research help education

• Our Mission

How Teachers Can Learn Through Action Research

A look at one school’s action research project provides a blueprint for using this model of collaborative teacher learning.

When teachers redesign learning experiences to make school more relevant to students’ lives, they can’t ignore assessment. For many teachers, the most vexing question about real-world learning experiences such as project-based learning is: How will we know what students know and can do by the end of this project?

Teachers at the Siena School in Silver Spring, Maryland, decided to figure out the assessment question by investigating their classroom practices. As a result of their action research, they now have a much deeper understanding of authentic assessment and a renewed appreciation for the power of learning together.

Their research process offers a replicable model for other schools interested in designing their own immersive professional learning. The process began with a real-world challenge and an open-ended question, involved a deep dive into research, and ended with a public showcase of findings.

Start With an Authentic Need to Know

Siena School serves about 130 students in grades 4–12 who have mild to moderate language-based learning differences, including dyslexia. Most students are one to three grade levels behind in reading.

Teachers have introduced a variety of instructional strategies, including project-based learning, to better meet students’ learning needs and also help them develop skills like collaboration and creativity. Instead of taking tests and quizzes, students demonstrate what they know in a PBL unit by making products or generating solutions.

“We were already teaching this way,” explained Simon Kanter, Siena’s director of technology. “We needed a way to measure, was authentic assessment actually effective? Does it provide meaningful feedback? Can teachers grade it fairly?”

Focus the Research Question

Across grade levels and departments, teachers considered what they wanted to learn about authentic assessment, which the late Grant Wiggins described as engaging, multisensory, feedback-oriented, and grounded in real-world tasks. That’s a contrast to traditional tests and quizzes, which tend to focus on recall rather than application and have little in common with how experts go about their work in disciplines like math or history.

The teachers generated a big research question: Is using authentic assessment an effective and engaging way to provide meaningful feedback for teachers and students about growth and proficiency in a variety of learning objectives, including 21st-century skills?

Take Time to Plan

Next, teachers planned authentic assessments that would generate data for their study. For example, middle school science students created prototypes of genetically modified seeds and pitched their designs to a panel of potential investors. They had to not only understand the science of germination but also apply their knowledge and defend their thinking.

In other classes, teachers planned everything from mock trials to environmental stewardship projects to assess student learning and skill development. A shared rubric helped the teachers plan high-quality assessments.

Make Sense of Data

During the data-gathering phase, students were surveyed after each project about the value of authentic assessments versus more traditional tools like tests and quizzes. Teachers also reflected after each assessment.

“We collated the data, looked for trends, and presented them back to the faculty,” Kanter said.

Among the takeaways:

• Authentic assessment generates more meaningful feedback and more opportunities for students to apply it.
• Students consider authentic assessment more engaging, with increased opportunities to be creative, make choices, and collaborate.
• Teachers are thinking more critically about creating assessments that allow for differentiation and that are applicable to students’ everyday lives.

To make their learning public, Siena hosted a colloquium on authentic assessment for other schools in the region. The school also submitted its research as part of an accreditation process with the Middle States Association.

Strategies to Share

For other schools interested in conducting action research, Kanter highlighted three key strategies.

• Focus on areas of growth, not deficiency:  “This would have been less successful if we had said, ‘Our math scores are down. We need a new program to get scores up,’ Kanter said. “That puts the onus on teachers. Data collection could seem punitive. Instead, we focused on the way we already teach and thought about, how can we get more accurate feedback about how students are doing?”
• Foster a culture of inquiry:  Encourage teachers to ask questions, conduct individual research, and share what they learn with colleagues. “Sometimes, one person attends a summer workshop and then shares the highlights in a short presentation. That might just be a conversation, or it might be the start of a school-wide initiative,” Kanter explained. In fact, that’s exactly how the focus on authentic assessment began.
• Build structures for teacher collaboration:  Using staff meetings for shared planning and problem-solving fosters a collaborative culture. That was already in place when Siena embarked on its action research, along with informal brainstorming to support students.

For both students and staff, the deep dive into authentic assessment yielded “dramatic impact on the classroom,” Kanter added. “That’s the great part of this.”

In the past, he said, most teachers gave traditional final exams. To alleviate students’ test anxiety, teachers would support them with time for content review and strategies for study skills and test-taking.

“This year looks and feels different,” Kanter said. A week before the end of fall term, students were working hard on final products, but they weren’t cramming for exams. Teachers had time to give individual feedback to help students improve their work. “The whole climate feels way better.”

Introduction to Education Research

• First Online: 29 November 2023

Cite this chapter

• Sharon K. Park 3 ,
• Khanh-Van Le-Bucklin 4 &
• Julie Youm 4  

413 Accesses

Educators rely on the discovery of new knowledge of teaching practices and frameworks to improve and evolve education for trainees. An important consideration that should be made when embarking on a career conducting education research is finding a scholarship niche. An education researcher can then develop the conceptual framework that describes the state of knowledge, realize gaps in understanding of the phenomenon or problem, and develop an outline for the methodological underpinnings of the research project. In response to Ernest Boyer’s seminal report, Priorities of the Professoriate , research was conducted about the criteria and decision processes for grants and publications. Six standards known as the Glassick’s criteria provide a tangible measure by which educators can assess the quality and structure of their education research—clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation, and reflective critique. Ultimately, the promise of education research is to realize advances and innovation for learners that are informed by evidence-based knowledge and practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

“Just Tell Us the Formula!” Co-Constructing the Relevance of Education in Freshman Learning Communities

Reconciling educational research traditions

Building the Infrastructure to Improve the Use and Usefulness of Research in Education

Boyer EL. Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1990.

Google Scholar  

Munoz-Najar Galvez S, Heiberger R, McFarland D. Paradigm wars revisited: a cartography of graduate research in the field of education (1980–2010). Am Educ Res J. 2020;57(2):612–52.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ringsted C, Hodges B, Scherpbier A. ‘The research compass’: an introduction to research in medical education: AMEE Guide no. 56. Med Teach. 2011;33(9):695–709.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bordage G. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ. 2009;43(4):312–9.

Varpio L, Paradis E, Uijtdehaage S, Young M. The distinctions between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework. Acad Med. 2020;95(7):989–94.

Ravitch SM, Riggins M. Reason & Rigor: how conceptual frameworks guide research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2017.

Park YS, Zaidi Z, O'Brien BC. RIME foreword: what constitutes science in educational research? Applying rigor in our research approaches. Acad Med. 2020;95(11S):S1–5.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Writing a winning application—You’re your niche. 2020a. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/find-your-niche . Accessed 23 Jan 2022.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Writing a winning application—conduct a self-assessment. 2020b. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/winning-app-self-assessment . Accessed 23 Jan 2022.

Glassick CE, Huber MT, Maeroff GI. Scholarship assessed: evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey Bass; 1997.

Simpson D, Meurer L, Braza D. Meeting the scholarly project requirement-application of scholarship criteria beyond research. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4(1):111–2. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-11-00310.1 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fincher RME, Simpson DE, Mennin SP, Rosenfeld GC, Rothman A, McGrew MC et al. The council of academic societies task force on scholarship. Scholarship in teaching: an imperative for the 21st century. Academic Medicine. 2000;75(9):887–94.

Hutchings P, Shulman LS. The scholarship of teaching new elaborations and developments. Change. 1999;11–5.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Pharmacy, Notre Dame of Maryland University, Baltimore, MD, USA

Sharon K. Park

University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA

Khanh-Van Le-Bucklin & Julie Youm

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sharon K. Park .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

April S. Fitzgerald

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

Gundula Bosch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Park, S.K., Le-Bucklin, KV., Youm, J. (2023). Introduction to Education Research. In: Fitzgerald, A.S., Bosch, G. (eds) Education Scholarship in Healthcare. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38534-6_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38534-6_2

Published : 29 November 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-38533-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-38534-6

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Using research to improve education under the Every Student Succeeds Act

Subscribe to the center for economic security and opportunity newsletter, mark dynarski mark dynarski owner - pemberton research, former brookings expert.

December 10, 2015

• 14 min read

Executive summary

The Every Student Succeeds Act, the new reauthorization of the federal program designed to support the education of disadvantaged students, requires that states and districts use evidence-based interventions to support school improvement. Researchers have studied the effectiveness of education programs for decades and that effort is now producing substantial gains in knowledge of what works and what doesn’t.  But educators note that this kind of research is not as useful as it could be for them because it is conducted in settings that differ from theirs. They are interested in research that fits their contexts.

Recently, another kind of research paradigm has emerged in which researchers work directly with educators to identify and implement paths for improvement within particular settings. This new kind of research—which has come to be known as improvement science—operates in local contexts of districts and schools. But it faces a capacity problem because there are relatively few researchers participating or able to participate in these efforts compared to the number of districts and schools that could benefit from more evidence-based programs and practices.

The two approaches need to be coordinated. In the first stage, research would identify effective programs and practices writ large. In the second stage, districts or schools not meeting targets or objectives would work with improvement-science teams to adapt those research-proven programs to local contexts.

