Talk:Evidence-based education

The neuroscience section of "evidence-based education" is good, but offtopic

It makes no reference to use of randomized trials. This section should include studies from educational neuroscience that would include rcts. Does anyone mind if I remove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leo Sammallahti (talk • contribs) 20:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Merging Scientifically based research and Evidence-based education

I know that a great deal of work has gone into these two articles Scientifically based research and Evidence-based education, so please don't be offended by my suggestions. However, would it make sense to merge them into one article, make it lean, efficient and easy to maintain? And we can use REDIRECTS so people can find it.

Both articles require updating. They should not try to include too much detail or serve as an instruction manual because the field is changing rapidly.

In my view, Evidence-based education contains so much information that makes it impossible to keep up to date. The Coalition For Evidence-Based Policy appears to have wound down in 2015. And, Best Evidence Encyclopedia appears to be mentioned only in Scientifically based research.

Instead, the merged article would highlight the best available sources of information and offer unbiased information about them. This would enable educators to seek out reliable sources and make their own decision.

This is a hot topic and worth doing a good job.

Are there other articles that attempt to cover this same area? The merged article could be featured briefly in Evidence and Evidence-based practice.

I am not an expert in this area and am hoping you are.

John (talk) 12:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

To add to my above comment, I propose we remove the charts because they are not dated, I don't think they are verifiable, and are very difficult to keep up to date.

I am preparing a revision and will post it soon. I welcome any comments and suggestions. John (talk) 21:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Added Best Evidence

More to follow. John (talk) 00:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Removed chart

As mentioned before, I removed this chart because it was undated and unnecessary since the site has filters.

Program	Intervention Description	Grades	Improvement area and effect size
Success for All	In kindergarten through first grade, teachers read aloud and discuss with students focusing on phonemic awareness, auditory discrimination, and sound blending. In the second through fifth grades cooperative learning activities built around partner reading are used. It is delivered with daily 90-minute reading classes consisting of 15–20 students, grouped by performance and regardless of their age. One-on-one tutoring is provided to students with learning difficulties.	8	Alphabetics (+9%)
READ 180	A reading program for those that are two or more grades years below grade level. The classes start off with whole-class instructions, which is followed by computer practices that are adaptive and individualized, small group activities or independent reading, with a whole-class wrap up in the end of the class.	4–10	Comprehension (+6%) and general literacy achievement (+4%)
Phonological Awareness Training	Activities where children identify, detect, delete, segment, or blend segments of spoken words (i.e., words, syllables, onsets and rimes, phonemes) or that focus on teaching children to detect, identify, or produce rhyme or alliteration.	PK	Phonological processing (+27%)
Phonological Awareness Training plus Letter Knowledge Training	The added letter knowledge training component includes teaching children the letters of the alphabet and making an explicit link between letters and sounds.	PK	Phonological processing (+30%), Print knowledge(+27)
Reading recovery	Daily 30 minute one-on-one tutoring sessions to students who have difficulties in reading and writing over the course of 12–20 weeks.	1	Alphabetics (+21%), Reading achievement (+27)
Instructional Conversations and Literature Logs	Program for English learners where teachers engage students to Instructional Conversations, where stories or personal experiences are discussed with teachers acting as facilitators. Literature Logs require students to respond in writing to prompts or questions. Responses are then shared in small groups or with a partner.	2–5	Reading achievement (+27%)
SpellRead	Literacy program for struggling readers, including special education students and English language learners. SpellRead breaks the recognizing and manipulating of English sounds into specific skills, and focuses on mastering each skill through systematic and explicit instruction.	5–6	Alphabetics (+18%)
Dialogic Reading	Shared picture book reading practice where the adult and the child switch roles so that the child learns to become the storyteller with the assistance of the adult, who functions as an active listener and questioner.	PK	Oral language (+19%)
DaisyQuest	Computer-assisted instruction with a storyline and practices that teach children how to recognize words that rhyme; words that have the same beginning, middle, and ending sounds, words that can be formed from a series of phonemes presented separately and also teaches children how to count the number of sounds in words.	PK–1	Alphabetics (+23%)
Earobics	Interactive software that provides individual instruction for phonemic awareness, auditory processing, and phonics, as well as the cognitive and language skills required for comprehension. Each level of instruction addresses recognizing and blending sounds, rhyming, and discriminating phonemes. The software is supported by audio, video and reading materials.	3	Alphabetics (+19%)
Stepping Stones to Literacy	The program includes serial rapid automatic naming activities where children practice making quick visual-verbal associations of known sets of colors, numbers, and/or letter names in a left-to-right format, and instructional prompts in English and Spanish.	3	Alphabetics (+19%)
Teach For America	Placing non-traditionally trained teachers in high-need public schools. Many TFA teachers hold bachelor's degrees from selective colleges and universities.	12	Mathematis Achievement (+4%)
Caring School Community (CSC)	Program consists of class meeting lessons, cross-age “buddies” programs, “homeside” activities, and creation of schoolwide community by bringing school staff, parents and students together to create new school traditions.	6	Behavior (+8%), Knowledge, attitudes, and values (+7%)
First Step to Success	Program seeks to detect children who at risk to develop antisocial behavior patterns and match them with behavior coaches who work with the child, his or her classpeers and parents for approximately 50–60 hours over a 3-month period.	3	External behavior (+28)
Social Skills Training	Collection of practices using modeling, role-playing, and specific instruction on social skills, with positive reinforcement for engaging in appropriate social behavior.	PK	Social-emotional development (+12)
Dual Enrollment Programs	The intervention allows high school students to take college courses and earn college credits while still attending high school.	9–12	Access and enrollment (+15), Attainment (+25), Completing school (+7), Credit accumulation (+14), General academic achievement - high school (+7)
Check & Connect	Students are assigned a “monitor” who regularly checks their performance (in particular, whether students are having attendance, behavior, or academic problems) and connects with school personnel, family members, and community service providers when problems are identified.	9–12	Staying in school (+25)
ACT/SAT Test Preparation and Coaching Programs	Test preparation programs with the goal of increasing student scores on college entrance tests.	10–12	General academic achievement-high school (+9)
Positive action	Teaches children positive and constructive way of thinking about themselves and acting towards others using methods such as discussions, role-playing and games. The program uses factsheets, booklets and songs as teaching material.	1–12	Behavior (+19%) and general academic achievement (+14%)
Coping power	The program consists of a child and a parent component. The child component consists of thirty-four 50 minute group sessions and periodic individual sessions over the course of 15–18 months. The parent component consists of 16 group sessions and periodic individual meetings. The child component emphasizes goal setting, problem-solving, anger management and peer relationships and consists, while the parent lessons emphasize setting expectations, praise, discipline, managing stress, communication and child study skills.	K–12 students with emotional disturbances	External behavior (+8%) and social outcomes (+6%)
Too Good for Drugs and Violence	The program promotes prosocial behavior and norms, and consists of 14 core lessons with additional 12 lessons that include roleplaying and co-operative learning. Pupils are encouraged to apply the skills taught, for example by infusing the lessons into subjects such as English, science or social studies	5, with additional program for 8	Knowledge, attitudes and values (+16%)
I CAN Learn Algebra	The program is mastery-based and uses self-paced educational software.	8	Mathematics achievement (+7%)
Pre-K Mathematics	The program uses small group activities (4 - 6 children) with concrete manipulatives and includes take-home picture strips and activities that are designed to help parents support their learning, as well as a software with activities to reinforce the lessons.	PK	Mathematics achievement (19%)
Literacy Express	Includes lessons on oral language, emergent literacy, basic math, science, general knowledge, socioemotional development. It offers the staff with recommendations for room arrangement, daily schedules, classroom management and activities, and provides them with teaching materials.	PK students, especially those with special needs	Print knowledge (+12%), oral language (+12%) and psychological processing (+12%)
Accelerated Middle Schools	The intervention gives additional teaching and attempts to cover an additional year of curriculum during its 1 or 2-year duration. Classes link multiple subjects and are designed to have a "hands on" practical approach.	6–8, High risk and low performing students in grades who are behind their grade levels	Progressing in school (+35%), staying in school (+18%)

