Closing

To bring together the range of learnings from the event, most of Saturday morning was devoted to a closing plenary. As participants gathered, they were asked to fill out two evaluations. The first was a personal evaluation of what each person was taking with them. The second was an assessment of the Institute itself. Overall people felt they were leaving the Institute with a broader understanding of research, more confident to pursue research in practice. People also felt much more connected, part of a real network of people who were all interested in asking questions about their work. Consistently, people expressed appreciation for the course format. A detailed summary of the evaluations is included in the Reports section of this book.

In the plenary session, participants heard reports from each of the four courses and from the six theme discussions from Thursday afternoon. Four people took the floor to reflect on the Institute. Participants also met in regional groups to talk about how to continue research in practice in their region. Finally, Eileen Antone led a formal closing. All of these activities gave us a sense of closure on our time together. With lifted spirits, we began to prepare for our journeys home, taking a sense of connection with us. The following sections include reports from the theme discussions, the individual reflections and the closing ceremony.

Emerging Questions and Themes

The following six themes were identified by the affinity groups. Participants met to discuss these issues on Friday afternoon.

• who is missing
• responding to imposed policy advocacy and change (what, how, who)
• funding and funders
• practical ways to connect with researchers
• what's next

The following notes are from presentations at the final plenary.

Who's Missing?
Rapporteur: Janet Isserlis

Who is missing? How can we encourage more participation?
We need to think about

• kinds of practitioners (for example, numeracy and ESL Literacy)
• Who does research? How does that get communicated? What bridges need to be built? What will the next Institute look like? We would recommend that the planning committee for the next gathering be more proactive in outreach.
• Challenge ourselves to be aware of who's here and who isn't.

What about the next Institute?
Recommendation: That the Planning Committee look at outreach issues, e.g. to ensure invitations go to a wide range of programs and locations and ensure that when a Coordinator gets an invitation it's passed on to instructors.

Change / Advocacy
Rapporteur: Cheryl Brown

Change happens when decision-makers buy into new ways of seeing. But change also happens from below. We can influence change at both levels. Small changes can lead to large change. What advocacy is for learners, practitioners and practice? Whose role is advocacy? Everyone's! But who is heard? Mostly, people in universities.

We need to find ways to change and need to be prepared to challenge each other.