The ‘Every Student Succeeds Act’ also creates a new program to support research on innovations in education. Using the existing infrastructure of the regional lab network can help identify priorities for this new research on innovations. The priorities should fill gaps in knowledge and proven programs that states and districts have identified as important to them. 

Scaling up effective education policies or programs is in everyone’s interests. Who argues that education should not improve? And findings from research often underscore where improvements are possible and where education can be more effective. But scaling up findings from research—having the findings lead to actions on a larger scale—is a challenge.

The issue is partly the size and dispersion of authority of the public-education enterprise, with its 15,000 districts, 65,000 schools, 4 million teachers, and 55 million students. For an improvement to find its way into even a fraction of this enterprise counts as progress and might be seen as miraculous.

How does the process of adoption appear to be working?  Do improvements identified by research find their way into the enterprise at all? Brian Jacob’s recent note here on Evidence Speaks commented on learning from research ‘failures,’ which arise when evidence emerges that a promising idea did not improve education outcomes when tested rigorously. A related question is whether the enterprise learns from research successes, when evidence emerges that a promising idea works. Do these successes become education practices?

The answer is hard to know because the extent to which research finds its way into schools and classrooms has not been measured. When educators are asked about research, however, they point to their perception of research having a “local perspective” as one reason for caution about using the research for programmatic decisions. They give more credence to findings that arise in contexts similar to their districts or schools compared to findings emerging elsewhere. [i]

This ‘localism,’ for lack of a better word, combined with limited avenues for research dissemination, has led to new forms of research in which researchers work directly with educators to develop local practices and programs. In the words of one of its foremost practitioners, this research takes a ‘design-engineering-development’ perspective, working from the ground up to tackle educators’ problems. [ii] This approach is now known as ‘improvement science.’ [iii]

This local approach sounds like an ideal way to move research closer to what educators value, program development and evidence about outcomes that occurs in their particular schools or districts and that results from a researcher-educator collaboration.  Maybe there will come a day in which most schools or school districts are sufficiently resourced to have their own program development and evaluation teams. But even then local improvement science would need to be a complement to research efforts to identify effective practices, not a substitute for them. Working with educators to promote more effective reading or math instruction, for example, needs to begin with sound research on reading and math instruction. Improvement science then can focus on encouraging and promoting the take-up of that sound research, working with educators to adapt what are believed to be key ingredients of the approaches. We’ll return to that two-stage approach below.

Identifying effective practices is not the same as implementing them

The dominant approach to studying a question of whether a practice or program improves an education outcome is known as ‘effectiveness’ research. Often experiments are used to answer the question—Are teachers who attend these workshops more effective? Does this dropout-prevention program keep students in school? Does using this software lead to stronger math skills? There are different kinds of methodologies that address effectiveness, including randomized controlled trials, regression-discontinuity designs, well-designed quasi-experimental studies, and single-case designs, but it is convenient to use ‘experiments’ as a term for all of these ways of measuring the effects of programs, practices, or policies.

Experiments were relatively uncommon in education, certainly compared to their use in medicine, until 2002, when Congress created the Institute of Education Sciences. Since 2002, IES has funded hundreds of experiments and disseminated their results, mostly through the web and through workshops, webinars, and social media channels. It also disseminates syntheses of research and appraisals of individual effectiveness studies through its ‘What Works Clearinghouse,’ by way of the web and through the other channels. The information reaches a large audience. Practice guides produced by the What Works Clearinghouse are downloaded about 22,000 times a month. One of the Clearinghouse’s most popular practice guides was downloaded nearly 90,000 times in its first month of release. [iv]

For disseminating research findings cheaply, it’s hard to top this model. In principle, every educator can hear about every finding of relevance to them for the cost of looking up a web page or watching a recorded webinar on YouTube. But whether the findings actually change educator practices is not known. Educators could be ignoring the findings and continuing to do what they are doing. The Government Accountability Office expressed concerns about this possible disconnect in its recent review of IES. [v]

Findings from experiments are information, but changing practices to do something with the findings is implementation. As Pfeffer and Sutton (2000) have written, knowing is a long way from doing. [vi] ‘Improvement science’ strives to close the gap between knowing and doing. At a risk of oversimplifying, improvement science poses a model—such as the ‘design-engineering-development’ one mentioned above—in which researchers work directly with educators in districts and schools. The focus is on using rapid tests of change and ‘Plan-Do-Study-Act’ cycles to learn by doing, and connecting participants (teachers, principals, administrators) through networks to expedite their learning.

For example, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching is collaborating with community colleges to promote success in math, with urban school districts to improve skills of their new teachers, and with school districts and organizations to design classroom experiences that promote ‘academic mindsets’ and support students to develop their own learning strategies. [vii] Vanderbilt University is collaborating with school districts to enhance middle-school math curricula and create new kinds of professional development and teacher networks to improve math teaching. [viii]

By its nature, improvement science focuses intensively within districts. That focus is a plus because researchers and educators are at the table, but also a minus because there are not enough researchers to be at the many tables that need them. There are about four times more school districts than higher-education institutions, and many higher-education institutions have no one with the time or, in many cases, interest or expertise, to anchor the improvement science effort at a local school district. Unless improvement science can generate knowledge of how schools and districts can improve without researchers being involved in thousands of school districts, the limited number of researchers essentially precludes scaling up. And if the knowledge improvement science generates in a few districts has to be disseminated to many others, improvement science ends up being in the same place as effectiveness research: educators might not hear about the findings or might view them as too distant to be useful in their local areas.

So findings from experiments that are intended to produce generalizable results can be inexpensively disseminated but might not be used by educators, and improvement science may yield more local knowledge but cannot operate widely because of capacity and generalizability issues. The key is for effectiveness research to be more ‘localized’—more applicable to educators in their schools and districts — without it necessarily having to be produced locally.

Experiments can be more useful to educators

Depending on the intervention or policy being considered, a district or school needs to first learn of an improvement—for example, a relevant research finding that has been published, written about in the media, or passed along to local educators through word of mouth. Then, the educators’ questions become local. How much did staff in the study differ from staff in their schools? Did characteristics of students have a role in the experiment’s findings? Are the powers-that-be in the local education system, including its teachers, open to the type of program that generated the positive research findings? Does the state or district have the authority to implement the program that the research studied? Can school or district afford the out-of-pocket expense for licenses, fees, or materials, and the staff time to learn how to do the program?

These are a lot of judgments, and a significant gap opens up between how a researcher may view the findings—‘the study shows that the approach worked’—and how an educator might view the findings—‘it worked for somebody but I don’t know if it can work for me.’ What a researcher views as evidence becomes what an educator views as one variable in a risk equation when the risk itself is avoidable by sticking to the tried and true.

Move the approaches closer together

Both effectiveness research and improvement science can add to knowledge and both approaches can be useful. Both need to measure effects, provide information to prospective adopters about how to implement the program or approach, and be explicit about how much it will cost.

Scaling up should be the starting point in thinking about how to design experiments and improvement science efforts. If studies were designed from the view of scaling up, they would focus on developing information prospective adopters need: how large are effects, how can the program be implemented, and how much is it likely to cost? Approaches to effectiveness studies vary somewhat in how they measure effects, but they vary much more in how they study costs and implementation. Costs are rarely analyzed, and while some experiments report several hundred pages of detailed information about implementation, others describe implementation in a report chapter and many published papers simply do not mention it. [ix] The risks educators face in implementing programs shown by research to be effective would be mitigated if research on implementation focused on creating a manual on how to carry out the program. Researchers developed a process for ‘manualization’ more than a decade ago, but that process is rarely used in studies of education programs. [x]

Using a two-stage model for generating evidence on effective, implementable interventions will help put experiments and improvement science into balance. In the first stage, districts and schools would be able to learn about recent research on effective practices, how to implement those practices, and their costs. Currently there is no organization doing all that is envisioned here for the first stage of the model. The What Works Clearinghouse and Best Evidence Encyclopedia provide information on evidence of effects but little information about implementation and cost. [xi] This is not for lack of interest on their part; most research studies and reports provide too little information about implementation and cost, and standards are not in place for how to assess what is provided. Efforts to document implementation and cost need to be increased for this stage to be useful.

The second stage is improvement science. Districts that use evidence from the first stage but are not satisfied with the results or do not meet targets can work with improvement scientists to adapt interventions with evidence of effectiveness and monitor the results. The second stage needs only enough improvement-science capacity to work with districts that are committed to it. This may still be too many districts and not enough capacity, but starting from the total number of districts certainly overwhelms capacity, as noted above, whereas thinking of improvement science as targeted moves it into the realm of practicality.

The federal role in the two-stage model

The ‘ Every Student Succeeds Act’ gives states responsibility to develop accountability structures. These structures need to include ‘comprehensive support and improvement plans’ for schools that need improvement, and these plans must include evidence-based interventions. Using the two-stage approach—with districts and schools moving to the second stage if improvement targets are not met—is a sensible means to develop a pool of evidence-based interventions that meet state needs.