Out of date chart for The Coalition For Evidence-Based Policy

This chart is out of date and misleading, so I will remove it and add material that will enable our readers to find the current information they want. John NH (talk) 12:34, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

• I agree. The chart needs to go. --66.244.121.212 (talk) 15:56, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Evidence-based learning techniques

I have a few concerns about this portion. Firstly with spaced repetition and the apparent promotion of commercial software. Secondly, it does not deserve such a prominent position in the article. I believe readers are more interested in sources of legitimate evidence, hence the section on Research sources and information. With that in mind, I will move Evidence-based learning techniques to the end of the article. Thirdly, as this article is about "evidence" readers would expect that it would have very reliable references. Some of the references do not appear to meet the Wikipedia standards. For example, the reference "Human Memory: Theory and Practice", Alan D. Baddeley, 1997 does not seems to make any mention of spaced repetition.

I will make some changes and welcome comments. John NH (talk) 18:00, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

• User:Jnhmunro: Thank you for your concern. However, the efficacy of the spaced repetition technique is "proven", as shown by a review in Nature Magazine. No evidence-based education technique has more evidence behind it than this one. As such, it deserves a prominent place in the article. --66.244.121.212 (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I am not disputing the efficacy of spaced learning. However, I suggest we use more scientific language (just the facts) to describe the theory and the evidence. I will make an attempt to do this a little later and you can tell me what you think. Also, I feel the order of the material is appropriate since it goes from the general to the specific. For the record; I have no connection with any software organization, nor am I employed in anything related to the education field; however I am a volunteer member of a non-profit organization that encourages research literacy in education. That is my only COI in regards to this article. Thanks again. John NH (talk) 17:39, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. More scientific language is a good idea. Sorry if I'm a bit pushy -- I just have strong feelings about this (haha). I appreciate the work you've done and I hope we can work together to improve the article. --66.244.121.212 (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2020 (UTC)