Gibbs, B. (Eds.). (2015). Self-studies in rural teacher education . Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Shucksmith, M., & Brown, D. (2016). Framing rural studies in the global north. In M. Shuckmsith & D. Brown (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of rural studies (pp. 1–26). New York: Routledge.

Thomas, A. R., Lowe, B. M., Fulkerson, G. M., & Smith, P. J. (2011). Critical rural theory: Structure, space, culture . Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

White, S., & Corbett, M. (2014). Doing educational research in rural settings: Methodological issues, international perspectives and practical solutions . Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, New York: Routledge.

Woods, M. (2011). Rural. Routledge.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia

Philip Roberts

Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Melyssa Fuqua

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip Roberts .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of Canberra, Moss Vale, NSW, Australia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Roberts, P., Fuqua, M. (2021). Ruraling Education Research. In: Roberts, P., Fuqua, M. (eds) Ruraling Education Research. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0131-6_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0131-6_1

Published : 16 May 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-16-0130-9

Online ISBN : 978-981-16-0131-6

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Virtual Tour

Experience University of Idaho with a virtual tour. Explore now

• Discover a Career
• Find a Major
• Experience U of I Life

More Resources

• Admitted Students
• International Students

Take Action

• Find Financial Aid
• View Deadlines
• Find Your Rep

Helping to ensure U of I is a safe and engaging place for students to learn and be successful. Read about Title IX.

Get Involved

• Clubs & Volunteer Opportunities
• Recreation and Wellbeing
• Student Government
• Student Sustainability Cooperative
• Academic Assistance
• Safety & Security
• Career Services
• Health & Wellness Services
• Register for Classes
• Dates & Deadlines
• Financial Aid
• Sustainable Solutions
• U of I Library

• Upcoming Events

Review the events calendar.

Stay Connected

• Vandal Family Newsletter
• Here We Have Idaho Magazine
• Living on Campus
• Campus Safety
• About Moscow

The largest Vandal Family reunion of the year. Check dates.

Benefits and Services

• Vandal Voyagers Program
• Vandal License Plate
• Submit Class Notes
• Make a Gift
• View Events
• Alumni Chapters
• University Magazine
• Alumni Newsletter

U of I's web-based retention and advising tool provides an efficient way to guide and support students on their road to graduation. Login to VandalStar.

Common Tools

• Administrative Procedures Manual (APM)
• Class Schedule
• OIT Tech Support
• Academic Dates & Deadlines
• U of I Retirees Association
• Faculty Senate
• Staff Council

University of Idaho News

University Communications and Marketing

Fax: 208-885-5841

Email: [email protected]

Web: Communications and Marketing

U of I Students Earn Top Awards for Music Education

April 16, 2024.

MOSCOW, Idaho — A University of Idaho student has received the Professional Achievement Award from the National Association for Music Education (NAfME), and the U of I collegiate chapter of NAfME received the Chapter of Excellence Award for Service in April.

Alexis Gist of Veradale, Washington, is a senior at Lionel Hampton School of Music and 2023-24 president of the Idaho Collegiate NAfME chapters. She has been a tireless advocate for music education and works to connect performers and educators through opportunities to teach, perform and inspire musicians of all ages. Gist is an accomplished flautist and served as a section leader in the Vandal Marching Band. She will graduate in May. 

The U of I collegiate chapter of NAfME is made up of more than 30 students from Lionel Hampton School of Music. Over a period of several weeks, they worked closely with Lapwai Middle/High School where they cleaned and inventoried school band instruments, made simple instrument repairs, labeled those that needed professional repair and organized the instruments. This service project contributed to the revival of the school’s band program which hadn't met since 2014.

“I am so very proud of our CNAfME Chapter leadership and members and their hard work in planning and executing service projects, educational opportunities, and social gatherings for our music education community,” said Lori Conlon Khan, advisor to the group and a clinical associate professor at Lionel Hampton School of Music. “These students are well on their way to becoming awesome music educators,” she said.

For information about Lionel Hampton School of Music, visit uidaho.edu/music .

Media Contact:

Kelly O’Neill Media Relations, Department of Theatre Arts University of Idaho 208-885-6465 [email protected]

About the University of Idaho

The University of Idaho, home of the Vandals, is Idaho’s land-grant, national research university. From its residential campus in Moscow, U of I serves the state of Idaho through educational centers in Boise, Coeur d’Alene and Idaho Falls, nine research and Extension centers, plus Extension offices in 42 counties. Home to nearly 11,000 students statewide, U of I is a leader in student-centered learning and excels at interdisciplinary research, service to businesses and communities, and in advancing diversity, citizenship and global outreach. U of I competes in the Big Sky and Western Athletic conferences. Learn more at uidaho.edu .

