|
|
Executive Summary
The Traditional Model for Evidence-based Education The primary focus of evidence-based education has been on “efficacy” research,
which tells us whether or not an education intervention has the desired
impact on the target academic or social behavior when analyzed in a
controlled setting.
The complexities of successfully applying
the education intervention in a real world setting have been largely
minimized and ignored.
The Problem The
education landscape is strewn with practices that had proven research
results and failed miserably. There are also many examples of programs
with poor or no research backing that have gained adoption and continue
to be implemented despite poor performance.
The Expanded Model for Evidence-Base Education: The Roadmap The Roadmap for the expanded evidence-based education model includes four critical components:
- efficacy research (what works?)
establishing promising interventions through rigorous, high quality research
- effectiveness research (when does it work?)
identifying through research the minimum conditions for interventions
to be successful (student characteristics, setting features, resource
demands, social contingencies)
- implementation (how do we make it work?)
addressing all relevant variables so an intervention will be successfully adopted and sustained in a particular setting
- monitoring (is it working?)
establishing the effectiveness of interventions through on-going evaluation
Traditional Model
When most people think of the term “evidence-based education”, they think of “efficacy”
research. Efficacy research tells us whether or not an educational
intervention has the desired impact on the target academic or social
behavior. It is typically done in controlled, university settings, and
is the most common form of published research. There is the belief
that, once we know what works, it is a simple matter to apply the new
intervention in the “real world” education environment.
The Problem This
belief is held by many education professionals as well as lay people.
Yet, the education landscape is strewn with practices that had proven
research results and failed miserably. There are also many examples of
programs with poor or no research backing that have gained adoption and
continue to be implemented despite poor performance. It becomes obvious
that something in the “evidence-based education / efficacy research”
model is missing.
The next piece to be added to the model was “monitoring”,
or as more recently coined, “accountability”. This emphasis on results
is prevalent in the new No Child Left Behind legislation. The notion is
that schools need to be held to measurable, standardized outcomes.
Along with the accountability standards, schools are given clear
reinforcement for meeting the goals and significant punishment for
failing to meet the goals. The law doesn’t specify particular
interventions or practices, just outcomes. It does contain numerous
references to using “scientifically-based research” (efficacy research)
in decision-making. The result is a mandate that exhorts the use of
research and measurable outcomes but treats everything in between as a
“black box”. It emphasizes knowing where you want to go and reporting
when you get there. What is missing is the “how” to get there.
Of
late there has been increasing attention paid to the concept of
“research to practice”, which asks the “how” question and highlights
the fact that there are critical variables to be analyzed when
successfully translating research into real world practice. The first
missing piece of the model is a second form of research: “effectiveness”
research. Effectiveness research asks the question “what are the
minimum conditions for interventions to be successful in real world
settings?” (student characteristics, setting features, resource
demands, social contingencies). While effectiveness research is much
less common than efficacy research, there is growing recognition of the
critical role it plays in successfully implementing efficacy research
in education settings…which brings us to the fourth and final component
of the model.
“Implementation”
refers to the process by which the intervention moves from research to
practice, addressing the critical variables necessary for an
intervention to be successfully adopted in a particular setting. While
effectiveness research can tell us the variables that will affect a
practice’s likely success in a general type of setting, it cannot tell
us whether or not a practice will succeed in a particular setting.
Implementation involves a systematic process for analyzing and
addressing the variables for success in a particular setting during two
critical phases: adoption and sustainability.
The Expanded Model for Evidence-Base Education: The Roadmap The resulting roadmap for the complete evidence-based education model includes all four components:
- efficacy research (what works?)
establishing promising interventions through rigorous, high quality research
- effectiveness research (when does it work?)
identifying
through research the minimum conditions for interventions to be
successful (student characteristics, setting features, resource
demands, social contingencies)
- implementation (how do we make it work?)
addressing all relevant variables so an intervention will be successfully adopted and sustained in a particular setting
- monitoring (is it working?)
establishing the effectiveness of interventions through on-going evaluation

The model outlines numerous directions of interactivity. There is a natural flow to the process as interventions move from research to practice. The first step would be efficacy
research, in which a new intervention is tested in a controlled
environment for its desired impact on target behaviors. Once there is
solid evidence of cause and effect, effectiveness
research would be used to identify the critical variables necessary for
the intervention to be successfully transferred to a real world
setting. Implementation strategies would then be used to analyze and address the variables unique to that particular setting. Finally, monitoring would be used to evaluate whether or not the intervention was achieving the desired outcomes.
A
critical feature of this model involves continual feedback loops. Each
component can interact with the other components depending on the
outcomes. Implementation outcomes might suggest further topics for efficacy research or effectiveness research. Outcomes from effectiveness research might suggest different strategies in monitoring.
The key is that each component is responding to the data generated in
the overall model, and each component is part of a whole process that
helps us determine where we want to go, how to get there, and how to
know when we’ve arrived.
|
|