Democratizing the Development of Evidence

Jackson, Cara

doi:10.3102/0013189x211060357

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A theory is practical when it has defensible, actionable implications for addressing real-world problems (Berkman & Wilson, 2021). Understanding real-world problems, and providing practical proposals for addressing them, requires working with participants and community members to gather and understand informative observations that comprehensively capture multiple aspects and nuances of the context (Jackson, 2021), practices that are ideally suited for qualitative and mixed methods research. Novel applications of theory are more feasible when scholars and practitioners understand the contexts in which that theory was developed, so that they can engage in informed modifications, as described by another promising methodology in educational psychology and the learning sciences: design-based research (Sandoval & Bell, 2004).…”

Section: Qualitative and Mixed Methods Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Barzilai and Chinn (2018) have demonstrated how the AIR model of epistemic cognition can be translated into actionable goals for education, which is evidence in support of the practicality of the model. Often, theory development, including phenomena generation and evaluation of explanatory claims, can be improved by involving practitioners and other applied professionals (Berkman & Wilson, 2021;Jackson, 2021), something educational psychologist do often, but perhaps not often enough (Reber, 2016).…”

Section: Theory Evaluation and Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Can Educational Psychology Learn From, and Contribute to, Theory Development Scholarship?

Greene

2022

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the field of psychology’s stated goals is to produce scholarship with findings that benefit the world. Over the last 10 years, psychology scholarship and its presumed societal benefits have been called into question due to the field’s history of questionable research practices, racism, and epistemic oppression. Calls for methodological, ethical, and practical reforms are essential to building a psychological science that is just, effective, reliable, and beneficial. Recently, these calls have been complemented by a push to reform how theory is developed and used in psychology. There is great need for better understanding and implementation of theory development, both in the field of psychology broadly as well as in its subdisciplines, including educational psychology. At the same time, educational psychologists have much to contribute to the tripartite calls for methodological, ethical, and theory reforms. In this paper, I explore theory development in psychology by discussing the importance of developing both the descriptive and explanatory aspects of theory as well as the need to refine how theory is evaluated and integrated. Then, I review how innovations and practices in educational psychology can inform the broader theory reform movement in psychology writ large. Finally, I identify important future directions for further advancing theory reform in psychology, including addressing ableism in the field, increasing the field’s hospitability for theory revision, furthering theory development transparency, and more deeply integrating theory development into preparation programs.

show abstract

Section: Qualitative and Mixed Methods Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theory Evaluation and Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Can Educational Psychology Learn From, and Contribute to, Theory Development Scholarship?

Greene

2022

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because systematic reviews typically focus on presenting evidence for branded interventions that can be quite costly, there is a logical need to “democratize” evidence by distilling evidence down to core components that may be less costly (Jackson, 2022). By focusing on discrete practices, the presentation of evidence on core components may also greatly expand the potential audience for systematic evidence reviews.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of systematic evidence reviews: Past and future developments and their implications for policy analysis

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence reviews are widely used to summarize findings from existing studies and, as such, are an important base for policy analysis. Over the past 50 years, three waves of evidence reviews have emerged: (1) the meta‐analysis wave, (2) the mixed‐methods synthesis wave, and (3) the core components wave. The present article first describes these waves and reflects on the benefits and limitations of each wave in the context of policy analysis. Informed by this historical account, the article then identifies and discusses three trends that are likely to influence future directions of evidence reviews: (1) using data science tools, (2) embedding an equity focus, and (3) translating research into practice. The concluding discussion connects these developments to public policy, identifying how evidence from systematic evidence reviews informs—or could better inform—policy decisions. Related Articles Nunes Silva, Carlos. 2012. “Policy and Evidence in a Partisan Age: The Great Disconnect—By Paul Gary Wyckoff.” Politics & Policy 40(3): 541–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2012.00363.x. Sinclair, Thomas A. P. 2006. “Previewing Policy Sciences: Multiple Lenses and Segmented Visions.” Politics & Policy 34(3): 481–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2006.00025.x. Smith‐Walter, Aaron, Holly L. Peterson, Michael D. Jones, and Ashley Nicole Reynolds Marshall. 2016. “Gun Stories: How Evidence Shapes Firearm Policy in the United States.” Politics & Policy 44(6): 1053–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12187.

show abstract

“…Democratizing research production means reconsidering “what questions are asked and answered” (Jackson, 2022, p. 1). Democratizing research use means that evidence is not primarily for the consumption of other researchers (Tseng, 2024).…”

Section: Democratizing Evidence Through Research‐practice Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engineering research‐practice partnerships for social justice

Tseng

2024

Social Policy Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our current systems for producing and using research are mired—as are all U.S. institutions—in a long history of racism, xenophobia, and a culture of paternalism. Fortunately, we are not beholden to maintaining those systems, and we can re‐imagine and re‐engineer the ways we approach research and what we seek to accomplish with it. Research–practice partnerships (RPPs) can play a unique and meaningful role in bringing research to bear on social justice for children and families, but the partnerships must be intentionally designed for those goals. In this essay, I discuss three design principles for RPPs: centering children marginalized by oppression, embracing historical perspectives, and contending with power asymmetries.

show abstract

Democratizing the Development of Evidence

Cited by 12 publications

References 28 publications

What Can Educational Psychology Learn From, and Contribute to, Theory Development Scholarship?

What Can Educational Psychology Learn From, and Contribute to, Theory Development Scholarship?

The evolution of systematic evidence reviews: Past and future developments and their implications for policy analysis

Engineering research‐practice partnerships for social justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About