PL EN


2016 | 3(11) | 175-189
Article title

Innowacje w kształceniu kadr analitycznych administracji: przykład szkolenia opartego na grze

Content
Title variants
EN
Innovation in training policy analysts: an example of a game-based workshop
Languages of publication
PL
Abstracts
PL
Pomimo mnogości prowadzonych badań i analiz ich faktyczne wykorzystanie w projektowaniu i wdrażaniu polityki publicznej jest dość ograniczone. Najnowsze badania wskazują, że skuteczną strategią wzmacniania wykorzystania wyników badań w praktyce polityki publicznej jest brokering wiedzy. Artykuł przedstawia użycie innowacji dydaktycznej umożliwiającej nauczanie brokeringu wiedzy poprzez praktykę - za pomocą szkolenia opartego na grze symulacyjnej. Dotychczasowe doświadczenia z zastosowania gry Brokerzy wiedzy do nauczania analityków polityki publicznej z Polski, Stanów Zjednoczonych i Kanady potwierdzają, że gra pomaga w: (1) zrozumieniu roli wyników badań i analiz w polityce publicznej, (2) opanowaniu sześciu kluczowych umiejętności brokera wiedzy oraz (3) zrozumieniu ograniczeń brokera we wpływaniu na procesy decyzyjne. Instytucje administracji publicznej mogą wykorzystać Brokerów wiedzy do praktycznego kształcenia swoich kadr analitycznych i podnoszenia swojego organizacyjnego potencjału do prowadzenia polityki publicznej opartej na dowodach.
EN
Despite the plethora of conducted research and analyses, their actual use in the design and implementation of public policies is quite limited. The latest research indicates that an effective strategy to strengthen the use of public policy research results in practice is knowledge brokering. The article demonstrates the use of an educational innovation enabling knowledge brokering teaching through practice - by means of a simulation game-based workshop. The past experience connected with the use of "Knowledge 176 Karol Olejniczak, Dominika Wojtowicz Studia z Polityki Publicznej Brokers" game to teach public sector professionals in Poland, the United States and Canada has confirmed that the game helps to: (1) understand the role of the public policy research and analysis results, (2) master the six key skills of knowledge brokers and (3) understand the broker's limitations in influencing the decision-making process. Public administration institutions can make use of "Knowledge Brokers" for the practical training of their analytical personnel and raising its organizational capacity to carry out public policies based on evidence.
Year
Issue
Pages
175-189
Physical description
Contributors
  • University of Warsaw
  • Kozminski University in Warsaw
References
  • Alkin M., A Guide for Evaluation Decision Makers, Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks 1985.
  • Armstrong R., Waters E., Crockett B., Kelehers H., The Nature of Evidence Resources and Knowledge Translation for Health Promotion Practitioners, "Health Promotion International", 2007, Vol. 22, No. 3.
  • Batterbury S., Principles and Purposes of European Union Cohesion Policy Evaluation, "Regional Studies", 2006, Vol. 40, No. 2.
  • Caplan N., The Two-Communities Theory and Knowledge Utilization, "American Behavioral Scientist", 1979, Vol. 22, No. 3.
  • Clark R., Holmes J., Improving Input from Research to Environmental Policy: Challenges of Structure and Culture, "Science and Public Policy", 2010, Vol. 37, No. 10.
  • Cooper A., Research Mediation in Education: A Typology of Research Brokering Organizations that Exist across Canada, "Alberta Journal of Educational Research", 2013, Vol. 59, No. 2.
  • Davies H., Nutley S., Walter I., Using Evidence: How Social Research Could be Better Used to Improve Public Service Performance, w: Connecting Knowledge and Performance in Public Services: From Knowing to Doing, red. K. Walshe, G. Harvey, P. Jas, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2010.
  • de Freitas S., Liarokapis F., Serious Games: A New Paradigm for Education?, w: Serious Games and Edutainment Applications, red. M. Ma, A. Oikonomou, L. Jain, Springer, London 2011.