Schools also might move into the second stage if they fall in the 5 percent of schools for which Congress is requiring states to intervene. (States can choose to intervene in more schools, but not less than 5 percent.) The constellation of issues these schools face is an opportunity for educators and researchers to work together to identify improvements and implement new approaches. Having improvement-science teams working with schools that are most in need of improvement is a reasonable way to blend the strengths of the two approaches.

The two-stage model also can be connected to the new ‘Innovation Research’ section of the Act (section 4611). The section calls for the U.S. Department of Education to fund research to develop, test, and scale effective practices. The language does not indicate how funding priorities are to be identified.    

One way to do so is to ground priorities in expressed state and local needs. For example, if language acquisition is a need in rural areas of the Southwest, and research identified in the first stage is thought to be inadequate, some of the innovation grants could be used to fill that gap. Similarly, states and districts might express needs to bolster reading, math, or kindergarten readiness, or any number of other objectives. The regional lab network already has an infrastructure for assessing needs at state and district levels. It can have a role in tying these needs to innovation priorities and monitoring whether needs change over time. The Institute of Education Sciences within the department, which operates the labs under contract, is well positioned to work with the labs to identify innovation priorities emerging from local needs. Labs also can conduct research to meet needs that do not become innovation priorities.

Education research is sparsely funded and is unlikely to enjoy the resources of the National Institutes of Health any time soon. Effectiveness research and improvement science need to be deployed in concert to make the best use of these scarce resources.

[i] The most common theme that emerged from a survey of educators about hurdles in their use of evidence was ‘localism.’ See Nelson, S., J. Leffler, and Barbara Hansen. “Toward a Research Agenda for Undestanding and Improving the Use of Research Evidence. Accessed December 8, 2015: http://educationnorthwest.org/sites/default/files/toward-a-research-agenda.pdf .

[ii] See Bryk, A., and L Gomez. “Ruminations on Reinventing an R&D Capacity for Education Improvement.” Accessed December 8, 2015: http://cdn.carnegiefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/DED_paper.pdf .

[iii] See ‘Learning To Improve: How America’s Schools Can Get Better At Getting Better,’ by Anthony Bryk, Louis Gomez, Alicia Grumow, and Paul LeMahieu (2015), Bryk and Gomez’s 2008 paper , and the National Academies monograph laying out a design for the Strategic Education Research Partnership. Cohen-Vogel and her colleagues provide a succinct recounting of the emergence of improvement science against the backdrop of experiments. See L. Cohen-Vogel et al., “Implementing Educational Innovations At Scale: Transforming Researchers into Continuous Improvement Scientists.” Educational Policy, vol. 29(1), 257-277. Roots of improvement science can be found in the work of Donald Berwick in health-care, beginning in the eighties. Berwick, D. “The Science of Improvement.” Journal of the American Medical Association, 2008, 299(10), pp.1182-1184.

[iv] Full disclosure: I directed the What Works Clearinghouse from 2008 to 2010, when practice guides were first released, and I chaired a panel that produced one of the first guides. I continue to be involved with the Clearinghouse in various roles.

[v] IES recently funded two research centers to explore these topics but it will be several years before findings are known.

[vi] Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert Sutton. ‘The Knowing-Doing Gap.’ Harvard Business School Press: 2000.

[vii] http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/in-action/student-agency-improvement-community/

[viii] http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/departments/tl/teaching_and_learning_research/mist/index.php

[ix] For examples, see the Reading First study reported here , the study of teacher induction programs reported here , and the study of supplemental services reported here .

[x] For more on manualization, see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4126244/ and Carroll KM, Nuro KF. One size cannot fit all: A stage model for psychotherapy manual development. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice. 2002; 9(4): 396–406.

[xi] http://www.bestevidence.org/

Education Technology

Economic Studies

Center for Economic Security and Opportunity

Lydia Wilbard

August 29, 2024

Zachary Billot, Annie Vong, Nicole Dias Del Valle, Emily Markovich Morris

August 26, 2024

Brian A. Jacob, Cristina Stanojevich

Scientific Research in Education (2002)

Chapter: 1 introduction, 1 introduction.

Born of egalitarian instincts, the grand experiment of U.S. public education began over 200 years ago. The scope and complexity of its agenda is apparent:

to teach the fundamental skills of reading, writing, and arithmetic; to nurture critical thinking; to convey a general fund of knowledge; to develop creativity and aesthetic perception; to assist students in choosing and preparing for vocations in a highly complex economy; to inculcate ethical character and good citizenship; to develop physical and emotional well-being; and to nurture the ability, the intelligence, and the will to continue on with education as far as any particular individual wants to go (Cremin, 1990, p. 42).

The educational system is no less complex. Today the United States sends more than 45 million children to schools that are governed by 15,000 independent school districts in the 50 states (and territories); it boasts thousands of colleges and universities and myriad adult and informal learning centers. The nation takes pride in reaffirming the constitutional limitations on the federal role in education, yet recently has tentatively embraced the idea of national standards. The system is one of dualities: a national ethos with local control; commitment to excellence and aspiration to equality; and faith in tradition and appetite for innovation.

The context in which this system operates is also changing. The United States is no longer a manufacturing society in which people with little

formal education can find moderate- to high-paying jobs. It is now a service- and knowledge-driven economy in which high levels of literacy and numeracy are required of almost everyone to achieve a good standard of living (National Research Council, 1999a; Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, 1991; Murnane and Levy, 1996; Judy and D’Amico, 1997; Packer, 1997). Moreover, to address the challenges of, for example, low-performing schools, the “achievement gap,” and language diversity, educators today require new knowledge to reengineer schools in effective ways.

To meet these new demands, rigorous, sustained, scientific research in education is needed. In today’s rapidly changing economic and technological environment, schooling cannot be improved by relying on folk wisdom about how students learn and how schools should be organized. No one would think of designing a rocket to the moon or wiping out a widespread disease by relying on untested hunches; likewise, one cannot expect to improve education without research.

Knowledge is needed on many topics, including: how to motivate children to succeed; how effective schools and classrooms are organized to foster learning; the roots of teenage alienation and violence; how human and economic resources can be used to support effective instruction; effective strategies for preparing teachers and school administrators; the interaction among what children learn in the context of their families, schools, colleges, and the media; the relationship between educational policy and the economic development of society; and the ways that the effects of schooling are moderated by culture and language. In order that society can learn how to improve its efforts to mount effective programs, rigorous evaluations of innovations must also be conducted. The education research community has produced important insights on many of these topics (we trace some of them in Chapter 2 ). However, in contrast to physics and other older sciences, many areas of education are relatively new domains for scientific study, and there is much work yet to do.

Everyone has opinions about schooling, because they were all once in school. But in this ever more complex world, in which educational problems tend to be portrayed with the urgency of national survival, there is (again) an understandable attraction to the rationality and disciplined style of science. Simply put, for some problems citizens, educators, administrators,

policy makers, and other concerned individuals want to hear about hard evidence, they want impartiality, and they want decisions to rest on reasonable, rigorous, and scientific deliberation. And how can the quality of science be judged? This is our topic.

To set the stage for this discussion, this chapter provides historical and philosophical background and describes how the current undertaking fits into that broader context.

HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL CONTEXT

Education research in the United States is barely 100 years old, and its history is not a simple tale of progress. The study of education drew heavily on the emerging social sciences, which had found a place in research universities at the beginning of the twentieth century. That foothold was often tenuous, however, with intense debates about the essential character of these “sciences.” Many in academic circles sought to model the social sciences on the physical sciences, while others—regarding this as “physics envy”—insisted that broader accounts of the nature of science had to be adopted in order to encompass adequately the range of phenomena in these newer domains (Lagemann, 2000).

Education research began as a branch of psychology at a time when psychology was still a part of philosophy. In the first decade of the twentieth century, psychology was emerging as a distinct field, as were the budding fields of educational psychology, history of education, and educational administration. By the 1930s, subfields of work that centered on different subjects of the school curriculum—notably reading, mathematics, and social studies—had also emerged. As education research continued to develop new methods and questions and in response to developments in the social and behavioral sciences, research fields proliferated (Lagemann, 2000; Cronbach and Suppes, 1969).

From the beginning, the field has been plagued by skepticism concerning the value and validity of developing a “science of education.” This attitude was evident as long ago as the late nineteenth century, when universities began to establish departments and schools of education. A chorus of complaints arose from faculty in the arts and sciences concerning the inclusion of scholars intending to systematically study the organizational

and pedagogical aspects of schooling. Ellwood Patterson Cubberley, a school superintendent in San Diego who just before the end of the nineteenth century was appointed chair of the department of education (later the School of Education) at Stanford University, arrived on campus ready and eager to help improve education by generating studies of the history and current administration of the nation’s public schools. Despite his enthusiasm and extraordinary productivity, his colleagues refused to acknowledge that “the study of education could be validly considered either an art or a science.” On the opposite side of the country Paul Hanus, Harvard’s first scholar of education, faced similar skepticism. George Herbert Palmer liked to quip that when “Professor Hanus came to Cambridge, he bore the onus of his subject.” (quoted in Lagemann, 2000, p. 72). Indeed, a set of attitudes toward education research that one might call “anti-educationism” has been a constant to the present day.

