Education and research go hand in hand like peanut butter and jelly; you cannot have one without the other. Yet, there are many ways research is not being used properly. Many people only see one side of research, the supply of it. They look to see what kind of research has an effect? Is it enough? Is it high quality? They do not pay attention to the demand side, they do not ask is it practical, is it a genuine and important source of information? There are six hypotheses about the procedure of research approval happens within the classroom (Porter and McMaken, 2009).
This first hypothesis is about research finding its ways within the classroom, and how changes need to be made in order for it to be long lasting and successful (Porter and McMaken, …show more content…
As the saying goes, it is not necessarily what you know, but who you know. Marshall Smith wrote a letter to Bassam Shakhashiri, who happened to be the head of the National Science Foundation Education and Human resources directorate (Porter and McMaken, 2009). Before the letter was written these two men were coworkers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Smith had left to become the dean of the School of Education at Stanford. Soon after, Shakhashiri started working at NSF. Smith’s letter had explained systemic reform, and Shakhashiri liked the idea and held a competition for different state to be involved in systemic reform. The competitions were held for different kinds of levels of education. Later Smith was able to join the Clinton administration, and systemic reform had become a big part of the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (Porter and McMaken, 2009). If these two men had not known each other the Elementary and Secondary Education Act may not have happened. These two men had an influence on policy making within the government with systemic reform on different levels of
This first hypothesis is about research finding its ways within the classroom, and how changes need to be made in order for it to be long lasting and successful (Porter and McMaken, …show more content…
As the saying goes, it is not necessarily what you know, but who you know. Marshall Smith wrote a letter to Bassam Shakhashiri, who happened to be the head of the National Science Foundation Education and Human resources directorate (Porter and McMaken, 2009). Before the letter was written these two men were coworkers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Smith had left to become the dean of the School of Education at Stanford. Soon after, Shakhashiri started working at NSF. Smith’s letter had explained systemic reform, and Shakhashiri liked the idea and held a competition for different state to be involved in systemic reform. The competitions were held for different kinds of levels of education. Later Smith was able to join the Clinton administration, and systemic reform had become a big part of the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (Porter and McMaken, 2009). If these two men had not known each other the Elementary and Secondary Education Act may not have happened. These two men had an influence on policy making within the government with systemic reform on different levels of