Dioxinas y furanos

For any research, the challenge is how best to make the results widely available. If research findings are to be considered for possible utilization, appropriate dissemination strategies must be worked out right from the very beginning. Proper dissemination increases the usability of research findings. As mentioned earlier, each research project has an audience, primary and secondary. The first category of audience consists of the people who identify the need for undertaking the study and who commission the research. The second category of audience comprises those who use the new knowledge for their academic or personal advancement. The dissemination strategy should identify the audience first. The aim should be to reach as wide an audience as possible.

The extent to which research findings are disseminated can be established in a number of ways: (a) the availability of research reports to policy-makers and administrators (or the primary audience for research); (b) the understanding of key research findings, conclusions and recommendations by policy-makers and administrators; (c) the involvement of policy-makers and administrators at critical stages of research; (d) the preparation of a written executive

summary that directly targets the primary audience; (e) conducting dissemination workshops; (f) the preparation and distribution of research reviews; and (g) the language of the report.

Availability of research reports. The heads of departments or sections of central departments

of the MOES were asked if they had copies of the studies under review. Two of the ten respondents reported having possessed copies of a few study reports, while many did not have copies of any of them. It is often difficult to locate completed research works due to the lack of library and documentation services.

Understanding of research findings, conclusions and recommendations. Although no

systematic research was undertaken to assess the understanding of research findings, conclusions and recommendations within the system, informal discussions with some individuals revealed that educational policy-makers and administrators in the Ministry have little knowledge of educational research and/or evaluation related to girls’ education. They were found to be

knowledgeable about one or two most recently conducted studies (e.g., the gender audit), but did not have a clue about the findings and conclusions of many of the other studies under review. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of these studies were largely new to the respondents. There was one case where a single respondent had a fair understanding of the Gender Audit Report.

Involvement of policy-makers and administrators at critical stages of research. Policy-

makers’ and administrators’ involvement in research design and execution can be useful in many ways. In nine of the twenty studies, senior officials of the MOES were represented on the

steering committees, advisory committees or study support groups. In many other studies, no formal structure was created to involve policy-makers and administrators. Very recently, under the Formative Research Project (FRP) funded by the Government of Norway, young educational researchers and MOES officials, along with other practitioners, collaborated in designing and executing the studies.

Preparation of an executive summary. Among many other things, executive summaries

written in simple language can help to make policy-makers more likely to translate research findings into policy. Of the 20 studies reviewed, only 12 of them had executive summaries.

Conducting dissemination workshops. One effective way of reaching the audience is to

conduct dissemination workshops where research findings and conclusions can be directly shared with the relevant practitioners. For 11 of the 20 studies, dissemination workshops were organized to share the findings of research. Most of these workshops took place at the central level. The number of participants ranged from 30 to 40. Those who participated in these workshops were officials working in central institutions of the MOES. There was one case where research findings were shared with community members and district officials. Overall, research findings are largely inaccessible to field level education personnel such as teachers, principals, supervisors and district level officials. Very recently, the Department of Education (DOE) has started sharing research findings at the regional level. For the first time, in 2003 four regional workshops were organized to share the findings of studies undertaken that year.

Preparation of research reviews. The main channel of communication between researchers

and the larger audience occurs by means of reviews of entire fields of research, rather than the reports of single studies. The publication of research reviews can be a good step toward informing both practitioners and academics about the findings of studies and evaluations. This activity can improve communication between the producers and consumers of information and knowledge. Nevertheless, preparing research reviews is a rare activity in Nepal. The DOE, for the first time, produced a synthesis of research studies conducted in 2003.

The language of the report. The extent to which educational research will have an impact on

policy-making and practice can depend on the language used in the report. Because donors have funded most of the research/evaluation, they are the primary audience for the research findings. Naturally, therefore, these reports are written in English to suit the convenience of donor

agencies. Almost every report reviewed was prepared in English. It is safe to say that most research on girls’ education is directed at donors and high-level ministry officials.

On the whole, it is clear that the reporting and dissemination of research findings have been given little emphasis.

5. Major Recommendations for the Formulation of Evidence-Based Educational