Despite this skepticism, the enterprise grew apace. For example, by the end of the twentieth century, the American Educational Research Association (AERA) had well over 20,000 members (roughly 5,500 of whom report research as their primary professional responsibility), organized into 12 divisions (e.g., administration, curriculum, learning and instruction, teacher education), some with a number of subsections, and about 140 special interest groups (American Educational Research Association, 2000). This growth in the number of scholars has been notable because it occurred in the absence of a proportional increase in federal funding. And as a percentage of the total amount spent on public elementary and secondary education, the nation as a whole invested less than 0.1 percent in research (President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology, 1997).

There are several reasons for the lack of public support for education research. Problems include research quality (Lagemann, 2000; Kaestle, 1993; Sroufe, 1997; Levin and O’Donnell, 1999), fragmentation of the effort (National Research Council, 1992), and oversimplified expectations about the role of research in education reform (National Research Council, 2001d). Another key problem has been the sharp divide between education research and scholarship and the practice of education in schools and other settings. This disconnect has several historic roots: researchers and practitioners have typically worked in different settings; most researchers

have been men, while most teachers have been women; and teacher education has typically relied on practical experience rather than research. Operating in different worlds, researchers and practitioners did not develop the kinds of cross fertilization that are necessary in fields where research and practice should develop reciprocally—medicine and agriculture faced similar problems in their early development (Lagemann, 2000; Mitchell and Haro, 1999).

The epistemology of education research—that is, understanding about its core nature as a scientific endeavor—has also evolved significantly since its early days (see Dewey [1929] for an insightful early treatment). Five dimensions are particularly relevant to this report: the emergence of refined models of human nature; progress in understanding how scientific knowledge accumulates; recognition that education is a contested field of study; new developments in research designs and methods; and increased understanding of the nature of scientific rigor or quality. We comment briefly on each below and expand on several of them in the remaining chapters.

Models of Human Nature

In the decades when scientific research in education was gathering momentum, the most prevalent “models of man” and of human social life were derived from the mechanistic, positivistic sciences and philosophy of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The most famous example—the focus of numerous theoretical and methodological battles—was B.F. Skinner’s behaviorism (Skinner, 1953/1965, 1972). Following the work of the logical positivist philosophers, who believed that talking about entities that were not available for direct inspection (such as thoughts, values, ideals, and beliefs) was literally meaningless, Skinner’s research assumed that human behavior could be explained completely in terms of observable causes— for example, through schedules of reinforcement and punishment. Although Skinner’s work laid the foundation for modern theories of behavior (see National Research Council, 2001b), the behaviorist paradigm excluded important phenomena from inquiry at the outset of the study. Today, it is recognized that many phenomena of interest across the domains of the social sciences and education research result from voluntary human actions (or from the unintended or aggregate consequences of such actions) even

though direct measurement of such phenomena is typically not possible. 1 Thus, research on human action must take into account individuals’ understandings, intentions, and values as well as their observable behavior (Phillips and Burbules, 2000; Phillips, 2000.)

The development of alternative perspectives on the nature of humans that are more inclusive than the once-dominant behaviorist perspective should be regarded as both highly promising and something of a cautionary tale for education research. The moral of the rise and at least partial fall of behaviorism warns the scientific community to resist the tendency to take a single model (whether behavioral, cognitive, or interpretive), derived in relation to a limited range of phenomena, and extrapolate it as appropriate across all the social and behavioral sciences. There is room in the mansion of science for more than one model, and also for the creative tension produced when rival models are deployed (see, for an example, Greeno et al., 1996).

Progress in Science

If appreciation for multiple perspectives on the nature of humans has enhanced efforts to develop scientific research, so has a better, more sophisticated awareness of what “progress” in science means and how it is achieved. Linear models of progress have been put aside in favor of more jagged ones. Mistakes are made as science moves forward. The process is not infallible (see Lakatos and Musgrave, 1970); science advances through professional criticism and self-correction. Indeed, we show in Chapter 2 that this jagged progression of scientific progress is typical across the range of physical and social sciences as well as education research.

A long history of the philosophy of science also teaches that there is no algorithm for scientific progress (and, consequently, we certainly do not attempt to offer one in this report). Despite its optimistic-sounding title, even Sir Karl Popper’s (1959) classic work, The Logic of Scientific Discovery , makes the point strongly that there is no logical process by which researchers

can make discoveries in the first place. Popper also argues that knowledge always remains conjectural and potentially revisable. Over time, erroneous theories and inaccurate findings are detected and eliminated, largely by the process of testing (seeking refutations) that Popper himself described (Popper, 1965; Newton-Smith, 1981).

Education—A Highly Contested Field

While knowledge in the physical and social sciences and education has accumulated over time, the highly contested nature of education has had an effect on the progress of scientific research (Lagemann, 1996). One reason education is highly contested is because values play a central role: people’s hopes and expectations for educating the nation’s young are integrally tied to their hopes and expectations about the direction of society and its development (Hirst and Peters, 1970; Dewey, 1916). Obviously, different people see these matters differently. As in other fields that have such a public character, social ideals inevitably influence the research that is done, the way it is framed and conducted, and the policies and practices that are based on research findings. And decisions about education are sometimes instituted with no scientific basis at all, but rather are derived directly from ideology or deeply held beliefs about social justice or the good of society in general.

A second reason that education is contested is that rarely, if ever, does an education intervention—one important focus of study in the broader domain of education research—have only one main effect. Both positive and negative unintended consequences are often important (Cronbach et al., 1980). Education interventions have costs—in money, time, and effort: making a judgment on the effectiveness of a treatment is complex and requires taking account of myriad factors.

In short, education research will inevitably reflect and have to face many different values, and it will as a consequence produce complex findings. Ultimately, policy makers and practicing educators will have to formulate specific policies and practices on the basis of values and practical wisdom as well as education research. Science-based education research will affect, but typically not solely determine, these policies and practices.

Research Design and Method

Research in education has been enhanced by the recent invention of methods: new observational techniques, new experimental designs, new methods of data gathering and analysis, and new software packages for managing and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data. Rapid advances in computer technologies have also dramatically increased the capacity to store and analyze large data sets. As new methods are developed, they lead to the identification of new questions, and the investigation of these, in turn, can demand that new methods be devised. We illustrate this dynamic relationship between methods, theories, empirical findings, and problems in Chapter 2 and describe common designs and methods employed to address classes of research questions in Chapter 5 .

Scientific Evidence and Rigor

In thinking about the ways that a research conjecture or hypothesis may be supported by evidence, many philosophers of science have found it fruitful to adopt a term that was featured in John Dewey’s (1938) treatise, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (see, e.g., Phillips and Burbules, 2000). Dewey wrote of warrants for making assertions or knowledge claims. In science, measurements and experimental results, observational or interview data, and mathematical and logical analysis all can be part of the warrant—or case—that supports a theory, hypothesis, or judgment. However, warrants are always revocable depending on the findings of subsequent inquiry. Beliefs that are strongly warranted or supported at one time (e.g., the geocentric model of the solar system) may later need to be abandoned (for a heliocentric model). Evidence that is regarded as authoritative at one time (e.g., ice ages are caused by the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit) can be shown later to be faulty (see Chapter 3 ). Science progresses both by advancing new theories or hypotheses and by eliminating theories, hypotheses, or previously accepted facts that have been refuted by newly acquired evidence judged to be definitive.

To make progress possible, then, theories, hypotheses, or conjectures must be stated in clear, unambiguous, and empirically testable terms. Evidence must be linked to them through a clear chain of reasoning. Moreover, the community of inquirers must be, in Karl Popper’s expres-

sion, “open societies” that encourage the free flow of critical comment. Researchers have an obligation to avoid seeking only such evidence that apparently supports their favored hypotheses; they also must seek evidence that is incompatible with these hypotheses even if such evidence, when found, would refute their ideas. Thus, it is the scientific community that enables scientific progress, not, as Nobel Prize-winning physicist Polykarp Kusch once declared, adherence to any one scientific method (Mills, 2000 [emphasis added]). We emphasize this notion of community in the scientific enterprise throughout this report.

These points about the nature of evidence constitute the essence of our account of rigor in inquiry; these ideas are fleshed out in the rest of this report. Importantly, our vision of scientific quality and rigor applies to the two forms of education research that have traditionally been labeled “quantitative” and “qualitative,” as well as to two forms of research that have been labeled “basic” and “applied.” These dichotomies have historically formed fault lines within and outside academia. As our brief discussion of the emergence of schools of education suggests, the perceived hierarchy of basic or “pure” science versus its messier cousin—applied research—has isolated the field of education research from other sciences. Similarly, sharp distinctions between quantitative and qualitative inquiry have divided the field. In particular, the current trend of schools of education to favor qualitative methods, often at the expense of quantitative methods, has invited criticism. Real problems stem from these “either/or” kinds of preferences, and we believe that both categorizations are neither well defined nor constructive. Thus, beyond a brief discussion that follows, we do not dwell on them in the report.

