Co-sponsored by the Federation and the Association for Behavior Analysis
On April 10, 2003, the Federation co-sponsored a Forum on Research Management (FORM) with one of its member societies, the Association for Behavior Analysis (ABA) (www.abainternational.org). The topic, "Translating Basic Research Into Application" is a particularly timely one, especially as the facilitation of basic research to application is an important funding initiative at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
The FORM was divided into three related but distinct subtopics, with Federation President Howard Egeth (Johns Hopkins University) serving as moderator.
Panel One
The first panel covered advances in the field of Behavior Analysis that have successfully made the transition from basic research into application. (Note that all of the academics on this panel are and have been funded by NIH but not explicitly vis-à-vis the NIH initiative.) Behavior Analysis is a discipline in Psychology founded on the principle of conducting basic research on animals and humans and then using those principles to inform clinical models (e.g. behavior therapy). The focus on the individual (and attendant environmental factors) makes it amenable to addressing translational issues. For example, Mike Perone (West Virginia University) discussed the basic research question of understanding when a subject pauses after reinforcement (and for how long) and demonstrated that long pauses occur primarily in shifts from rich to leaner reinforcement conditions. Perone noted that this preparation could be an effective model for testing aberrant behavior and investigating ways to reduce it. He stated that behavior analytic experimental designs could address the reciprocity of basic and applied issues. Bob Heinssen (National Institute of Mental Health, NIH) further suggested that Perone's basic finding may help to explain why a person relapses after leaving a highly-reinforcing therapy situation and returns to his or her normal environment.
In a somewhat related vein, Edmund Fantino (University of California- San Diego) discussed research he has conducted with both pigeons and humans on assessing probabilities, demonstrating that pigeons were more adept at making "decisions" of this sort than were humans. Since people commit the "base-rate neglect" error (as shown in Kahnemann & Tversky's work), these subjects carry a bias not observed in non-verbal organisms such as the pigeon. Fantino noted that this tendency to ignore base rates, even when trained to avoid this type of error, has serious implications for health care workers interpreting test results. Heinssen noted another application of this basic research could be in addressing perseveration in physicians. That is, they may follow a manual without attention to such mitigating factors, get personally invested in the method and not consider other sorts of data.
Kate Saunders (University of Kansas) discussed her data on mentally-challenged adults and how the basic research findings could be applied towards teaching the mentally-challenged and other disadvantaged populations how to read. For example, she noted how computer applications properly designed to teach reading could both accelerate the learning process and reduce the potential embarrassment associated with learning how to read as an adult. Unfortunately, since society has low expectations for the mentally-challenged, she said that techniques have not been fully developed for them but instead have focused on teaching normal children to read. Since the mentally challenged suffer serious deficits in learning ability, there is a challenge to researchers to fine-tune the analysis of what actually goes into learning to read. Saunders explained that there are visual as well as phonological components in learning how to read and while these components are assumed to be quite accessible in normal populations, these are basic areas needing research for the mentally challenged.
Overall, this session was a presentation of data gathered from basic research with some clear applications and also helped to generate ideas on possible new applications to extract from the basic data. There was some discussion that basic researchers may not want to wait for others to see and develop possible applications of their work but should instead think about the links to application that they personally see in their own work.
Panel Two
The second panel focused on bridging the gap between research and practice in education. According to Suzanne Donovan (Associate Director of the National Research Council's Strategic Education Research Partnership, SERP),good research in areas such as cognitive and developmental psychology is not carried far enough to improve practice in education. Even the best research is not cumulative (replicated and built upon), refined (for whom does it work and under what circumstances) or made easily accessible. Once research is put into practice, it isn't applied or studied systematically, with wide variation in classroom teaching and district/states policy. The NRC's committee has concluded that a new research and development infrastructure is needed that will 1) Develop a coherent program of research and development, and 2) Focus research on problems of practice. The SERP committee has proposed the development of a coherent program of research and development, linking knowledge with product development and and linking student and teacher learning, organizational issues, and policy issues.
James McPartland (Center for Social Organization of Schools, Johns Hopkins University) addressed the transformation of high-poverty, low-performing schools though research-based organizational and instructional reforms. High-poverty high schools are fraught with learning environment and student outcome problems (e.g., low expectations of students, weak staff morale, low test scores, and high drop-out rates). Research has indicated that smaller schools facilitate the creation of a more hospitable school environment (personalized adult/student relationships, higher morale, improved attendance and motivation). Dr. McPartland has worked with school systems on the creation of small, personalized, "academies" within schools. These academies emphasize the fostering of personal relationships, with individualized attention for students with specific problems, and on literacy, with extra time and classroom activities devoted to fluency and comprehension. The academy approach seems to be paying off in low-performance schools, with the next step being the creation of more research and development centers and teams with researchers and practitioners working together.
Panel Three
Bill Leslie (Johns Hopkins University) presented a historical perspective on the relationship between basic technological research and application, Dr. Leslie showed a series of slides of old labs, factories, workers, and equipment. In the early 1900s, it was believed that basic research should be isolated in all ways from the application of the research findings. Quite a bit of research was performed by what we would now call "blue-collar workers", but after World War II, there was a trend for lab-workers to abandon their blue- collar attire and don white lab coats. Labs no longer resembled machine shops, but were instead new, clean, and sterile. These new research centers embodied a linear model...that is, research findings would be translated directly into application and technology, without any type of feedback loop relaying suggestions back to the researchers. As you may imagine, the linear model was not successful! In order for our research and our research applications and practice to reach their potential, we need to create mechanisms by which researchers, practitioners, and policy makers can interact and learn from one another's experience.
Agenda: Click here to view the agenda for this event.
Speaker Bios: Click here to view speaker bios for this event.
Power Points: Power Point presentations for this event have been archived and are available upon request.