Researchers' discourses about teachers' use of research, evidence and data. A systematic review and critical discourse analysis of reviews

Teachers' use of research as a way to improve teaching has been extensively studied. Diverse scholarly communities have likewise studied teachers' use of evidence or data. The meanings of research, evidence or data (RED) and their use by teachers are debated, as are the goals for such use. Researchers play a crucial role in shaping our understanding of these terms and may influence both teachers and policymakers, but top-down approaches rarely work and nurture power imbalances. To better understand the influence of researchers' discourses from diverse scholarly communities such as research-practice partnerships or evidence-based practices, we conducted a systematic review of reviews. Using a critical discourse analysis of 32 reviews, we have inquired into the differences and similarities of scholarly communities’ discourses on different dimensions: (1) quality indicators of RED; (2) quality indicators for RED use; (3) the roles of professionals involved (teachers, researchers and others) and their relationships; (4) the contexts influencing teachers' use of RED (cultures, infrastructures and systems) and, (5) the goals for such use. We created three archetypes illustrating trends from different scholarly communities: a top-down and rigid archetype illustrated by reviews on the use of evidence-based practices; a within-school collaborative capacity building archetype mostly associated with data use; a multi-institution horizontal empowering process archetype mostly associated with research-practice partnerships. The global lack of critical perspectives and conceptual rigor across most scholarly communities was pointed out with the hope that changing our discourses about teachers' use of RED can trigger systemic change.