It is common to see quantitative and qualitative methods described as being fundamentally different modes of inquiry—even as being different paradigms embodying quite different epistemologies (Howe, 1988; Phillips, 1987). We regard this view as mistaken. Because we see quantitative and qualitative scientific inquiry as being epistemologically quite similar (King, Keohane, and Verba, 1994; Howe and Eisenhart, 1990), and as we recognize that both can be pursued rigorously, we do not distinguish between them as being different forms of inquiry. We believe the distinction is outmoded, and it does not map neatly in a one-to-one fashion onto any group or groupings of disciplines.

We also believe the distinction between basic and applied science has outlived its usefulness. This distinction often served to denigrate applied work (into which category education research was usually placed). But as Stokes (1997) in Pasteur’s Quadrant made clear, great scientific work has often been inspired by the desire to solve a pressing practical problem— much of the cutting-edge work of the scientist who inspired the book’s title had this origin. What makes research scientific is not the motive for carrying it out, but the manner in which it is carried out.

Finally, it is important to note that the question of what constitutes scientific rigor and quality has been the topic of much debate within the education research community itself since the nineteenth century. Two extreme views in the field’s complex history are worthy of brief elaboration. First, some extreme “postmodernists” have questioned whether there is any value in scientific evidence in education whatsoever (see the discussion of these issues in Gross, Levitt, and Lewis, 1997). At the other end of the spectrum, there are those who would define scientific research in education quite narrowly, suggesting that it is only quantitative measures and tight controls that unambiguously define science (see, e.g., Finn, 2001). We do not believe that either view is constructive, and in our estimation they have both compounded the “awful reputation” (Kaestle, 1993) of education research and diminished its promise.

PUBLIC AND PROFESSIONAL INTEREST IN EDUCATION RESEARCH

While federal funding for education research has waxed and (mostly) waned, the federal government has been clear and consistent in its call for scientific research into education. The Cooperative Research Act of 1954 first authorized the then Office of Education to fund education research (National Research Council, 1992). The National Institute of Education (NIE) was created in 1971 to provide “leadership in the conduct and support of scientific inquiry into education” (General Education Provisions Act, Sec. 405; cited in National Research Council, 1992). Likewise, as NIE was incorporated into the U.S. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), the quest for the scientific conduct of education research was front and center (Department of Education Organization Act, 1979; see National Research Council, 1992).

The federal government has not been alone in calling for scientific research into education. This call has been echoed in a series of reports and recommendations from the National Academies’ research arm, the National Research Council (NRC). In 1958, the NRC’s report, A Proposed Organization for Research in Education, recommended establishing a research organization for the advancement and improvement of education. A 1977 report, Fundamental Research and the Process of Education , called for fundamental research about educational processes. A 1986 report, Creating a Center for Education Statistics : A Time for Action , led to what many regard as the successful overhaul of the federal education statistical agency. And in the 1992 report, Research and Education Reform: Roles for the Office of Educational Research and Improvement , the NRC called for a complete overhaul of the federal research agency, criticizing its focus on “quick solutions to poorly understood problems” (National Research Council, 1992, p. viii). The report recommended creating an infrastructure that would support and foster scientific research into learning and cognitive processes underlying education, curriculum, teaching, and education reform.

What, then, warrants another NRC report on scientific research in education? First, as we argue above, the nation’s commitment to improve the education of all children requires continuing efforts to improve its research capacity. Questions concerning how to do this are currently being debated as Congress considers ways to organize a federal education research agency. Indeed, H.R. 4875—the so-called “Castle bill” to reauthorize OERI—has provided us with an opportunity to revisit historic questions about the “science of education” in a modern policy context. This bill includes definitions—crafted in the political milieu—of scientific concepts to be applied to education research, reflecting yet again a skepticism about the quality of current scholarship. (We discuss these definitions briefly in Chapter 6 .) Our report is specifically intended to provide an articulation of the core nature of scientific inquiry in education from the research community.

The rapid growth of the education research community in recent years has resulted in the production of many studies, articles, journal publications, books and opinion pieces associated with academics, but that are not necessarily scientific in character. Moreover, the field of education researchers is itself a diverse mix of professionals with varying levels and types of research training, and they often bring quite different orientations

to their work. These multiple perspectives are in many ways indicative of the health of the enterprise, but they also render the development of a cohesive community with self-regulating norms difficult (Lagemann, 2000). In this spirit, we intend this report to provide a balanced account of scientific quality and rigor that sparks self-reflection within the research community about its roles and responsibilities for promoting scientific quality and advancing scientific understanding.

Finally, perhaps more than ever before, citizens, business leaders, politicians, and educators want credible information on which to evaluate and guide today’s reform and tomorrow’s education for all students. Driven by the performance goals inherent in standards-based reforms, they seek a working consensus on the challenges confronting education, on what works in what contexts and what doesn’t, and on why what works does work. Simply put, they seek trustworthy, scientific evidence on which to base decisions about education.

COMMITTEE CHARGE AND APPROACH

The committee was assembled in the fall of 2000 and was asked to complete its report by the fall of 2001. The charge from the committee’s sponsor, the National Educational Policy and Priorities Board of the U.S. Department of Education, was as follows:

This study will review and synthesize recent literature on the science and practice of scientific education research and consider how to support high quality science in a federal education research agency.

To organize its deliberations, the committee translated this mandate into three framing questions:

What are the principles of scientific quality in education research?

To address this question, the committee considered how the purposes, norms, methods, and traditions of scientific inquiry translated in the study of education. The committee also considered what scientific quality meant, both in individual research projects and in programs of research, to better

understand how knowledge could be organized, synthesized, and generalized. Furthermore, we sought to understand how scientific education research is similar to, and different from, other scientific endeavors.

In approaching this question, we recognize that existing education research has suffered from uneven quality. This statement is not very startling, because the same could be said about virtually every area of scientific research. Although it is clear that the reputation of education research is quite poor (Kaestle, 1993; Sroufe, 1997; H.R. 4875), we do not believe it is productive to attempt to catalogue “bad research.” Instead, we have found it useful to focus on constructive questions: How much good research has been produced? Why isn’t there more good research? How could more good research be generated? We address these kinds of questions in the report.

How can a federal research agency promote and protect scientific quality in the education research it supports?

The committee did not conduct an evaluation of OERI. Rather, the committee approached the general question of the federal role from the perspective of scientific quality and rigor. We sought to identify the key design principles for a federal agency charged with fostering the scientific integrity of the research it funds and with promoting the accumulation of science-based knowledge over time. Among the issues the committee explored were how research quality is affected by internal infrastructure mechanisms, such as peer review, as well as external forces, such as political influence and fiscal support, and how the federal role can build the capacity of the field to do high-quality scientific work.

Here again, our approach is constructive and forward looking. We attempt to strike a balance between understanding the realities of the federal bureaucracy and the history of an education research agency within it while avoiding the detailed prescriptions of previous and current proposals to reform the existing federal role. We hope to make a unique contribution by focusing on “first principles” that form the core of scientific education research at the federal level and providing guidance about how these principles might be implemented in practice. Some of our suggestions are already in place; some are not. Some will be easy to implement; others will

be more difficult. Our intent is to provide a set of principles that can serve as a guidepost for improvement over time.

How can research-based knowledge in education accumulate?

The committee believes that rigor in individual scientific investigations and a strong federal infrastructure for supporting such work are required for research in education to generate and nurture a robust knowledge base. Thus, in addressing this question, we focused on mechanisms that support the accumulation of knowledge from science-based education research—the organization and synthesis of knowledge generated from multiple investigations. The committee considered the roles of the professional research community, the practitioner communities, and the federal government. Since we view the accumulation of scientific knowledge as the ultimate goal of research, this issue weaves throughout the report.

Assumptions

Taking our cue from much of the historical and philosophical context we describe in this chapter, we make five core assumptions in approaching our work.

First, although science is often perceived as embodying a concise, unified view of research, the history of scientific inquiry attests to the fact there is no one method or process that unambiguously defines science. The committee has therefore taken an inclusive view of “the science of education” or “the educational sciences” in its work. This broad view, however, should not be misinterpreted to suggest “anything goes.” Indeed, the primary purpose of this report is to provide guidance for what constitutes rigorous scientific research in education. Thus, we identify a set of principles that apply to physical and social science research and to science-based education research ( Chapter 3 ). In conjunction with a set of features that characterize education ( Chapter 4 ), these principles help define the domain of scientific research in education, roughly delineating what is in the domain and what is not. We argue that education research, like research in the social, biological, and physical realms, faces—as a final “court of appeal”— the test of conceptual and empirical adequacy over time. An educational

hypothesis or conjecture must be judged in the light of the best array of relevant qualitative or quantitative data that can be garnered. If a hypothesis is insulated from such testing, then it cannot be considered as falling within the ambit of science.

