In response to recent state and local reforms, schools have reduced formal exclusionary discipline (e.g., suspensions, expulsions). Our report highlights the largely undocumented informal exclusionary discipline practices that emerge when formal discipline is no longer legally or culturally permissible. We define informal exclusionary discipline practices as within-classroom, within-school, and out-of-school practices beyond formal discipline that limit students' access to classroom learning opportunities in PreK-12 settings. These practices disproportionately affect racially/ethnically and economically marginalized students and students with disabilities, thereby reproducing formal discipline inequalities, but have received scant attention in contemporary policy discussions. We offer policy considerations for federal, state, and district policymakers to document and address these practices.
To provide policymakers and affiliated audiences (including elected officials, government agency staff, program developers, and practitioners) with comprehensive, nonpartisan reviews of child development research findings to inform decision-making. To inform SRCD members about (a) policy issues related to child development and (b) child development research related to such issues. Against the backdrop of these goals, we took the helm of the Social Policy Report editorship in January 2023. This is an exciting time to strive to make child and family policies—by which we are referring to laws, programs, and practices—more evidence-based. Researchers are becoming increasingly attuned to sharing their findings and maximizing their use. Practitioners and policymakers are increasingly interested in—and, in many cases, mandated to demonstrate—evidence-based decision-making. We view the promotion of the use of research by policymakers as not only communication from researchers to policymakers but also communication to researchers about what policymakers need to know and the format(s) in which researchers may most helpfully present findings. We are eager to leverage the Social Policy Report to facilitate an active, ongoing dialog that in turn will help make laws, programs, and practices as evidence-based as possible. In one of our first steps as editors, we established a diverse editorial board of experts who work in government, research, philanthropy, and direct service organizations. All bring experience in communicating and/or using research to inform program, practice, and/or policy decision-making. All already are helping to set the direction of the journal and support rigorous peer review processes. As we deliberated the content of the first Social Policy Report wholly under our editorial leadership, we reflected on the nature of research-policy communication and on the science interrogating the most impactful ways to use research evidence for policy development (e.g., Larsen & Owen, 2017; Oliver et al., 2022). Given the fast pace of this evolving science and its relevance to the Social Policy Report readership, we decided to create a special issue devoted to strategies for creating productive partnerships among child and family researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to make child and family policies more evidence-based. This focus also converges with SRCD's new policy strategy that leverages the SRCD Policy Department to build relationship-based connections among researchers and policymakers. We invited four essays from experts in research-practice and/or research-policy partnerships, three of whom are members of our editorial team or board. All thoughtfully took up the charge. Each essay provides provocative considerations for anyone aiming to maximize evidence use for program, practice, or policy development. Two of the essays explicitly situate their considerations in the larger context of the promotion of social justice. Government + research + philanthropy: How cross-sector partnerships can improve policy decisions and action (Owen), describes why government-research partnerships are crucial, identifies barriers to their success, proposes actionable strategies to overcome the challenges, and highlights the role of philanthropy in supporting research-government collaborations. Part of the process: Using evidence to shape policy development (Osborne) discusses the stages of policymaking and suggests how researchers can best inform each step, focusing especially on sharing accessible and actionable information at a time that is relevant for policymakers' decision-making. Talking to young children about race: Using research evidence to move the needle in early childhood educational practice and policy (Haulcy) tells the story of a practitioner leveraging research findings to illustrate how discussing race and racism with young children can combat implicit biases and foster positive racial identity development. Engineering research-practice partnerships for social justice (Tseng) emphasizes the importance of democratizing research production and use and advocating for research-practice partnerships that challenge systemic oppression and prioritize community-driven research agendas. We hope that readers find these essays informative and helpful. We welcome input on topics of interest that this special issue helps to raise and on any other topics that reflect the goals of the Social Policy Report. In the meantime, we invite readers to visit the Social Policy Report webpage showcasing its updated mission and guidelines for prospective authors. Lisa Berlin, Lead Editor, is Alison L. Richman professor of Children and Families and MPower Professor at the University of Maryland School of Social Work. Her research focuses on programs and policies to support early parenting and infants' relationships with their first caregivers. Jenni Owen, Associate Editor, is Director of the North Carolina Office of Strategic Partnerships. She was previously Policy Director for Governor Roy Cooper and on the faculty and Director of Policy Engagement at the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University. X: @jenniowen Freya Kaur, Editorial Intern, is a doctoral student in applied developmental psychology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Her research focuses on identifying instructional practices in elementary school classrooms to help reduce attentional decay and mind wandering in students.
AbstractThis essay tells the story of a unique collaboration among practitioners, researchers, and policymakers to create and disseminate Early Risers, a podcast devoted to supporting racial equity in early childhood. Early Risers leverages research evidence to debunk common myths about how children learn about race. It showcases evidence‐informed practices for teaching young children about race and racism and for supporting positive racial identity. I share lessons learned about how research can educate caregivers, early childhood educators, administrators, and policymakers on the importance of creating pathways toward conversations about race and racism. Our hope is that Early Risers can serve as a model for researcher–practitioner–policymaker collaboration to innovate and “wake up” the early childhood field.
AbstractRigorous research can inform each stage of the policy‐making process, however too often academic research is not shared with policy leaders in a timely or actionable manner, and policies are often made and implemented with incomplete information. This essay describes each stage of the policy‐making process and discusses the types of research and evidence that are most useful at each stage. I draw on examples from my experience founding two university‐based research centers that, in addition to conducting original research, have aimed to translate complex research findings to empower policy leaders to adopt and implement effective and equitable policies.
AbstractResearchers often lament that government decision‐makers do not generate or use research evidence. People in government often lament that researchers are not responsive to government's needs. Yet there is increasing enthusiasm in government, research, and philanthropy sectors for developing, investing in, and sustaining government‐research partnerships that focus on government's use of evidence. There is, however, scant guidance about how to do so. To help fill the gap, this essay addresses (1) Why government‐research partnerships matter; (2) Barriers to developing government‐research partnerships; (3) Strategies for addressing the barriers; (4) The role of philanthropy in government‐research partnerships. The momentum to develop, invest in, and sustain cross‐sector partnerships that advance government's use of evidence is exciting. It is especially encouraging that there are feasible and actionable strategies for doing so.
