How Consistent Are Meanings of Evidence-Based? A Comparative Review of 12 Clearinghouses that Rate the Effectiveness of Educational Programs (Record no. 133497)

MARC details
000 -LEADER
fixed length control field 02000nas a2200217Ia 4500
008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION
fixed length control field 240802c99999999xx |||||||||||| ||und||
022 ## - INTERNATIONAL STANDARD SERIAL NUMBER
International Standard Serial Number 0034-6543
100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Wadhwa, Mansi
9 (RLIN) 119524
245 #0 - TITLE STATEMENT
Title How Consistent Are Meanings of Evidence-Based? A Comparative Review of 12 Clearinghouses that Rate the Effectiveness of Educational Programs
260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC.
Name of publisher, distributor, etc. Review of Educational Research
260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC.
Date of publication, distribution, etc. 2024
300 ## - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
Extent 05-32
520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC.
Abstract Clearinghouses set standards of scientific quality to vet existing research to determine how “evidence-based” an intervention is. This paper examines 12 educational clearinghouses to describe their effectiveness criteria, to estimate how consistently they rate the same program, and to probe why their judgments differ. All the clearinghouses value random assignment, but they differ in how they treat its implementation, how they weight quasi-experiments, and how they value ancillary causal factors like independent replication and persisting effects. A total of 1359 programs were analyzed over 10 clearinghouses; 83% of them were assessed by a single clearinghouse and, of those rated by more than one, similar ratings were achieved for only about 30% of the programs. This high level of inconsistency seems to be mostly due to clearinghouses disagreeing about whether a high program rating requires effects that are replicated and/or temporally persisting. Clearinghouses exist to identify “evidence-based” programs, but the inconsistency in their recommendations of the same program suggests that identifying “evidence-based” interventions is still more of a policy aspiration than a reliable research practice.
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element Clearinghouse
9 (RLIN) 119525
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element Experimental Research
9 (RLIN) 30653
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element Research Methodology
650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM
Topical term or geographic name entry element Research Utilization
9 (RLIN) 119526
700 ## - ADDED ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Cook, Thomas D.
9 (RLIN) 119527
700 ## - ADDED ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Zheng, Jingwen
9 (RLIN) 119528
856 ## - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS
Uniform Resource Identifier <a href="https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231152262">https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231152262</a>
999 ## - SYSTEM CONTROL NUMBERS (KOHA)
Koha biblionumber 133497
Holdings
Withdrawn status Lost status Damaged status Not for loan Home library Current library Date acquired Serial Enumeration / chronology Total Checkouts Barcode Date last seen Price effective from Koha item type
        Dr VKRV Rao Library Dr VKRV Rao Library 02/08/2024 Vol. 94, No. 1   AI150 02/08/2024 02/08/2024 Article Index

Powered by Koha