A second assumption is that many scientific studies in education and other fields will not pan out. Research is like oil exploration—there are, on average, many dry holes for every successful well. This is not because initial decisions on where to dig were necessarily misguided. Competent oil explorers, like competent scientists, presumably used the best information available to conduct their work. Dry holes are found because there is considerable uncertainty in exploration of any kind. Sometimes exploration companies gain sufficient knowledge from a series of dry holes in an area to close it down. And in many cases, failure to find wells can shed light on why apparently productive holes turned out to be dry; in other words, the process of failing to make a grand discovery can itself be very instructive. Other times they doggedly pursue an area because the science suggests there is still a reasonable chance of success. Scientific progress advances in much the same way, as we describe in Chapter 2 .

Third, we assume that it is possible to describe the physical and social world scientifically so that, for example, multiple observers can agree on what they see. Consequently, we reject the postmodernist school of thought when it posits that social science research can never generate objective or trustworthy knowledge. 2 However, we simultaneously reject research that relies solely on the narrow tenets of behaviorism/positivism (see above) (National Research Council, 2001b) because we believe its view of human nature is too simplistic.

Fourth, the committee’s focus on the scientific underpinnings of research in education does not reflect a simplistic notion that scientific quality alone will improve the use of such research in school improvement efforts. Scientific quality and rigor are necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for improving the overall value of education research. There are major issues related to, for example, how the research enterprise should be

organized at the federal and local levels, how it should and can be connected to policy and practice (National Research Council, 1999d), and the nature of scientific knowledge in education (Weiss, 1999; Murnane and Nelson, 1984). Throughout this report, we treat these complementary issues with varying degrees of depth depending on their proximity to our focus on the scientific nature of the field. Indeed, over the course of our deliberations, we have become aware of several complementary efforts focused on improving education research (e.g., NRC’s Strategic Education Research Partnership, RAND panels, Education Quality Institute, Interagency Education Research Initiative, and National Academy of Education-Social Science Research Council Committee on Education Research).

Finally, and critically, the committee believes that scientific research in education is a form of scholarship that can uniquely contribute to understanding and improving education, especially when integrated with other approaches to studying human endeavors. For example, historical, philosophical, and literary scholarship can and should inform important questions of purpose and direction in education. Education is influenced by human ideals, ideologies, and judgments of value, and these things need to be subjected to rigorous—scientific and otherwise—examination.

Structure of Report

The remainder of this report moves from the general to the specific. We begin by describing the commonalities shared across all scientific endeavors, including education research. We then take up some of the specifics of education research by characterizing the nature of education and of studying it scientifically; describing a sampling of trusted research designs used to address key questions; and providing guidance on how a federal education research agency could best support high quality science. A description of the specific contents of each chapter follows.

In Chapter 2 we address the global question of whether scientific inquiry in education has generated useful insights for policy and practice. We describe and analyze several lines of work, both inside and outside of education, to compare the accumulation of knowledge in education to that of other fields. In doing so, we provide “existence proofs” of the

accumulation of knowledge in education and show that its progression is similar in many ways to other fields.

In Chapter 3 we provide a set of guiding principles that undergird all scientific endeavors. We argue that at its core, scientific inquiry in education is the same as in all other scientific disciplines and fields and provide examples from a range of fields to illustrate this common set of principles.

In Chapter 4 we describe how the unique set of features that characterize education shape the guiding principles of science in education research. We argue that it is this interaction between the principles of science and the features of education that makes scientific research in education specialized. We also describe some aspects of education research as a profession to further illuminate its character.

In Chapter 5 , integrating our principles of science ( Chapter 3 ) and the features of education ( Chapter 4 ), we then take up the topic of the design of scientific education research. Recognizing that design must go hand in hand with the problem investigated, we examine education research design (and provide several examples) across three common types of research questions: What is happening? Is there a systematic effect? and How or why is it happening?

Finally, in Chapter 6 we offer a set of design principles for a federal education research agency charged with supporting the kind of scientific research in education we describe in this report. We argue that developing a strong scientific culture is the key to a successful agency and that all education stakeholders have a role to play in it.

Researchers, historians, and philosophers of science have debated the nature of scientific research in education for more than 100 years. Recent enthusiasm for "evidence-based" policy and practice in education—now codified in the federal law that authorizes the bulk of elementary and secondary education programs—have brought a new sense of urgency to understanding the ways in which the basic tenets of science manifest in the study of teaching, learning, and schooling.

Scientific Research in Education describes the similarities and differences between scientific inquiry in education and scientific inquiry in other fields and disciplines and provides a number of examples to illustrate these ideas. Its main argument is that all scientific endeavors share a common set of principles, and that each field—including education research—develops a specialization that accounts for the particulars of what is being studied. The book also provides suggestions for how the federal government can best support high-quality scientific research in education.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

• Copy/Paste Link Link Copied

Using Research and Reason in Education: How Teachers Can Use Scientifically Based Research to Make Curricular & Instructional Decisions

Paula J. Stanovich and Keith E. Stanovich University of Toronto

Produced by RMC Research Corporation, Portsmouth, New Hampshire

This publication was produced under National Institute for Literacy Contract No. ED-00CO-0093 with RMC Research Corporation. Sandra Baxter served as the contracting officer's technical representative. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the policies of the National Institute for Literacy. No official endorsement by the National Institute for Literacy or any product, commodity, service, or enterprise is intended or should be inferred.

The National Institute for Literacy

Sandra Baxter, Interim Executive Director Lynn Reddy, Communications Director

To order copies of this booklet, contact the National Institute for Literacy at EdPubs, PO Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Call 800-228-8813 or email [email protected] .

The National Institute for Literacy, an independent federal organization, supports the development of high quality state, regional, and national literacy services so that all Americans can develop the literacy skills they need to succeed at work, at home, and in the community.

The Partnership for Reading, a project administered by the National Institute for Literacy, is a collaborative effort of the National Institute for Literacy, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the U.S. Department of Education, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to make evidence-based reading research available to educators, parents, policy makers, and others with an interest in helping all people learn to read well.

Editorial support provided by C. Ralph Adler and Elizabeth Goldman, and design/production support provided by Diane Draper and Bob Kozman, all of RMC Research Corporation.

Introduction

In the recent move toward standards-based reform in public education, many educational reform efforts require schools to demonstrate that they are achieving educational outcomes with students performing at a required level of achievement. Federal and state legislation, in particular, has codified this standards-based movement and tied funding and other incentives to student achievement.

At first, demonstrating student learning may seem like a simple task, but reflection reveals that it is a complex challenge requiring educators to use specific knowledge and skills. Standards-based reform has many curricular and instructional prerequisites. The curriculum must represent the most important knowledge, skills, and attributes that schools want their students to acquire because these learning outcomes will serve as the basis of assessment instruments. Likewise, instructional methods should be appropriate for the designed curriculum. Teaching methods should lead to students learning the outcomes that are the focus of the assessment standards.

Standards- and assessment-based educational reforms seek to obligate schools and teachers to supply evidence that their instructional methods are effective. But testing is only one of three ways to gather evidence about the effectiveness of instructional methods. Evidence of instructional effectiveness can come from any of the following sources:

• Demonstrated student achievement in formal testing situations implemented by the teacher, school district, or state;
• Published findings of research-based evidence that the instructional methods being used by teachers lead to student achievement; or
• Proof of reason-based practice that converges with a research-based consensus in the scientific literature. This type of justification of educational practice becomes important when direct evidence may be lacking (a direct test of the instructional efficacy of a particular method is absent), but there is a theoretical link to research-based evidence that can be traced.

Each of these methods has its pluses and minuses. While testing seems the most straightforward, it is not necessarily the clear indicator of good educational practice that the public seems to think it is. The meaning of test results is often not immediately clear. For example, comparing averages or other indicators of overall performance from tests across classrooms, schools, or school districts takes no account of the resources and support provided to a school, school district, or individual professional. Poor outcomes do not necessarily indict the efforts of physicians in Third World countries who work with substandard equipment and supplies. Likewise, objective evidence of below-grade or below-standard mean performance of a group of students should not necessarily indict their teachers if essential resources and supports (e.g., curriculum materials, institutional aid, parental cooperation) to support teaching efforts were lacking. However, the extent to which children could learn effectively even in under-equipped schools is not known because evidence-based practices are, by and large, not implemented. That is, there is evidence that children experiencing academic difficulties can achieve more educationally if they are taught with effective methods; sadly, scientific research about what works does not usually find its way into most classrooms.

Testing provides a useful professional calibrator, but it requires great contextual sensitivity in interpretation. It is not the entire solution for assessing the quality of instructional efforts. This is why research-based and reason-based educational practice are also crucial for determining the quality and impact of programs. Teachers thus have the responsibility to be effective users and interpreters of research. Providing a survey and synthesis of the most effective practices for a variety of key curriculum goals (such as literacy and numeracy) would seem to be a helpful idea, but no document could provide all of that information. (Many excellent research syntheses exist, such as the National Reading Panel, 2000; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; Swanson, 1999, but the knowledge base about effective educational practices is constantly being updated, and many issues remain to be settled.)

