將研究與政策和實(shí)踐聯(lián)系起來(lái)education-WN8

JULY2024WORKINGPAPER#187.3SPARKSWORKINGPAPERIIILINKINGRESEARCHTOPOLICYTOPRACTICECOLLABORATIVERESEARCHFOREVIDENCE-INFORMEDPOLICYMAKINGINEDUCATIONGHULAMOMARQARGHARACHELDYLLinkingResearchtoPolicytoPractice:Collaborativeresearchforevidence-informedpolicymakingineducationGhulamOmarQarghaandRachelDylJuly2024WorkingPaper#187.3SPARKSWorkingPaperIIIAbouttheCenterforUniversalEducationFoundedin2002,theCenterforUniversalEducation(CUE)isaleadingpolicycenterfocusedonuniversalqualityeducationandskillsdevelopmentaroundtheworld.CUEcollaboratescloselywithnetworksofinternationalpartnerstoaccelerateeducationalprogressandsystemschangesothatalllearners–especiallythemostmarginalized–candevelopabreadthofskillstothriveinarapidlychangingworld.AcknowledgementsWewouldliketoexpressourgratitudetoStevenKlees,BrentEdwards,andMoOlateju,whorevieweddraftreports,andBradOlsenfromtheCenterforUniversalEducationattheBrookingsInstitutionforhiseditorialreview.WealsothankRachaelGrahamTinforherinvaluablefeedbackduringthewritingprocess.1Ultimately,policymakersbalancethepolitical,ideological,andpragmaticimplicationsoftheirdecisionswiththeevidencefromresearch,tomakethebestdecisiongiventheirtimeandbureaucraticconstraints(Cohenetal.,1972;Qargha&Morris,2023).Often,thisbalancingactmeanscompromisingbetweencompetingpolicyoptionstoaddressthemultipledemandsratherthanseekingcomprehensiveevidencetochooseonetechnically“optimal”solution(Barbalet,2009;Olsen,2023;Simon,1997).2.Privilegingonetypeofevidencefordecision-makingignoresthecomplexityofeducationecosystems.Thedesiretobaseeducationpoliciesonthebestavailableevidenceoftenresultedinprivilegingquantitativestatisticalresearchandprogramevaluationstudiesthatusestatisticalmethodsandrandomizedcontrolledtrialsasthe“goldstandard.”Asdiscussedpreviously,educationpolicymakingtakesplaceinaninterconnectedandmultifacetedenvironmentwithincreasinglycomplexpolicyproblemsforwhichthereisnosinglepolicysolution.Complexityisinherenttoahealthyeducationsystem.Thenatureofeducationdecision-makingisinnatelytiedtomultiplegoals,actors,andpurposesofeducationinsociety(Ingold&Monaghan,2016;Nussbaum,2010;Wu,2014).Muchofthewritingaboutevidence-basededucationpolicyandpractice,especiallyineducationdevelopmentspaces,eitherignoresoreliminatesthiscomplexity,particularlythepoliticsandmultiplicityofgoalsinpublicpolicydecision-making.Forexample,Davies(1999)writesthattheeducation“agendaisoftendrivenbypoliticalideology,conventionalwisdom,folklore,andwishfulthinkingasitstrivestomeettheneedsandinterestsoftheeconomy,business,employers,lawandorder,civilsociety,parentalchoice,and,atleastrhetorically,thechildren,youngpeople,andadultswhomakeupthelearningcommunity”(p.108).Hearguesthatthismultiplicityofdesiresisa“triumphofhopeoverreason,sentimentoverdemonstratedeffectiveness,intuitionoverevidence.”However,policymakersmustbalancetheirgoalsandinterestswithevidencefromresearchtomakedecisions.Toeliminatecomplexityfromeducationdecision-making,certainmembersoftheinternationaleducationdevelopmentcommunityhavepushedtomakeeducationpolicymakingmimicmedicalresearch,evenifitmeans“kickingandscreaming”(Slavin,2002,p.16).Thisisoftendonebyusingresearchapproachesfromthehardsciences,suchasexperimentationandcausationalstudies,forthesocialsciences(Klees,2021,2017;Pirrie,2001).Theendgoalisoftentousethisevidencetoidentifybestpractices,“whatworks,”and“bestbuy”modelsthatcanthenbereplicated,transferred,andscaled(Ingold&Monaghan,2016;Parra&Edwards,2024).Privilegingonetypeofresearchasthe“goldstandard”istechnicallyproblematicaswellasdisconnectedfromtherealityofhowresearchevidenceisusedintheeducationpolicyenvironment.Althoughthereisanalluretofind“bestpractices”thatpolicymakerscansimplymandatefortheirlocalcontext,bothdeterminingandalsomeasuringthequalityofeducationarecontextdependent(Steiner-Khamsi,2013).PleaserefertoWorkingPaperIIforadetaileddiscussionofwhypromoting“bestpractices”ineducationisproblematic.Furthermore,forafulldiscussionaboutthelimitationsofstatisticalcorrelationalresearchforeducationpolicymaking,refertoWu(2014),andforadiscussionofthepitfallsofusingrandomizedcontrolledtrialsasthegoldstandard,refertoParraandEdwards(2024).5FigureI:Policymakers’UseofEvidenceThereisnosuchthingascontext-freeresearchorevidence(Pirrie,2001).Often,findingsareinconclusive,researchersdisagreeonhowtomeasureprogrameffectiveness,anditisunclearwhetheraneducationprogramwillhavethesameresultsacrosscontexts.Policymakersoftenchoosebetweencompetingevidencetoinformtheirdecision-making(Klees,2017;Lubienskietal.,2009).Weadviseeducationactorstoviewevidencefromresearchasatooltoskillfullycurateandusebasedoneacheducationecosystem'suniqueenvironment,challenges,andgoals.“Whodecides‘whatworks,’whattomeasure,howtomeasureit,andinthecaseofconflictingevidence—whomtobelieve?”(Lubienskietal.,2009).7Inthefollowingsection,wehighlighttheimportanceofmovingbeyondtheconventionalpathwaysforcommunicatinganddisseminatingresearchandencourageeducationactorstoutilizeacollaborativeresearchapproachandcreativepathways,includingemergingtechnology,tocommunicateandshareresearchfindings.1.Creativepathwaysfordisseminatingresearchcanhelpbridgethegapbetweenpolicyandpractice.Thereisoftenadisconnectbetweenthetraditionalpathwaysfordisseminatingresearch,likeacademicjournals,andhowpolicymakersuseevidence.MostscholarlyjournalsareinEnglishandcomefromcountriesliketheUnitedStatesandtheUnitedKingdom.Becausethesejournalsareprestigious,researchersfeelpressuretoproduceresearchthatmeetsacademicexpectationsbyproducinggeneralizableresearchthatfocusesonbroaderglobaltrendsacrosscontexts,evenifitmaynotberelevanttopolicymakers(Lariviere&Warren,2019).However,researchinspiredbyinternationalresearchagendascancounteracttheneedforlocallybasedevidencerelevanttospecificcontextsandeducationecosystems.Tomovebeyondtraditionalpathwaysfordissemination,researchersmustthinkaboutwaystopresentresearchthatarerelevantandeasyforpolicymakerstounderstand.Ashcraftetal.(2020)explainhowthesource,message,audience,andchannelarecrucialforthesuccessfuldisseminationofresearch.Thismodel,asshowninTable1below,emphasizestheimportanceofnotonlytheevidencegeneratedbutalsothechannelsusedtoreachthetargetaudienceandthemessagebeingconveyed.Weencourageresearcherstoconsiderhowthesource,message,audience,andchannelmayaffectthereceptionofevidencebydifferentpolicymakers.Table1:ModelofDisseminationofResearch(Ashcraftetal.,2020)SourceResearcherswhogenerateevidenceMessageAudienceChannelRelevantinformationsentbythesourceonapolicytopicThosereceivingthemessageHowthemessagegetsfromthesourcetotheaudienceInnovativemodesofresearchdisseminationhaveemergedtocommunicateevidencetovariousaudiences.Forexample,socialmediaandtechnologyhavechangedthelandscapeofhowinformationisdisseminated,whichwediscussbelow.Additionally,blogs,wikis,open-sourcewebsites,andbroadcastingplatformslikeTEDxcanbespacesforuserstointeractwithresearchfindingsinlesstraditionalways(Ross-Hellaueretal.,2020).Regardlessofthechannel,researchersneedtoconsiderpotentialtargetaudiencesandtheirpreferencesforcommunication.Anotherimportantaspectofdisseminationisparticipationofthetargetaudiences,toencourageengagement,feedback,andinvolvementfromthosewhoultimatelyusethefindings(Ross-Hellaueretal.,2020).92.Clearcommunicationisessentialtoensurethatresearchbenefitsandisrelevantforalleducationactors.Policymakersandresearchersoftenhavedifferingexpectationsabouttheresearchproducedanditsintendeduse.Challengesthatcreateagapbetweenresearchandpolicyincludelackofcommunication,untimelyorirrelevantresearch,mutualmistrust,poorqualityresearch,inconclusiveorconflictingfindings,andpoliticalinstabilityorturnover(Lee&Belohlav,2014).Researcherstendtofocusonbroadertheoreticalthemesandabstractideas,whilepolicymakersseekrelevant,concretesolutionstoimmediatepolicyissuesintheirlocalcontexts(Henig,2008).Numerousstudiesemphasizethatforpolicymakerstouseresearchevidencefortheirdecision-making,theresearchhastoberelevanttotheirpressingproblems.Forexample,Nelsonetal.(2009)foundthatpolicymakersprioritizeresearchrelatedtotheirlocalcontextforinformingpolicydecisions.Similarly,Nakajima(2021)foundthatintheabsenceoflocalresearch,policymakerspreferstudiesconductedinsimilarcontextsorsettingssimilartotheirjurisdictions.Researchersmustalsoconsidertherelevanceandtimelinessoftheirwork.Theyshouldaccountforpolicymakers'timeconstraints,focusonspecificlocalissues,andestablishmechanismstoensurethatresearchprioritiesaremutuallyimportant.Additionally,itiscrucialthattheevidenceproducedisrelevantandthatresearchfindingsarecommunicatedanddisseminatedeffectivelytoalleducationactors.3.Technologycancreatepathwaysformoreeffectiveandefficientdisseminationofevidence.Theadvancementoftechnologyhasbroughtbothopportunitiesandchallengesincommunicatinganddisseminatingresearch(Klaretal.,2020).Forinstance,socialmediaprovideswideraccesstoinformationbutalsoallowsafloodofcompetinginformation,whichmakesitdifficulttodecipherthevalidityandreliabilityofinformation(Lubienskietal.,2014;Steiner-Khamsi,2022).Klaretal.(2020)foundthatpromotingresearchonTwittercorrelatedwithmorecitations,suggestingthatsocialmediaiseffectiveforactively“pushingout”researchratherthanrelyingonittobefoundbysearchingacademicjournals.Onsocialmedia,researcherscansharesnippetsoftheirwork,linktofullpapers,taginterestedindividuals,andusehashtagstojoinbroaderconversationsandreachwideraudiences(Irwinetal.,2022).AreportbytheInstituteofEducationSciencesfoundthatoverhalfofpractitionersconsumeresearchviasocialmedia(Sykesetal.,2022).Beyonddirectdissemination,socialmediacanalsoconnectresearcherswithpolicymakersandothereducationactors,facilitatingnetworkingandknowledge-sharing.Althoughrelativelynewandnotalwaysaccurate,AIholdssignificantpotentialfordataanalysisandresearchdissemination.EmergingresearchshowsthatAIcananalyzeusertrendsfortargetedevidencedissemination,improveaudienceperception,reduceinformationasymmetry,andenhanceengagement(Xifeng&Han,2022).Additionally,policymakerscanuseAItogatherinformationfrommultiplesourcesmoreefficientlythantraditionalmethodsofevidencecompilation.AIcanalsohelpidentifytheneedsofdifferentaudiencesandpersonalizedisseminationforspecificpurposesandpolicyneeds.10Inthenextsection,wehighlightthepromiseofcollaborativeresearchasamechanismforproducinganddisseminatinglocallyrelevantevidence.Weproposeacollaborativeresearchapproachtoinvolvepolicymakersandeducationactorsintheresearchprocessandtobetterconnectevidencewithpolicy.C.Collaborativeresearchapproachescanpromotelocallyrelevantresearchthatrespondstotheneedsoflocaleducationecosystems.Theinternationaleducationdevelopmentcommunityisincreasinglyinterestedinexploringthepotentialofcollaborativeresearchamongdifferenteducationactorstobridgethegapsbetweenresearch,policy,andpractice.Withinthepasttwodecades,manyuniversitieshaveshowninterestinformingresearchcollaborationswithexternalorganizationsorindividuals(Frankenetal.,2019;Niks,2006).Similarly,manyfundingorganizationshavesupportedcollaborativeresearchapproaches,mainlyinhigherincomecontexts,toensurethatpolicyinformsresearchasmuchasresearchinformspolicy(Coburnetal.,2013;Tsengetal.,2022)Despiteincreasedinterestandfundingforcollaboration,thereareoftensilosbetweenresearchersandthebroadercommunity(Niks,2006),especiallyininternationaldevelopmentspaces.Collaborativeapproachestointernationaleducationdevelopmentresearchcanhelpbridgethegapsbetweenresearch,policy,andpracticeandinformtheopportunitiesandchallengesoftheseapproachesforeducationtransformationinlocalcontexts.Inthissection,wediscusswhatacollaborativeresearchapproachentailsandhowitcanfosterrelationshipsamongeducationactorsandcontributetoalocallyrelevantevidencebase.1.Collaborativeresearchbringseducationactorstogethertodecideonlocalresearchpriorities.Collaborativeresearchinvolvesintentionallybringingtogetherresearchers,policymakers,practitioners,andothereducationactorswithdifferentexpertisetostudyreal-worldproblemsinamutuallybeneficialworkingrelationship.Theliteraturedescribesmanyprinciplesthatareessentialforcollaborativeresearch.Firstly,collaborativeresearchusuallyentailsanintentional,ongoing,mutuallybeneficialworkingrelationshipbetweentwoormoreeducationactorsfocusedonaproblemrelevanttoallactors(Coburnetal.,2013;Washington,2004).Anotherimportantprincipleofcollaborativeresearchisintegratingcollaborationthrougheachstepoftheresearchprocess.Collaborativeresearchdoesnotjustinvolvetheresearchdesignbutallphasesoftheresearchprocess,includingdecidingonmethodologiesandanalyzingdata.Collaborativeresearchalsovalueslocalknowledgeandlocalownershipofresearch.Forexample,whendesigninganinterviewprotocol,thereisadifferencebetweenchoosingquestionsbasedonwhattheresearcherwantstoknowandwhatpolicymakers,practitioners,orothermembersofthecollaborativebelieveismeaningfulfortheirimmediatelocalneeds(McArdle,2020).Thisnuanceincollaborativeresearchisthatofconductingresearchwithparticipantsratherthanaboutparticipants(Washington,112004).Barkeretal.