• For the Media
• Open Records
• Division of Marketing & Communications

UGA breaks ground on new medical education and research building

The groundbreaking was a "transformational moment at the University of Georgia"

The University of Georgia broke ground Friday on a new medical education and research building that will significantly expand teaching and research capabilities at the university’s future School of Medicine .

Located on UGA’s Health Sciences campus, preliminary plans for the building include medical simulation suites, standardized patient rooms, clinical skills labs, a gross anatomy lab, and a medical library. The building will also feature student support spaces like conference rooms, study spaces, lounges, and faculty and staff offices dedicated to student support.

In total, the proposed building will measure approximately 92,000 square feet. Roughly 67,000 square feet of the building will be dedicated to medical education while the remaining 25,000 square feet will house biomedical research laboratories.

Gov. Brian Kemp speaks at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Medical School Building on the Health Sciences Campus. (Andrew Davis Tucker/UGA)

The new building will complement existing facilities and provide the UGA School of Medicine with capacity to expand from 60 students per class to 120 in the future.

“Today is an exciting and transformational moment at the University of Georgia,” said UGA President Jere W. Morehead. “As a land-grant university and Georgia’s flagship research institution, the University of Georgia is uniquely positioned to address the health care needs of our state through world-class medical education, research and community outreach.”

Following the recommendation of Governor Brian Kemp, the Georgia General Assembly passed a fiscal year 2024 amended budget that includes $50 million in funding for a new University of Georgia School of Medicine facility.

President Jere W. Morehead speaks along with USG Chancellor Sonny Perdue and Gov. Brian Kemp at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Medical School Building on the Health Sciences Campus. (Andrew Davis Tucker/UGA)

The $50 million in state funding will be matched by private contributions to fund the $100 million medical education and research building.

The University System of Georgia Board of Regents authorized the University of Georgia to establish a new independent School of Medicine in Athens in February.

In March, Dr. Shelley Nuss was named founding dean of the UGA School of Medicine. She previously served as an associate professor of internal medicine and psychiatry in the Augusta University/University of Georgia Medical Partnership. In 2016, she was named campus dean of the Medical Partnership, which has been educating physicians in Athens since 2010.

“The fact is, Georgia needs more doctors, and we need them now,” said Nuss. “The new UGA School of Medicine will increase the number of medical students in the state, translating to more practicing physicians to help address Georgia’s greatest health care challenges.”

The creation of the UGA School of Medicine marks the natural evolution of the longest-serving medical partnership in the United States. Similar programs founded around the same time have already transitioned to independent medical schools.

USG Chancellor Sonny Perdue speaks from the podium along with Gov. Brian Kemp at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Medical School Building on the Health Sciences Campus. (Andrew Davis Tucker/UGA)

UGA will continue to work closely with the Medical College of Georgia to ensure a smooth transition for current medical students as UGA seeks accreditation from the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME).

The development of a new public school of medicine at UGA promises to help address a significant shortage of medical professionals. Georgia’s growing population tops approximately 11 million residents, straining the state’s existing medical infrastructure.

Now the nation’s eighth largest state, Georgia is forecasted to experience further population growth in the coming years, and nearly one-third of the state’s physicians are nearing retirement.

“Georgia is growing,” said Sonny Perdue, chancellor of the University System of Georgia. “We may only be only eighth today, but in just a few short years Georgia could be the fifth largest state. And that means we are going to need more health care, and people are going to get it here and across the state.”

Founding Dean of the School of Medicine Shelley Nuss, middle, is surrounded by medical students at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Medical School Building. (Andrew Davis Tucker/UGA)

Georgia currently ranks No. 40 among U.S. states for the number of active patient care physicians per capita, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), while it ranks No. 41 for the number of primary care physicians and No. 44 for the number of general surgeons per capita. The shortage of medical providers is particularly acute in rural and underserved areas, where access is even more limited.

UGA faculty are already engaged in human health research, and the establishment of a school of medicine will bolster their efforts.

“Our flagship institution, the University of Georgia, is tasked with the vital mission of educating and preparing the next generation of leaders,” said Gov. Brian Kemp. “To that end, one of our top priorities is building a strong health care workforce pipeline. This UGA facility will be an essential part of those efforts.”

Alongside funding from state government, strong private support will fortify efforts to create a School of Medicine at UGA. Donors have demonstrated robust support for UGA initiatives in recent years. In fiscal year 2023, UGA raised over $240 million in gifts and pledges from alumni, friends and foundation and industry partners. The university’s three-year rolling fundraising average is now a record $235 million per year, with annual contributions exceeding $200 million for the past six consecutive years.

You may also like

College of Engineering dean named provost at Ohio…

Undergraduate wins Regents Cup Debate

Lead@3 speakers offer insights on leadership

Uga community has access to ai-powered chatbot, growers hopeful 2024 peach season will rebound from…, innovator, educator inducted into the georgia….