  • Dobbins M., Robeson P., Ciliska D., Hanna S., Cameron R., O'Mara L., DeCorby K., Mercer S., A Description of a Knowledge Broker Role Implemented as Part of a Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Three Knowledge Translation Strategies, "Implementation Science", 2009, Vol. 4, No. 23.
  • Frost H., Geddes R., Haw S., Jackson C. A., Jepson R., Mooney J. D., Frank J., Experiences of Knowledge Brokering for Evidence-informed Public Health Policy and Practice: Three Years of the Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, "Evidence & Policy", 2012, Vol. 8, No. 3.
  • Heiskanen E., Mont O., Power K., A Map Is Not a Territory - Making Research More Helpful for Sustainable Consumption Policy, "Journal of Consumer Policy", 2014, Vol. 37.
  • Howlett M., Ramesh M., Perl A., Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009.
  • Johnson K., Greenseid L., Toal S., King J., Lawernz F., Volkov B., Research on Evaluation Use: A Review of the Empirical Literature From 1986 to 2005, "American Journal of Evaluation", 2009, Vol. 30, No. 3.
  • Jones C. O., An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Pacific Grove CA 1984.
  • Kapp K. M., The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education, Pfeiffer, San Francisco 2012.
  • Kupiec T., Program Evaluation Use and its Mechanisms: The Case of Cohesion Policy in Polish Regional Administration, "Zarządzanie Publiczne", 2015, t. 3 (33).
  • Lomas J., The In-Between World of Knowledge Broking, "British Medical Journal", 2007, Vol. 334, No. 7585.
  • Meyer M., The Rise of the Knowledge Broker, "Science Communication", 2010, Vol. 32, No. 1.
  • Nutley S., Walter I., Davies H. T. O., From Knowing to Doing. A Framework for Understanding the Evidence-Into-Practice Agenda, "Evaluation", 2003, Vol. 9, No. 2.
  • Nutley S. M., Walter I., Davies H. T. O., Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services, Policy Press, Bristol 2007.
  • Olejniczak K., Mechanisms Shaping Evaluation System - A Case Study of Poland 1999-2010, "Europe-Asia Studies", 2013, Vol. 65, No. 8.
  • Olejniczak K., Raimondo E., Kupiec T., Evaluation Units as Knowledge Brokers: Testing and Calibrating an Innovative Framework, "Evaluation", 2016, Vol. 22, No. 2.
  • Petticrew M., Roberts H., Evidence, Hierarchies, and Typologies: Horses for Courses, "Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health", 2003, Vol. 57, No. 7.
  • Prewitt K., Schwandt T., Straf M., Using Science and Evidence in Public Policy, The National Academies Press, Washington DC 2012.
  • Sanjeev K., Craig T., Toward a Platinum Standard for Evidence-Based Assessment by 2020, "Public Administration Review", 2010, December.
  • Shulha L. M., Cousins B. J., Evaluation Use: Theory, Research, and Practice Since 1986, "Evaluation Practice", 1997, Vol.18, No. 3.
  • Stern E., Stame N., Mayne J., Forss K., Davies R., Befani B., Broadening the Range of Designs and Methods for Impact Evaluations. Report of a study commissioned by the Department for International Development, Department for International Development, Working Paper 38, April 2012, London.
  • Torres R., Preskill H., Piontek M., Evaluation Strategies for Communicating and Reporting, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks 2005.
  • Turnhout E., Stuiver M., Klostermann J., Harms B., Leeuwis C., New Roles of Science in Society: Different Repertoires of Knowledge Brokering, "Science and Public Policy", 2013, Vol. 40.
  • Tyler C., Top 20 Things Scientists Need to Know about Policy-making, "The Guardian", 2 grudnia 2013.
  • Wojtowicz D., Kupiec T., Reluctant to Learn? The Use of Evaluation to Improve EU Cohesion Policy Implementation in Polish and Spanish Regions, "Evidence and Policy", 2016, Vol. 12, No. 3.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.ojs-doi-10_33119_KSzPP_2016_3_9
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.