(2023),intheircollaborativeresearchmanifesto,describethisasoneoftheethicalcommitmentsofcollaborativeepistemology—theneedto“changetheparadigmofconventionalinformationextractionfrommarginalizedorvolatilecommunitiesforscholarlybenefitandinsteadengagepeopleasactorswithagencyratherthansolelyobjectsofresearch”(11).2.Collaborativeresearchbuildsonmanyexistingresearchmethodologies.Collaborativeresearchdrawsuponexistingresearchtraditions,includingactionresearch,participatory-actionresearch(PAR),programevaluation,andknowledge-utilizationliterature.Whilecollaborativeresearchsharessimilaritieswiththesetraditions,itstandsoutforitsabilitytocombineelementsofallthesetraditionsandfocusonmultipleaspectsofpolicyandpracticesimultaneously.Collaborativeresearchrequirestheparticipationofvariouseducationactorsacrosstheeducationecosystem,includingthosenotdirectlyinvolvedintheinterventionnorpartoftheorganization,forasystematic,long-termrelationshipmutuallybeneficialtoallparticipatingactors(Argyrisetal.,1985;Denis&Lomas,2003;Elliott,1991;Lilfordetal.,2003).Below,wehighlightsomeofthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweencollaborativeresearchandthemethodologiesitbuildsfrom.Bothcollaborativeresearchandactionresearchhavethecommongoalofimprovingeducationsystemsandinvolvingpractitionersintheresearchprocess.However,therearedifferencesbetweenthetwoapproaches.Actionresearchisusuallyledbyoneormorepractitioners,suchasteachers,whouseareflectiveprocesstoconductresearchintheirownsettingstoimprovetheirindividualpractices.Whilesomemembersofcollaborativeresearchmightbepractitioners,collaborativeresearchalsoinvolvesothereducationactors,suchasresearchers,policymakers,educators,andothers.Thegoalistointegrateinsightsfromalleducationactorstoensurethattheresearchinformsbroader,systematicchangesinpolicyorpracticeandmakeevidencemoreusefulforallinvolvedparties.CollaborativeresearchandPARbothchallengetheexclusiveacademicnotionsofreliableandvalidresearch,emphasizetheimportanceoflocalknowledge,requirerespectforallinvolvedintheresearchprocess,andpromotelocalownershipofresearchprocesses(Frankenetal.,2019;Galletta&Torre,2019).However,PARusuallytriestoremovethedistinctionbetweenresearchersandnon-researchersbyprioritizingtheexpertiseandperspectivesfromlivedexperienceandsituatedknowledge.Collaborativeresearchapproaches,similartoevaluationandknowledgeutilizationtraditions,maintainthedistinctionsbetweenresearchersandnon-researchersbuttrytoco-createspacesthatdrawupontheexpertiseofeacheducationactorinacomplementarymannertowardsamutualgoal(Denis&Lomas,2003;Huberman,1994;Jason,2006;McArdle,2020).12RecentCollaborativeResearchEffortsinEducationTherecentworkoftheCenterforUniversalEducationattheBrookingsInstitutionhasexploredcollaborativemodelsofengagementandresearchwithpartnersfromaroundtheworld.Forexample,theKDNLCproject

(TheKnowing-DoingNetworkLeadershipCoalition),whichwaslaunchedin2023,bringstogether10civilsocietyorganizationstoworktogethertoresearchandunderstandhoweducationsystemtransformationoccursinlocaleducationecosystems.WilliamTGrantFoundationhasalsobeenaleadingadvocateofcollaborativeresearchmodels,withafocusonreducinginequalityinyouthoutcomes(WilliamT.GrantFoundation).Additionally,theHewlettFoundationsupportedthecreationofadesignteamthatincludestheNationalNetworkofEducationResearch-PracticePartnerships

(NNERPP),TheNationalCenterforResearchinPolicyandPractice(NCRPP),CaliforniaEducationPartners,StanfordUniversity,andUniversityofColoradoBoulder,wherememberscollectivelyexplorehowtopromoteandengageothersincollaborativeresearch(TheCollaborativeEducationResearchCollective,2023).Morerecently,theSpencerFoundation

