Academics and practitioners all too often have little or no contact with each other; the practitioner does not know what research exists that can inform their practices, and the academic does not know enough about the institutions they primarily study to make recommendations that are specific enough to inform a concrete practice or policy. I leverage my experiences both as an academic and as a data analyst and domestic violence coordinator at Family Court to outline lessons learned in the field. I detail how my academic training hindered my work as a practitioner, and how practitioners differ in terms of conducting internal research and presenting data and findings. I use my lessons learned and subsequently list several concrete practices that academics can begin to work into their work to increase communication with important stakeholders, and tailor their work to practical systemic improvement. Bridging the gap between academics and practitioners will lead to better research projects, and findings that will be able to actively enact changes within systems that academics focus on.

学术界和从业人员之间经常很少或根本没有接触。从业者不知道有什么研究可以为他们的实践提供信息，学者也不了解他们主要学习的机构是否能够提出足够具体的建议以为具体实践或政策提供参考。我利用自己在家庭法院担任学者，数据分析师和家庭暴力事务协调员的经验来概述该领域的经验教训。我详细介绍了我的学术培训如何阻碍了我作为从业者的工作，以及从业者在进行内部研究以及提供数据和发现方面有何不同。我将利用汲取的经验教训，然后列举几种具体的做法，以便学者们可以开始努力工作，以增进与重要利益相关者的沟通，并使他们的工作适应实际的系统改进。弥合学者和实践者之间的鸿沟将导致更好的研究项目和发现，这些发现将能够在学者关注的系统内积极地做出改变。