May 2017 - Parks & Recreation - 14

Letters
Why There Is a Need to Discuss the
Gap Between Research and Practice
[Editor's Note: The
following op-ed
was written by Jim
Stamborski, M.S.,
George Williams
College, Retired
Park and Recreation
Practitioner and Former Learning
Resources Network Board Member.]
As a park and recreation practitioner or,
more accurately, a former practitioner,
I have some thoughts and ideas about
why a gap exists between research and
practice. If NRPA wants to understand
why practitioners are not attending research sessions, then it should identify who is likely to attend its National
Conferences. I have been a participant
in many NRPA Conferences and my
observation is that the information
researchers provide is usually topical
for park and recreation commissioners, directors, superintendents or those
working in highly specialized areas of
parks or recreation, such as national parks. That is usually the attendees they attract. Presently, that makes
sense because, often, at the park and
recreation commission level, the trip to
Conference represents a perk, as usually these are voluntary, appointed or
elected officials. The same can be said
for park and recreation directors and
superintendents in larger recreation
agencies. Therefore, it is not surprising
that research information is focused on
mainly the group of practitioners at the
director and superintendent level, as
well as on commissioners. Perhaps one
of the assumptions of the research presenters is that the information provided
in a session will eventually be shared
with the rest of the agency employees.
12

Parks & Recreation

| M AY 2 0 1 7 | W W W. N R PA . O R G

What data is NRPA collecting and using to make decisions?
Often in my career, I wondered why
college and university researchers did not
produce useful information that park and
recreation professionals can use on a daily
basis. In fairness to academic researchers,
they have their own clientele that has to
be satisfied, including their employers, coresearchers among other academicians
and specialized clientele that provide
funding and other resources to the institution. I became involved as a board member for the Learning Resources Network
(LERN) in the 1980s, exactly because recreation professionals did not have useful
information to base decisions on, while,
at the same time, the trend was moving
toward becoming more businesslike.
LERN, at the time, was a mix of nonprofits and a smaller number of for-profit
providers of recreation programs and services. While on the board, I felt that an important goal would be to see that LERN
materials and seminars become accessible
to park and recreation professionals; this
in fact happened. Eventually, park and recreation professionals became their largest
membership base. Around the same time,
professors Witt and Crompton also began
touring selective parts of the country with
their important work on marketing and
other associated topics current in the business world. The emphasis was to become
more businesslike, and it came at a time
of shrinking park and recreation budgets
across the country.
If NRPA is desirous of engaging
people from all backgrounds, then it
needs to recognize the variety of clienteles it serves and the unique needs
and wants of each group. There is a
role for academics in the training of
park and recreation professionals.

First, there needs to be agreement as
to what the core training should be.
Academicians can follow the lead of
LERN and other similar networks in
reviewing the titles they publish. This
will give them an idea on areas not
covered specific to parks and recreation in other associations' literature.
Interestingly, some have been written
by recreation practitioners.
If researchers want to close the gap
between research and practice, they
need to produce materials that practitioners can use in their daily job performance. The audience should be the bulk
of NRPA membership, which is likely to
be recreation professionals around the
country, some who are NRPA members
and some who are not. Other associations, over the years, have been more in
tune with practitioners than colleges and
university researchers because they usually had accurate information on who
their real and potential clienteles were.
Then, they measured the likelihood of
interest in the materials they produced
for the general population, including
information that their subscribed members and nonmembers could use. Usually, for a minimal fee, information was
produced in a small brochure format;
not too lengthy and written in a direct,
easy-to-understand style.
There will always be a need for pure
academic research on subjects like the
carrying capacity of forest land for a
particular animal. However, the audience is small, therefore, much more
attention should be paid to the bulk of
NRPA members in producing materials
its membership will find useful in their
day-to-day work. This will go a long way
to reducing the gap between researchers
and practitioners.

May 2017 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of May 2017 - Parks & Recreation