Search results

In the context of professional learning networks (PLNs), there are many studies which address knowledge mobilization (KMb). The majority of these focus on how research is mobilized by various actors. This paper explores the concepts of KMb both on an individual and an organizational level and discusses the role of PLN participants and PLNs as catalysts for institutional change (IC). To illustrate this, a model was developed which draws on a concept that depicts the mobilization processes at the various levels.

The model was developed by drawing on theoretical approaches to both KMb on an individual and an organizational level of schools. The strengths and limitations of the model are then assessed as part of an exploratory study. Interviews of PLN participants (n = 7) from two schools and detailed logbooks of two participants were used to reconstruct experiences of KMb in the PLNs and the process of KMb among schools. By contrasting two schools, the study traces how mechanisms of KMb occurred. Data sources were analyzed using a structured content analysis alongside a deductive–inductive code system.

The results of the exploratory study show that, although the model is able to map the KMb practices, some refinement is still needed. While the extension of concepts describing the work of knowledge mobilizer (KM) leads to a more theoretically differentiated perspective, the data also showed that PLN participants only partially define themselves as KMs. The connection to concepts of strategies of knowledge mobilizing on an organizational level led to an increased transparency in the theoretical model. The data showed that KMb is influenced by organizational and individual beliefs.

The paper adds to the current knowledge base through a theoretical model that addresses the underinvestigated topic of KMb regarding the link between the individual and organizational levels. With a special focus on individual and organizational levels, a connection between KMb and IC is provided. The theoretical framework and research findings from an additional explorative study can be used to further develop relevant insights into the actions of participants from PLNs that enable IC processes among their schools.

The Austrian education system can be classified as an egalitarian system. This is due to the fact that although it is a centrally governed system, the implementation of reforms is the responsibility of the schools. Regarding this implementation, in turn, there is a low level of accountability for the schools to the education administration. Consequently, this has implications for the way how and from whom evidence is handled within the system. Despite the increased emphasis on evidence-informed decision-making, current trends are leading away from nationally coordinated approaches (abolition of the regular and external assessment of national educational standards) and towards locally based initiatives (informal competences assessments). In this context, extended autonomy for schools plays a crucial role as schools received more responsibilities for decision-making. After a detailed description of the Austrian education system, the following article shows how evidence-informed practice is supported within the system by means of selected instruments and projects. Furthermore, relevant groups of actors are identified and analysed in terms of their competences and thus responsibilities for evidence-informed practice. From the analysis, facilitating and hindering factors for evidence-informed teaching and leading are identified.