Is the educational ‘what works’ agenda working? Critical methodological developments

References

• Anwaruddin, S. 2016. “Language Teachers’ Responses to Educational Research: Addressing the ‘Crisis’ of Representation.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 314–328. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1166485.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. 2007. “Why ‘What Works’ Won’t Work: Evidence-based Practice and the Democratic Deficit in Educational Research.” Educational Theory 57 (1): 1–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00241.x
   Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., A. L. Brown, R. C. Rodney, and National Research Council Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, I. 2003. “Trying to Do More Good than Harm in Policy and Practice: The Role of Rigorous, Transparent, Up-to-date Evaluations.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 589: 22–40. doi: 10.1177/0002716203254762
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln eds. 2005. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Green, C., C. Taylor, S. Buckley, and S. Hean. 2016. “Beyond Synthesis: Augmenting Systematic Review Procedures with Practical Principles to Optimise Impact and Uptake in Educational Policy and Practice.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 329–344. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1146668.
   Google Scholar
• Hammersley, M. 2005. “Is the Evidence-Based Practice Movement Doing More Good than Harm? Reflections on Iain Chalmer’s Case for Research-based Policy Making and Practice.” Evidence & Policy 1 (1): 85–100. doi: 10.1332/1744264052703203
   Google Scholar
• Hanley, P., B. Cambers, and J. Haslam. 2016. “Reassessing RCTs as the ‘Gold Standard’: Synergy not Separatism in Evaluation Designs.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 287–298. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1138457.
   Google Scholar
• Hegel, G. W. F. (1977). Phenomenology of Spirit. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins, S., and M. Katsipataki. 2016. “Communicating Comparative Findings from Meta-analysis in Educational Research: Some Examples and Suggestions.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 237–254. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1166486.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2007. Understanding the Brain: The Birth of a Learning Science. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Pampaka, M., J. S. Williams, G. Hutchenson, L. Black, P. Davis, P. Hernandez-Martines, and G. Wake. 2013. “Measuring Alternative Learning Outcomes: Dispositions to Study in Higher Education.” Journal of Applied Measurement 14 (2): 197–218.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peterson, A. 2016. “Getting ‘What Works’ Working: Building Blocks for the Integration of Experimental and Improvement Science.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 299–313. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1170114.
   Google Scholar
• Schweig, J., and J. Pane. 2016. “Intention-to-treat Analysis in Partially-nested Randomized Controlled Trials with Real-world Complexity.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 268–286. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1170800.
   Google Scholar
• Scriven, M. 1994. “The Fine Line Between Evaluation and Explanation.” American Journal of Evaluation 15 (1): 75–77. doi: 10.1177/109821409401500108
   Google Scholar
• Smeyers, P. and M. Depaepe, eds. 2010. Educational Research: Why ‘What Works’ Doesn’t Work. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Smithers, A. 1993. All Our Futures: Britain’s Education Revolution. A Dispatches Report on Education. London: Channel Four Television.
   Google Scholar
• Spybrook, J., R. Shi, and B. Kelcey. 2016. “Progress in the Past Decade: An Examination of the Precision of Cluster Randomized Trials Funded by the U.S. Institute of Education Sciences.” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39 (3): 255–267. doi:10.1080/1743727X.2016.1150454.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, G. 2012. “Changing Our Landscape of Inquiry for a New Science of Education.” Harvard Educational Review 82 (1): 26–51. doi: 10.17763/haer.82.1.6t2r089l715x3377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Akker, J., K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, and N. Nieveen, eds. 2006. Educational Design Research. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. and J. Ryan. 2013. “Research, Policy, and Professional Development: Designing Hybrid Activities in Third Spaces.” In Reframing Educational Research: Resisting the ‘what works’ Agenda edited by V. Farnsworth and Y. Solomon. 200–212. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wittman, E. Ch. 1995. “Mathematics Education as a ‘Design Science.’” Educational Studies in Mathematics 29: 355–374. doi: 10.1007/BF01273911
   Google Scholar