From evidence‐informed to evidence‐based: An evidence building framework for education

Owen, Kaydee; Watkins, Richard; Hughes, J. Carl

doi:10.1002/rev3.3342

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 97 publications

(109 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The standard of evidence looked for must be at least as strong as reviewers would accept for established 'facts' in real life. The sieve has now been used widely and formally by research teams to assist in their reviews of evidence since 2014(e.g., El Soufi & See, 2019Fan & See, 2022;Huang & Chalmers, 2023;Neelen & Kirschner, 2020;Owen et al, 2022;See et al, 2022;Siddiqui & Ventista, 2018), as well as by countless PhD students in their theses. It has been explained in videos for specific areas like evidence on second language learning (Chalmers, 2016), and discussed widely on social media in fields beyond education and social science (e.g., https:// twitt er.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judging the relative trustworthiness of research results: How to do it and why it matters

Gorard

2024

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes, and lays out an argument for, the use of a procedure to help groups of reviewers to judge the quality of prior research reports. It argues why such a procedure is needed, and how other existing approaches are only relevant to some kinds of research, meaning that a review or synthesis cannot successfully combine quality judgements of different types of research. The proposed procedure is based on four main factors: the fit between the research question(s) for any study and its design(s); the size of the smallest group of cases used in the headline analyses; the amount and skewness of missing data; and the quality of the data collected. This simple procedure is now relatively widely used, and has been found to lead to widespread agreement between reviewers. It can fundamentally change the findings of a review of evidence, compared to the conclusions that would emerge from a more traditional review that did not include genuine quality rating of prior evidence. And powerfully, because it is not technical, it permits users to help judge research findings. This is important as there is a growing demand for evidence‐led approaches in areas of social science such as education, wherein summaries of evidence must be as trustworthy as possible.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judging the relative trustworthiness of research results: How to do it and why it matters

Gorard

2024

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Close-to-practice research can help to support the development of a research culture within non-academic organisations, by supporting teams to consider the gaps in their own and the organisations’ knowledge, to use appropriate research methods to elicit change and in turn to evaluate and evidence outcomes (Owen et al , 2022), and it encompasses traditions such as action research and practitioner research (Wyse et al , 2018). Despite the potential challenges to close-to-practice research in naturalistic settings, robust methodological rigour still needs to be ensured, including the use of experimental designs, reliability measures and appropriate analyses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Commentary on “Vocational training for livelihood and rehabilitation of persons with intellectual disabilities”

Evans

2022

TLDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this commentary is to reflect on some of the themes presented in the associated article “Vocational training for livelihood and rehabilitation of persons with intellectual disabilities” and provide considerations for future close-to-practice research in the area of vocational training models and rehabilitation provisions. Design/methodology/approach This commentary considers the literature in relation to rehabilitation provisions centred around vocation, highlights the need for a person-centred focus and reiterates the potential of vocation as a route to social inclusion and wider social networks. Findings The focus on adapting supports and vocational training programmes to fit within the context of low-income areas and country-specific legislation should be afforded particular consideration, alongside ways to achieve high-quality research rigour, which still puts the person supported at the centre of any outcome measures. Originality/value This commentary is aimed in part at practitioners working in the field of learning disabilities and employment/vocation, who are keen to conduct close-to-practice research.

show abstract

“…Use of Meta-Analysis in the social sciences accelerated around the turn of the century in response to evidence-based policy initiatives in the U.S., Canada, and parts of Europe (Campbell Collaboration, n.d;Davies et al, 2000;Donaldson et al, 2015;European Commission, n.d;Haskins, 2018;Margolis & Haskins, 2015;Nutley et al, 2007;Owen et al, 2022;Stack, 2018). In turn, the evidence-based policy initiatives sparked public and private efforts to accelerate the production and curation of evidence on the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of both current and alternative approaches for improving outcomes in education, workforce development, social welfare, and criminal justice.…”

Section: The Push For More and Better Evidence To Guide Policy Develo...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Use State-of-the-Art Meta-Analysis Guidelines and Tools and Make Key Intermediate Products Publicly Accessible Good Meta-Analyses begin with a systematic search for available evidence on a particular topic. The results define the corpus of evidence appropriate for inclusion in the planned Meta-Analysis, establish bounds on the questions that can be addressed and identify seemingly related evidence that should be excluded from the review and the reasons why (Owen et al, 2022;Slavin, 2020).…”

Section: Improve the Design And Reporting Of Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Usefulness and Use of Meta-Analysis to Inform Policy and Practice

Maynard

2024

Eval Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter begins with an overview of recent developments that have encouraged and facilitated greater use of research syntheses, including Meta-Analysis, to guide public policy and practice in education, workforce development, and social services. It discusses the role of Meta-Analysis for improving knowledge of the effectiveness of programs, policies, and practices and the applicability and generalizability of that knowledge to conditions other than those represented by the study samples and settings. The chapter concludes with recommendations for improving the potential of Meta-Analysis to accelerate knowledge development through changing how we design, conduct, and report findings of individual studies to maximize their usefulness in Meta-Analysis as well as how we produce and report Meta-Analysis findings. The paper includes references to resources supporting the recommendations.

show abstract

From evidence‐informed to evidence‐based: An evidence building framework for education

Abstract: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Cited by 13 publications

References 97 publications

Judging the relative trustworthiness of research results: How to do it and why it matters

Judging the relative trustworthiness of research results: How to do it and why it matters

Commentary on “Vocational training for livelihood and rehabilitation of persons with intellectual disabilities”

Improving the Usefulness and Use of Meta-Analysis to Inform Policy and Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About