1. Identifying the MERN and analyzing the contents of the fora Rachel. W. Roh

2.  Introduction  Purpose  Methodology  Qualitative analysis  Quantitative analysis  Research category 1,2,3  The MERN, a think tank or a network?  Type of Think Tank by McGann (2007)  Type of Network by Goldsmith and Eggers (2004)  Triple Helix Model by Etzkowitz (2002)  Characteristics of the MERN  Findings  Discussions  Conclusion  Q & A

3.  The Manitoba Educational Research Network (the MERN)  Found in 2002  Since 2003  Twenty Fora  Three journals  One monograph  Website  To connect the government, academics, practitioners

4.  A preliminary research before studying effectiveness of the organization  To identify  What the MERN is.  What resource, presented in the fora, could be provided.

5.  Qualitative analysis  Quantitative research  Sample: the research from the 1 st forum to 20 th forum  Categorizing ▪ By target groups and subjects ▪ By affiliated group ▪ By type  Titles and contents

7.  By Affiliated groups  The government departments  Academia  School Divisions, and schools  Others

8.  By type  Exploring  Describing  Evaluating  Consulting

9.  Type of Think Tank by McGann (2007)  Independent think thinks ▪ Academic-diversified think tanks ▪ Academic-specialized think tanks ▪ Contract research organizations ▪ Advocacy think tanks ▪ Policy enterprise organization  Affiliated think tanks ▪ Party-affiliated ▪ Government sponsored ▪ Private, for-profit ▪ University based

10.  Type of Network by Goldsmith and Eggers (2004)  Service contract  Supply chain  Ad hoc  Channel partnership  Civic switchboard  Information dissemination

11.  Triple Helix Model by Etzkowitz (2002) Tri-lateral networks and hybrid organization The MERN source: Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Incubation of incubators:Innovation as as a triple helix of university-industry-goverment networks. Science and Public Policy, 29 (2), p.118

12.  A space  Independent  Nonprofit  No budget  Researchers from affiliations  Informal network

13.  Community related studies – Five times  Rural area  Low-income communities  Aboriginal communities  Science and Mathematics – three times  Research to Practice – two times

14.  Targeting groups  local community – 22%;  The government – 17%  Subjects  Aboriginal Education – 24%;  Low-Income communities – 3%  Subjects by Target  Government : Sustainable development – 24%  Rest targets : Aboriginal Education

18.  Academia – 57%  Cooperated research – 43%  Focus targets  Departments of government  Government  Schools Division, schools  Local communities  Academia  teaching skills and classroommanagements.

21.  Different sampling : 148 research  Describing – 55%  Exploring – 30%  The research targeting the government  More consultative research  Less descriptive research (Comparing with other targeting groups)

23.  The position of the MERN  Not a think tank, but containing similarities of the think tank  A unique type of research network  A place to share educational information, not to consult policies

24.  Achievement  Providing “the meeting place”  Well balanced research target area  Research in the priority subjects of the department of education  Accommodating various affiliated groups.

25.  Challenges  Providing better quality research ▪ Creating the environment for follow-up research ▪ Long-term plans ▪ Balancing of research types and subjects ▪ Increasing the possibility of utilizing the research  Offering better access to the research ▪ Providing detail research information through online and offline (present: only 47% accessible)  Building structured data base

26.  Limitations  Analyze within accessible research data  Mainly research title and abstract were criteria to classify research.  Further research suggestions  Surveys  Measuring effectiveness

27.  The MERN, a network  For the government ▪ Promoting their policy plans ▪ Obtaining feedbacks  For schools and school division ▪ Sharing information with similar groups ▪ Appeal the opinions to other groups  For Academia ▪ Obtaining practical feedbacks ▪ Reducing the gap between research and practice ▪ Getting the research topic idea  Two ways of future choices for the MERN  Horizontal improvement as a network  Vertical improvement as a think tank

28.  Thank you