Conference Agenda

Knowledge produced by research has a social value. Much of it can serve as a guide to more effective behaviours and practices for users whether practicing professionals or decision-makers. Furthermore, the use of research to improve educational practices has become a lively political and scientific debate since the concepts of evidence-based education or evidence-informed education were developed in Europe and the United States, then within international organizations (Gaussel, et al., 2017). Thus, for the past twenty years, the IFÉ (Institut français de l’Éducation) has been developing a mediation activity between research and educational practices. In this context, IFÉ’s Veille et Analyses team has been focusing its work on the role of intermediaries in the transfer of research knowledge through a mediation or transformation process (Gaussel, 2014).

In this presentation, we propose to explore a conceptual framework for a mediation process for knowledge to be disseminated in the field of educational research and address some specific issues raised in the research literature on the matter:

- RQ1: What does characterize a mediation process?

- RQ2: processed in perspective, what implications could emerge for intermediaries and mediators in terms of brokering competencies?

Theoretical framework:

In Europe and other parts of the world, it has long been accepted that educational research can be very useful in improving educational policy and practice (Farley-Ripple, 2018; Godfrey & Brown, 2018; Weiss, 1979) ; at the same time, educational research is criticized for not being sufficiently in tune with practice (Malin & Brown, 2019; Cooper & Shewchuk, 2015), while teachers show great resistance in implementing research findings (Draelant & Revaz, 2022). The gap between research and practice has many causes, and at its root lie deep social, cultural and structural fractures, particularly when research dissemination is perceived as linear, unidirectional and potentially disempowering for practitioners – asking researchers to better disseminate work or teachers to better engage with research has not been particularly successful to date (Rycroft-Smith, 2022) –and therefore ineffective (Farley-Ripple & Grajeda, 2019; Malin & Brown, 2019).

Previous work on knowledge transfer – an interdisciplinary concern about how to disseminate knowledge created by research – has indeed shown that the development of a scientific mediation process between research producers and users (whether field actors or policy-makers) could be relevant to bridging the gap between these two communities (Cooper & Shewchuk, 2015; Hering, 2016; Turnhout, et al., 2013; Ward, 2017) and reinforce the usability of scientific knowledge. However, knowledge transfer goes through a mediation process that goes beyond a simple push towards those concerned (from researchers to decision-makers, from researchers to practitioners, from researchers to the general public).

A mediation process actually involves a number of tasks that complement each other. It is a composite interface that includes searching for information, evaluating that information, cross-referencing and interpreting the results, identifying emerging issues or, on the contrary, blind spots related to the studied subject; It means making knowledge appropriable, exploitable and usable (Meyer, 2010). This idea is echoed by many researchers, for whom mediation contexts play a key role: it is not enough for teachers to be aware of research that has proved its value, the conditions must be provided for them to change their practices as well (Gaussel, et al., 2017). The requirement to develop a simple and effective means of promoting research knowledge is reinforced by the need to find a way of translating scientific results and, consequently, to strengthen the operational links between education professionals and research producers through a mediation process, one of which is knowledge brokering.

