Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 7 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 7 |
Descriptor
Source
Educational Research and… | 7 |
Author
Bugler, Daniel | 1 |
Cartwright, Nancy | 1 |
Joyce, Kathryn E. | 1 |
Kvernbekk, Tone | 1 |
McCusker, Sean | 1 |
Phillips, D. C. | 1 |
Simpson, Adrian | 1 |
Terrell, Jenna Howard | 1 |
Wrigley, Terry | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 7 |
Reports - Evaluative | 7 |
Education Level
Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Kvernbekk, Tone – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2019
This paper discusses, compares, and contrasts 4 different models for bringing evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) into practice and into practical reasoning. I look at what questions the models can and cannot answer, what role they accord to RCT evidence, and what their possible attraction for practitioners might be. The models are…
Descriptors: Role, Evidence Based Practice, Evidence, Models
Wrigley, Terry; McCusker, Sean – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2019
This paper examines the insistent claims by advocates of evidence-based teaching that it is a rigorous scientific approach. The paper questions the view that randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses are the only truly scientific methods in educational research. It suggests these claims are often based on a rhetorical appeal which relies on…
Descriptors: Evidence Based Practice, Educational Research, Research Methodology, Athletics
Phillips, D. C. – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2019
EBP -- evidence-based policy and practice -- has generated intense controversy. A rough continuum of positions can be discerned: At one pole are "tough-minded" commentators distinguished by their support of EBP; however, there are serious internal differences in this camp, for some regard randomised field trials (RFTs) as the gold…
Descriptors: Evidence Based Practice, Educational Practices, Educational Theories, Randomized Controlled Trials
Cartwright, Nancy – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2019
Across the evidence-based policy and practice (EBPP) community, including education, randomised controlled trials (RCTS) rank as the most "rigorous" evidence for causal conclusions. This paper argues that that is misleading. Only narrow conclusions about study populations can be warranted with the kind of "rigour" that RCTs…
Descriptors: Evidence Based Practice, Educational Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, Error of Measurement
Simpson, Adrian – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2018
Ainsworth et al.'s paper "Sources of Bias in Outcome Assessment in Randomised Controlled Trials: A Case Study" examines alternative accounts for a large difference in effect size between 2 outcomes in the same intervention evaluation. It argues that the probable explanation relates to masking: Only one outcome measure was administered by…
Descriptors: Statistical Bias, Randomized Controlled Trials, Effect Size, Outcome Measures
Joyce, Kathryn E. – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2019
Within evidence-based education, results from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and meta-analyses of them, are taken as reliable evidence for effectiveness -- they speak to "what works". Extending RCT results requires establishing that study samples and settings are representative of the intended target. Although widely recognised as…
Descriptors: Evidence Based Practice, Educational Research, Instructional Effectiveness, Randomized Controlled Trials
Terrell, Jenna Howard; Bugler, Daniel – Educational Research and Evaluation, 2017
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the most methodologically sound methods of conducting empirical research, but a successful RCT is contingent on the recruitment of subjects into the intervention and study. Few research articles and evaluations in education discuss recruitment, and even fewer discuss challenges in recruitment.…
Descriptors: Randomized Controlled Trials, Research Administration, Planning, Validity