As professionals, teachers can become more effective and powerful by developing the skills to recognize scientifically based practice and, when the evidence is not available, use some basic research concepts to draw conclusions on their own. This paper offers a primer for those skills that will allow teachers to become independent evaluators of educational research.

The Formal Scientific Method and Scientific Thinking in Educational Practice

When you go to your family physician with a medical complaint, you expect that the recommended treatment has proven to be effective with many other patients who have had the same symptoms. You may even ask why a particular medication is being recommended for you. The doctor may summarize the background knowledge that led to that recommendation and very likely will cite summary evidence from the drug's many clinical trials and perhaps even give you an overview of the theory behind the drug's success in treating symptoms like yours.

All of this discussion will probably occur in rather simple terms, but that does not obscure the fact that the doctor has provided you with data to support a theory about your complaint and its treatment. The doctor has shared knowledge of medical science with you. And while everyone would agree that the practice of medicine has its "artful" components (for example, the creation of a healing relationship between doctor and patient), we have come to expect and depend upon the scientific foundation that underpins even the artful aspects of medical treatment. Even when we do not ask our doctors specifically for the data, we assume it is there, supporting our course of treatment.

Actually, Vaughn and Dammann (2001) have argued that the correct analogy is to say that teaching is in part a craft, rather than an art. They point out that craft knowledge is superior to alternative forms of knowledge such as superstition and folklore because, among other things, craft knowledge is compatible with scientific knowledge and can be more easily integrated with it. One could argue that in this age of education reform and accountability, educators are being asked to demonstrate that their craft has been integrated with science--that their instructional models, methods, and materials can be likened to the evidence a physician should be able to produce showing that a specific treatment will be effective. As with medicine, constructing teaching practice on a firm scientific foundation does not mean denying the craft aspects of teaching.

Architecture is another professional practice that, like medicine and education, grew from being purely a craft to a craft based firmly on a scientific foundation. Architects wish to design beautiful buildings and environments, but they must also apply many foundational principles of engineering and adhere to structural principles. If they do not, their buildings, however beautiful they may be, will not stand. Similarly, a teacher seeks to design lessons that stimulate students and entice them to learn--lessons that are sometimes a beauty to behold. But if the lessons are not based in the science of pedagogy, they, like poorly constructed buildings, will fail.

Education is informed by formal scientific research through the use of archival research-based knowledge such as that found in peer-reviewed educational journals. Preservice teachers are first exposed to the formal scientific research in their university teacher preparation courses (it is hoped), through the instruction received from their professors, and in their course readings (e.g., textbooks, journal articles). Practicing teachers continue their exposure to the results of formal scientific research by subscribing to and reading professional journals, by enrolling in graduate programs, and by becoming lifelong learners.

Scientific thinking in practice is what characterizes reflective teachers--those who inquire into their own practice and who examine their own classrooms to find out what works best for them and their students. What follows in this document is, first, a "short course" on how to become an effective consumer of the archival literature that results from the conduct of formal scientific research in education and, second, a section describing how teachers can think scientifically in their ongoing reflection about their classroom practice.

Being able to access mechanisms that evaluate claims about teaching methods and to recognize scientific research and its findings is especially important for teachers because they are often confronted with the view that "anything goes" in the field of education--that there is no such thing as best practice in education, that there are no ways to verify what works best, that teachers should base their practice on intuition, or that the latest fad must be the best way to teach, please a principal, or address local school reform. The "anything goes" mentality actually represents a threat to teachers' professional autonomy. It provides a fertile environment for gurus to sell untested educational "remedies" that are not supported by an established research base.

Teachers as independent evaluators of research evidence

One factor that has impeded teachers from being active and effective consumers of educational science has been a lack of orientation and training in how to understand the scientific process and how that process results in the cumulative growth of knowledge that leads to validated educational practice. Educators have only recently attempted to resolve educational disputes scientifically, and teachers have not yet been armed with the skills to evaluate disputes on their own.

Educational practice has suffered greatly because its dominant model for resolving or adjudicating disputes has been more political (with its corresponding factions and interest groups) than scientific. The field's failure to ground practice in the attitudes and values of science has made educators susceptible to the "authority syndrome" as well as fads and gimmicks that ignore evidence-based practice.

When our ancestors needed information about how to act, they would ask their elders and other wise people. Contemporary society and culture are much more complex. Mass communication allows virtually anyone (on the Internet, through self-help books) to proffer advice, to appear to be a "wise elder." The current problem is how to sift through the avalanche of misguided and uninformed advice to find genuine knowledge. Our problem is not information; we have tons of information. What we need are quality control mechanisms.

Peer-reviewed research journals in various disciplines provide those mechanisms. However, even with mechanisms like these in behavioral science and education, it is all too easy to do an "end run" around the quality control they provide. Powerful information dissemination outlets such as publishing houses and mass media frequently do not discriminate between good and bad information. This provides a fertile environment for gurus to sell untested educational "remedies" that are not supported by an established research base and, often, to discredit science, scientific evidence, and the notion of research-based best practice in education. As Gersten (2001) notes, both seasoned and novice teachers are "deluged with misinformation" (p. 45).

We need tools for evaluating the credibility of these many and varied sources of information; the ability to recognize research-based conclusions is especially important. Acquiring those tools means understanding scientific values and learning methods for making inferences from the research evidence that arises through the scientific process. These values and methods were recently summarized by a panel of the National Academy of Sciences convened on scientific inquiry in education (Shavelson & Towne, 2002), and our discussion here will be completely consistent with the conclusions of that NAS panel.

The scientific criteria for evaluating knowledge claims are not complicated and could easily be included in initial teacher preparation programs, but they usually are not (which deprives teachers from an opportunity to become more efficient and autonomous in their work right at the beginning of their careers). These criteria include:

• the publication of findings in refereed journals (scientific publications that employ a process of peer review),
• the duplication of the results by other investigators, and
• a consensus within a particular research community on whether there is a critical mass of studies that point toward a particular conclusion.

In their discussion of the evolution of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) conference and the importance of separating research evidence from opinion when making decisions about instructional practice, Levin and O'Donnell (2000) highlight the importance of enabling teachers to become independent evaluators of research evidence. Being aware of the importance of research published in peer-reviewed scientific journals is only the first step because this represents only the most minimal of criteria. Following is a review of some of the principles of research-based evaluation that teachers will find useful in their work.

Publicly verifiable research conclusions: Replication and Peer Review

Source credibility: the consumer protection of peer reviewed journals..

The front line of defense for teachers against incorrect information in education is the existence of peer-reviewed journals in education, psychology, and other related social sciences. These journals publish empirical research on topics relevant to classroom practice and human cognition and learning. They are the first place that teachers should look for evidence of validated instructional practices.

As a general quality control mechanism, peer review journals provide a "first pass" filter that teachers can use to evaluate the plausibility of educational claims. To put it more concretely, one ironclad criterion that will always work for teachers when presented with claims of uncertain validity is the question: Have findings supporting this method been published in recognized scientific journals that use some type of peer review procedure? The answer to this question will almost always separate pseudoscientific claims from the real thing.

In a peer review, authors submit a paper to a journal for publication, where it is critiqued by several scientists. The critiques are reviewed by an editor (usually a scientist with an extensive history of work in the specialty area covered by the journal). The editor then decides whether the weight of opinion warrants immediate publication, publication after further experimentation and statistical analysis, or rejection because the research is flawed or does not add to the knowledge base. Most journals carry a statement of editorial policy outlining their exact procedures for publication, so it is easy to check whether a journal is in fact, peer-reviewed.

Peer review is a minimal criterion, not a stringent one. Not all information in peer-reviewed scientific journals is necessarily correct, but it has at the very least undergone a cycle of peer criticism and scrutiny. However, it is because the presence of peer-reviewed research is such a minimal criterion that its absence becomes so diagnostic. The failure of an idea, a theory, an educational practice, behavioral therapy, or a remediation technique to have adequate documentation in the peer-reviewed literature of a scientific discipline is a very strong indication to be wary of the practice.

The mechanisms of peer review vary somewhat from discipline to discipline, but the underlying rationale is the same. Peer review is one way (replication of a research finding is another) that science institutionalizes the attitudes of objectivity and public criticism. Ideas and experimentation undergo a honing process in which they are submitted to other critical minds for evaluation. Ideas that survive this critical process have begun to meet the criterion of public verifiability. The peer review process is far from perfect, but it really is the only external consumer protection that teachers have.

The history of reading instruction illustrates the high cost that is paid when the peer-reviewed literature is ignored, when the normal processes of scientific adjudication are replaced with political debates and rhetorical posturing. A vast literature has been generated on best practices that foster children's reading acquisition (Adams, 1990; Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985; Chard & Osborn, 1999; Cunningham & Allington, 1994; Ehri, Nunes, Stahl, & Willows, 2001; Moats, 1999; National Reading Panel, 2000; Pearson, 1993; Pressley, 1998; Pressley, Rankin, & Yokol, 1996; Rayner, Foorman, Perfetti, Pesetsky, & Seidenberg, 2002; Reading Coherence Initiative, 1999; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 2001). Yet much of this literature remains unknown to many teachers, contributing to the frustrating lack of clarity about accepted, scientifically validated findings and conclusions on reading acquisition.