The importance of sharing knowledge research, practice and policy in education is well recognized. Still, a notable gap among these areas in the field of education has been observed (Rycroft-Smith 2022, Levin 2013). Researchers and decision makers addressing this situation, are faced with a complex problem that spans from agreeing on a mutual understanding of knowledge and its application, to navigating the boundaries between diverse domains, and includes the identification, implementation, and evaluation of effective transfer methods (Levin 2013, McMahon, Legget & Carroll 2022). Intermediaries such as individuals, teams, organizations and initiatives have been identified as crucial in facilitating knowledge transfer by connecting researchers, practitioners and decision makers (Malin & Brown 2020, MacKillop, Quarmby & Downe 2020). Digital platforms can also act as intermediaries by creating a centralized space where different communities are brought together. Their basic function in the transfer process is to provide access to knowledge, structuring knowledge and interlinking it (Bernhard-Skala, Sonnenmoser & Tombeil 2023). Furthermore, they have the potential to offer new communication channels and complementary mediated types of transmission, enabling alternate access to knowledge (Bernhard-Skala, Sonnenmoser & Tombeil 2023). Their function in the transfer process is at the same time limited to the features they provide for their users thus setting boundaries to the production, dissemination and use of knowledge (Hartong & Decupere 2023).In our research, we tap into the intermediary role of a specific set of digital platforms in Europe in the context of knowledge transfer. We focus on infrastructures that disseminate information on education that is open and freely accessible to all. We consider this openness a prerequisite for their role as intermediaries - in contrast for example to digital learning platforms which are typically available only to a selected group of users, thereby establishing an initial barrier to knowledge transfer. Our investigation concentrates on ducation servers which we define as state-initiated platforms with a national scope. They were established to collect, produce, organize and distribute educationally relevant information, making it available to a broad public (Kühnlenz et al. 2012, Ramsayer & Lorenz 2001/02). Over time they have expanded their services to include specific portals, e.g. for learning materials, for training or for specific educational formats as well as incorporating new communication formats and channels, enhancing their intermediary capabilities. The German Education server is an example of such an approach. It primarily curates web resources in the field of education and instructional materials created by different agents. Educational research is presented in terms of interviews, podcasts and blog entries as well as curated lists of links including research publications. All of these information objects are open and freely accessible to scholars, educational professionals, educators, students, and the general public. Thus, the portal primarily forges connections between different communities via the presentation of information objects. In its function as a referatory and repository, the portal is a boundary object in itself. Boundary objects enable individuals from diverse backgrounds to utilize or draw from the collective resource pool for their own purposes thus connecting different communities (Monod-Ansaldi, Vincent & Aldon, Wenger 1998, Star & Griesemer 1998). By analyzing education servers and other information portals that act as intermediaries, we seek to understand how the European information landscape adapts to the growing demand for knowledge transfer. Our investigation will shed light on the practices of digital platforms that connect educational communities in Europe, underlining the potential and the limitations of these platforms as promoters of knowledge transfer in education.

This paper presents the theoretical and methodological approach of a stakeholder mapping study in the field of open educational resources (OER) in Germany. The study is a component of the OERinfo project, which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research as the central information office for OER in Germany (www.o-e-r.de). The objective of the mapping study is to identify new actors and communities in diverse educational domains that have limited prior engagement with OER. These groups are later to be introduced to the discussion and communities surrounding OER and Open Educational Practices (OEP) through information and advisory services by OERinfo its partners. Overall, this approach aims to promote the mainstreaming of OER and OEP across all educational sectors.

OER are essentially defined as openly available and reusable, mainly digital learning, teaching and research materials (UNESCO, 2019; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2023), while OEP are defined „as practices which support the (re)use and production of OER through institutional policies, promote innovative pedagogical models, and respect and empower learners as co-producers on their lifelong learning path“ (Ehlers, 2011, p. 6).

The assumed benefits of OER are that the improved accessibility, adoption and adaptability of learning materials increase the quality and efficiency of education (Janssen et al., 2023). Learning settings and educational programs can thus be better adapted to the needs of different learners, collaboration between and within institutions is promoted, and educational innovation is encouraged (Janssen et al., 2023). On the level of educational processes, OER stand for an ecosystem-focused approach in which the learner's learning environment is given special consideration (Janssen et al., 2023). It is also assumed that OER help to develop collaborative and participatory learning arrangements (Otto, 2020). On a global level, OER are seen as an important prerequisite for building inclusive knowledge societies and achieving UNESCO Sustainable Development Goal 4, which aims to "ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all" (UNESCO, 2019, p. 4).

Despite these expectations, and despite the boost of digitalization in education in many countries caused by the COVID 19-pandemic, OER have not yet spread in education systems and educational practice to the extent hoped for – both globally (Janssen et al., 2023), but especially in Germany (Orr et al., 2018). The following reasons are cited as the main obstacles: Users being overwhelmed by legal issues (Otto, 2019), lack of appropriate OER policies, funding problems, lacking knowledge and skills about using, developing and publishing OER, worries about additional time investment (Janssen et al., 2023), and uncertainty over the quality and appropriateness of the content (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2023). The OERinfo project attempts to help break down these barriers with its information and advisory measures. However, in order to reach the right target groups, the mapping of OER stakeholders presented here is planned.

There are already various mapping and overview studies on the status of the adoption and use of OER by educational stakeholders in Germany (Ebner et al., 2015; Orr et al., 2018) as well as a comprehensive collection of people, projects, organizations and offers in the field of OER through the OER World Map (Neumann & Muuß-Merholz, 2017; Mollenhauer & Grimm, 2023). However, these studies and sources concentrate primarily on presenting active players and existing offers in the OER sector, so that they provide only few clues for the identification of specific desiderata groups. Since such groups are not explicitly visible through activities, projects or publications in connection with OER, a comprehensive and up-to-date view on educational institutions and actors in Germany is necessary. This is what the presented mapping study aims to achieve.