Expresses doubts about whether the evidence presented by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg provides robust and consistent findings that could, or should, be used to inform educational policy and practice. Discusses five questions about the methodology of the study, and indicates that basing educational policy on their findings would be merely an…

Explores the role and purpose of research synthesis, and defends the conclusions drawn about school learning. The selection of the broad outcome "school learning" was an attempt to show that educational research and development can answer important questions about schooling. (SLD)

Asserts that the central problem of the analysis by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg is that they tend to view the teacher, at least implicitly, as the compliant beneficiary of the knowledge of the educational researcher. Any knowledge base that aims to affect classroom practice should take into account and respect the teacher's world.…

Asserts that because M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg never clarify the contours of their "knowledge base for school learning," it is difficult to know what their broad-based comparison of research studies has really yielded. Explores dilemmas posed by the methodology of the study. (SLD)

Considers the potential impact of the study by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg. Their analysis is the first step in understanding and explaining the factors that really do make a positive difference in quality of school learning, rather than simply describing associations between school-related input and output measures. (SLD)

Explores what the "knowledge base for school learning" described by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg might mean for education by describing some cases of school learning from fieldwork in elementary schools. The focus is on psychological dimensions of school learning. (SLD)

Asserts that the reductionistic methodology used by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg in their study does not do justice to the educational phenomena they wish to illuminate. In addition, these authors have too simple a view of the relationship between educational research and educational practice. (SLD)

M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg have produced a summary of the bivariate relationships that influence learning. The problem is how to convert such evidence into knowledge, and the knowledge into policy. Discusses how health science provides a guide for making the conversion from evidence to policy. (SLD)

Asserts that reviews like that of M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg are stimulating and useful in thinking about educational research, but they are nearly useless in thinking about educational policy and practice. It is not clear what is meant by "knowledge base," and the finding about proximal and distal variables is simplistic. (SLD)