Combating Systematic Research Inequality Through Multiple Research Approaches: Exploring the Role of Federal Funding Opportunities

Lauren E. Decker-Woodrow, Donald Barfield
{"title":"Combating Systematic Research Inequality Through Multiple Research Approaches: Exploring the Role of Federal Funding Opportunities","authors":"Lauren E. Decker-Woodrow, Donald Barfield","doi":"10.29034/ijmra.v13n1a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The importance of the ethnic diversity of study participants is well established in the medical, social science, and education fields but more work is needed. Currently, the concern revolves around the inclusion of racial diversity, within study populations, in the reporting of results, and diversity of authors and reviewers of research (Roberts, Bareket-Shavit, et al., 2020). In response to a call for action from the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) in light of the deaths of George Floyd and Brianna Taylor (Schneider, 2020, para. 1), the authors posit three recommendations that directly address the call for action given the aspirations of IES to be responsive to diversity challenges in research and legislative requirements for educational practitioners. Recommendations include the more thorough reporting of study population racial diversity within the What Works Clearinghouse, the creation of additional funding structures within IES that create opportunity for multiple research approach studies and potentially enhance racial diversity (in studies, study topics, researchers, and reviewers), and the development of metrics to assess progress in addressing racial diversity goals over time. Together, the recommendations in this theoretical paper support research focused on increasing the knowledge base of what works, for whom, and under what conditions, that acknowledge the importance of tailored solutions for people of color.","PeriodicalId":89571,"journal":{"name":"International journal of multiple research approaches","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of multiple research approaches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29034/ijmra.v13n1a4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The importance of the ethnic diversity of study participants is well established in the medical, social science, and education fields but more work is needed. Currently, the concern revolves around the inclusion of racial diversity, within study populations, in the reporting of results, and diversity of authors and reviewers of research (Roberts, Bareket-Shavit, et al., 2020). In response to a call for action from the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) in light of the deaths of George Floyd and Brianna Taylor (Schneider, 2020, para. 1), the authors posit three recommendations that directly address the call for action given the aspirations of IES to be responsive to diversity challenges in research and legislative requirements for educational practitioners. Recommendations include the more thorough reporting of study population racial diversity within the What Works Clearinghouse, the creation of additional funding structures within IES that create opportunity for multiple research approach studies and potentially enhance racial diversity (in studies, study topics, researchers, and reviewers), and the development of metrics to assess progress in addressing racial diversity goals over time. Together, the recommendations in this theoretical paper support research focused on increasing the knowledge base of what works, for whom, and under what conditions, that acknowledge the importance of tailored solutions for people of color.
通过多种研究方法对抗系统性研究不平等:探索联邦资助机会的作用
在医学、社会科学和教育领域,研究参与者种族多样性的重要性已得到充分确认,但还需要做更多的工作。目前,关注的焦点是在研究人群中纳入种族多样性,报告结果,以及研究作者和审稿人的多样性(Roberts, Bareket-Shavit, et al., 2020)。为响应教育科学研究所所长在乔治·弗洛伊德和布里安娜·泰勒去世后发出的行动呼吁(施耐德,2020年,第39段)。1),作者提出了三个建议,这些建议直接回应了IES对研究多样性挑战和教育从业者立法要求的愿望。建议包括在What Works Clearinghouse中更彻底地报告研究人口的种族多样性,在IES中创建额外的资助结构,为多种研究方法研究创造机会,并可能增强种族多样性(研究、研究主题、研究人员和审稿人),以及制定指标来评估随着时间的推移在实现种族多样性目标方面的进展。总之,这篇理论论文中的建议支持的研究重点是增加知识基础,了解什么对谁有效,在什么条件下有效,并承认为有色人种量身定制解决方案的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信