launchedacollaborative-research-focusedprogramthatpromotescollaborativeresearchontheprocesses,practices,routines,andpoliciesthatimproveeducationforlearners,educators,families,communities,andinstitutions(SpencerFoundation).3.Collaborativeresearchfosterstrust,jointownership,andacomplementaryrelationshipamongsteducationactors.Asuccessfulcollaborativeresearchapproachfostersareciprocalrelationshipcharacterizedbytrust,mutualrespectforexpertise,andjointownershipoftheresearchprocess.Collaborationextendsbeyondmerecooperation,resourcesharing,andpartnershipsbasedsolelyonfundingoraccesstoresearchsites;itinvolvesaninclusivethoughtpartnershipwheremultipleeducationactorscontributeopinions,insights,andsolutionstowardacommongoal(Denis&Lomas,2003;O’Sullivanetal.,2010).Acollaborativeresearchapproachensuresthatresearchquestionsandmethodologiesaremoreresponsivetocommunityneeds,accuratelycapturecommunitynuances,andincreasethelikelihoodthatpolicymakersandpractitionerswillimplementtheresearchfindings(Coburnetal.,2013;Denis&Lomas,2003;Jason,2006).Additionally,collaborativeresearchprioritizeslocalneeds,incorporatesmultipleperspectives,andencouragesinterdisciplinaryandcontextualanalysis.Inmanycases,teachers—whoareatthecoreofanypedagogicalreform—feelexcludedfromthepolicymakingprocess.Collaborativeresearchallowsteachersandothereducationactorstocontributetothelocalevidencebase(Christianakis,2010).Transformingeducationiscomplexandchallengingbecauseitinvolvesincomplete,contradictory,andevolvingrequirementswithineacheducationecosystemwithmultipleactorswithdifferingperspectivesandvalues(Rittel&Webber,1973;Szostak,2021).Traditionallinearapproachestopolicymakingoftenfailtoaddressthesecomplexities.Bybringingtogetherindividualswithdiversestrengthsandskillsetsandpromotingactiveengagement,dialogue,anddebateamongsteducationactors,acollaborativeresearchapproachcangeneratecreativesolutionsandhelptacklethecomplexityofeducationtransformation(Frankenetal.,2019;Head,2022;Ritchey,2013).13AppendixI:WorkingDefinitionsofKeyConceptsApproach:Thistermreferstothewayteachersimplementpedagogiesintheclassroom.Apedagogicalapproachishowtheyimpartacertainpedagogyinpractice.Thistermcanalsorefertothewayinwhichsomeoneconductsresearch.Behaviorism:Behaviorismisalearningtheorybasedonthepremisethatbehaviorsarelearnedoracquiredthroughpositiveornegativereinforcementordifferenttypesofconditioningintheenvironment.BreadthofSkills:Abreadthofskillsincludesnotjustfoundationalliteracyandnumeracybutalsosocioemotionalskillsandotherskills,attitudes,characteristics,andknowledgechildrenneedtothrive.ChalkandTalk:“Chalkandtalk”approachesgenerallyrefertotraditionalteacher-centeredpedagogicalapproacheswhereteachersrelyonachalkboardandlecture-styleclasses.CommunityCollaborators:ThistermencompassesthemultipleactorsfromthecommunityinvolvedintheSPARKSResearchPolicyCollaborativesthatassistthelocalFacilitatingPartnerintheresearchprocess.Competency-Based:Incontrasttoanobjective-basededucationsystem,acompetency-basedsystemgenerallyhasacurriculumwheresuccessismeasuredbasedonwhetherstudentsmastercertaincompetenciesorskills.Generally,competency-basededucationsystemsutilizeformativeassessmentstoevaluatestudentprogressandencourageindividualizedlearningprogressionsforstudents.Constructivism:Constructivismisaneducationtheorythatemphasizestheactiveroleoflearnersinconstructingtheirunderstandingandknowledgeoftheworld.Inaconstructivistframework,learnersareseenasactiveparticipantsinthelearningprocessratherthanpassiverecipientsofinformation.Theyconstructknowledgethroughexperiences,reflection,andinteractionwithothers.EducationActors:Thistermencompassesthemultipleactorsinvolvedinthelocaleducationecosystemincludingpolicymakers,academics,teachers,students,journalists,donors,civilsocietyorganizationsandotherrelevantcommunitymembers.EducationEcosystem:Thistermreferstoeducationpolicies,curriculum,assessments,allocatedinstructiontime,classroomsizes,andformal,informal,andnon-formallocaleducationoutlets.EducationTechnology(EdTech):Thistermreferstotheintersectionbetweentechnologyandeducationandthepracticeofusingtechnologytofacilitatelearning.EducationSystemTransformation:Thistermreferstothefundamentaltransformationofeducationsystemswhichencouragesreflectionandreassessmentofthegoalsandpurposesofeducationinspecificcontextstoensurealignmentinaconstantlychangingandmodernizingworld.Evidence-baseddecision-making:Thistermreferstoanapproachtodecision-makingwherepolicymakersprimarilybasedecisionsonavailableevidencederivedfromrigorous,empiricalresearchmethods.Evidence-informeddecision-making:Thistermreferstoanapproachtodecision-makingwherepolicymakers’decisionsareinformedbybutnotsolelybasedonresearchevidence.15InnovativePedagogies:Thistermreferstopedagogicalapproachesthatarenewtoteachersandaimtosignificantlyimprovelearningoutcomesbycreatingtransformativeshiftsinteachingandlearning.InvisiblePedagogicalMindsets:Thistermreferstothecomplexandmultifacetednon-observableelementsthatinfluencepedagogicalapproachesandinturnareinfluencedbyculture,localeducationecosystems,andlearningtheories.Leapfrogging:Thistermreferstothecreationoftransformativeratherthanincrementalshiftstoharnessthepowerofinnovationandimprovelearning.Mechanism:Thistermreferstoawayofdoingsomethingorachievingagoal.Inthissense,amechanismforimplementinginnovativepedagogiesisthevehicleorprocessthroughwhichapedagogicalreformisimplemented.Objective-Based:Alsoreferredtoas“outcome-based,”anobjective-basededucationsystemhasacurriculumorapproachorganizedaroundachievingspecificlearningoutcomes.PedagogicalReform:Thistermreferstopoliciesoreffortsthatchangeexistingpedagogicalapproachesintheclassroom.Pedagogy:Wedefine“pedagogy”astheinteractionofculture,localeducationecosystems,andlearningtheoriesthatshapehowteachersteachandstudentslearn.Relevant:Thistermreferstopedagogicalapproachesapplicabletoaspecificcontext.ScriptedLessonPlans(SLPs):Scriptedlessonplansareaninstructionalapproachinwhichteachersfollowpre-writtenscriptsordetailedlessonplansduringteachingsessions.StructuredPedagogy:Thistermreferstopedagogicalapproachesthatareorganized,systematic,andplanned.Structuredpedagogyemphasizestheimportanceofclearinstruction,explicitteachingmethods,andtheuseofinstructionalmaterials.Examplesincludebreakingdownlearningobjectivesintosmaller,manageablesteps,sequencinglearningactivitiesinalogicalorder,andprovidingscaffoldingandsupporttolearnersastheyprogress.Student-CenteredPedagogy:Despitevaryingdefinitionsofstudent-centeredpedagogies,mostscholarsagreeonfourcentralthemes:activeparticipation,relevantcontent,respectfulclassroomenvironments,andformativeassessment.Thestudentiscentralinthelearningprocess.Teacher-CenteredPedagogy:Thistermreferstoaninstructionalapproachinwhichtheteacherplaysacentralroleinthelearningprocess.Inthisapproach,theteacherservesastheprima