Teachers should also be forewarned about the difference between professional education journals that are magazines of opinion in contrast to journals where primary reports of research, or reviews of research, are peer reviewed. For example, the magazines Phi Delta Kappan and Educational Leadership both contain stimulating discussions of educational issues, but neither is a peer-reviewed journal of original research. In contrast, the American Educational Research Journal (a flagship journal of the AERA) and the Journal of Educational Psychology (a flagship journal of the American Psychological Association) are both peer-reviewed journals of original research. Both are main sources for evidence on validated techniques of reading instruction and for research on aspects of the reading process that are relevant to a teacher's instructional decisions.

This is true, too, of presentations at conferences of educational organizations. Some are data-based presentations of original research. Others are speeches reflecting personal opinion about educational problems. While these talks can be stimulating and informative, they are not a substitute for empirical research on educational effectiveness.

Replication and the importance of public verifiability.

Research-based conclusions about educational practice are public in an important sense: they do not exist solely in the mind of a particular individual but have been submitted to the scientific community for criticism and empirical testing by others. Knowledge considered "special"--the province of the thought of an individual and immune from scrutiny and criticism by others--can never have the status of scientific knowledge. Research-based conclusions, when published in a peer reviewed journal, become part of the public realm, available to all, in a way that claims of "special expertise" are not.

Replication is the second way that science uses to make research-based conclusions concrete and "public." In order to be considered scientific, a research finding must be presented to other researchers in the scientific community in a way that enables them to attempt the same experiment and obtain the same results. When the same results occur, the finding has been replicated . This process ensures that a finding is not the result of the errors or biases of a particular investigator. Replicable findings become part of the converging evidence that forms the basis of a research-based conclusion about educational practice.

John Donne told us that "no man is an island." Similarly, in science, no researcher is an island. Each investigator is connected to the research community and its knowledge base. This interconnection enables science to grow cumulatively and for research-based educational practice to be built on a convergence of knowledge from a variety of sources. Researchers constantly build on previous knowledge in order to go beyond what is currently known. This process is possible only if research findings are presented in such a way that any investigator can use them to build on.

Philosopher Daniel Dennett (1995) has said that science is "making mistakes in public. Making mistakes for all to see, in the hopes of getting the others to help with the corrections" (p. 380). We might ask those proposing an educational innovation for the evidence that they have in fact "made some mistakes in public." Legitimate scientific disciplines can easily provide such evidence. For example, scientists studying the psychology of reading once thought that reading difficulties were caused by faulty eye movements. This hypothesis has been shown to be in error, as has another that followed it, that so-called visual reversal errors were a major cause of reading difficulty. Both hypotheses were found not to square with the empirical evidence (Rayner, 1998; Share & Stanovich, 1995). The hypothesis that reading difficulties can be related to language difficulties at the phonological level has received much more support (Liberman, 1999; National Reading Panel, 2000; Rayner, Foorman, Perfetti, Pesetsky, & Seidenberg, 2002; Shankweiler, 1999; Stanovich, 2000).

After making a few such "errors" in public, reading scientists have begun, in the last 20 years, to get it right. But the only reason teachers can have confidence that researchers are now "getting it right" is that researchers made it open, public knowledge when they got things wrong. Proponents of untested and pseudoscientific educational practices will never point to cases where they "got it wrong" because they are not committed to public knowledge in the way that actual science is. These proponents do not need, as Dennett says, "to get others to help in making the corrections" because they have no intention of correcting their beliefs and prescriptions based on empirical evidence.

Education is so susceptible to fads and unproven practices because of its tacit endorsement of a personalistic view of knowledge acquisition--one that is antithetical to the scientific value of the public verifiability of knowledge claims. Many educators believe that knowledge resides within particular individuals--with particularly elite insights--who then must be called upon to dispense this knowledge to others. Indeed, some educators reject public, depersonalized knowledge in social science because they believe it dehumanizes people. Science, however, with its conception of publicly verifiable knowledge, actually democratizes knowledge. It frees practitioners and researchers from slavish dependence on authority.

Subjective, personalized views of knowledge degrade the human intellect by creating conditions that subjugate it to an elite whose "personal" knowledge is not accessible to all (Bronowski, 1956, 1977; Dawkins, 1998; Gross, Levitt, & Lewis, 1997; Medawar, 1982, 1984, 1990; Popper, 1972; Wilson, 1998). Empirical science, by generating knowledge and moving it into the public domain, is a liberating force. Teachers can consult the research and decide for themselves whether the state of the literature is as the expert portrays it. All teachers can benefit from some rudimentary grounding in the most fundamental principles of scientific inference. With knowledge of a few uncomplicated research principles, such as control, manipulation, and randomization, anyone can enter the open, public discourse about empirical findings. In fact, with the exception of a few select areas such as the eye movement research mentioned previously, much of the work described in noted summaries of reading research (e.g., Adams, 1990; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998) could easily be replicated by teachers themselves.

There are many ways that the criteria of replication and peer review can be utilized in education to base practitioner training on research-based best practice. Take continuing teacher education in the form of inservice sessions, for example. Teachers and principals who select speakers for professional development activities should ask speakers for the sources of their conclusions in the form of research evidence in peer-reviewed journals. They should ask speakers for bibliographies of the research evidence published on the practices recommended in their presentations.

The science behind research-based practice relies on systematic empiricism

Empiricism is the practice of relying on observation. Scientists find out about the world by examining it. The refusal by some scientists to look into Galileo's telescope is an example of how empiricism has been ignored at certain points in history. It was long believed that knowledge was best obtained through pure thought or by appealing to authority. Galileo claimed to have seen moons around the planet Jupiter. Another scholar, Francesco Sizi, attempted to refute Galileo, not with observations, but with the following argument:

There are seven windows in the head, two nostrils, two ears, two eyes and a mouth; so in the heavens there are two favorable stars, two unpropitious, two luminaries, and Mercury alone undecided and indifferent. From which and many other similar phenomena of nature such as the seven metals, etc., which it were tedious to enumerate, we gather that the number of planets is necessarily seven...ancient nations, as well as modern Europeans, have adopted the division of the week into seven days, and have named them from the seven planets; now if we increase the number of planets, this whole system falls to the ground...moreover, the satellites are invisible to the naked eye and therefore can have no influence on the earth and therefore would be useless and therefore do not exist. (Holton & Roller, 1958, p. 160)

Three centuries of the demonstrated power of the empirical approach give us an edge on poor Sizi. Take away those years of empiricism, and many of us might have been there nodding our heads and urging him on. In fact, the empirical approach is not necessarily obvious, which is why we often have to teach it, even in a society that is dominated by science.

Empiricism pure and simple is not enough, however. Observation itself is fine and necessary, but pure, unstructured observation of the natural world will not lead to scientific knowledge. Write down every observation you make from the time you get up in the morning to the time you go to bed on a given day. When you finish, you will have a great number of facts, but you will not have a greater understanding of the world. Scientific observation is termed systematic because it is structured so that the results of the observation reveal something about the underlying causal structure of events in the world. Observations are structured so that, depending upon the outcome of the observation, some theories of the causes of the outcome are supported and others rejected.

Teachers can benefit by understanding two things about research and causal inferences. The first is the simple (but sometimes obscured) fact that statements about best instructional practices are statements that contain a causal claim. These statements claim that one type of method or practice causes superior educational outcomes. Second, teachers must understand how the logic of the experimental method provides the critical support for making causal inferences.

Science addresses testable questions

Science advances by positing theories to account for particular phenomena in the world, by deriving predictions from these theories, by testing the predictions empirically, and by modifying the theories based on the tests (the sequence is typically theory -> prediction -> test -> theory modification). What makes a theory testable? A theory must have specific implications for observable events in the natural world.

Science deals only with a certain class of problem: the kind that is empirically solvable. That does not mean that different classes of problems are inherently solvable or unsolvable and that this division is fixed forever. Quite the contrary: some problems that are currently unsolvable may become solvable as theory and empirical techniques become more sophisticated. For example, decades ago historians would not have believed that the controversial issue of whether Thomas Jefferson had a child with his slave Sally Hemings was an empirically solvable question. Yet, by 1998, this problem had become solvable through advances in genetic technology, and a paper was published in the journal Nature (Foster, Jobling, Taylor, Donnelly, Deknijeff, Renemieremet, Zerjal, & Tyler-Smith, 1998) on the question.

The criterion of whether a problem is "testable" is called the falsifiability criterion: a scientific theory must always be stated in such a way that the predictions derived from it can potentially be shown to be false. The falsifiability criterion states that, for a theory to be useful, the predictions drawn from it must be specific. The theory must go out on a limb, so to speak, because in telling us what should happen, the theory must also imply that certain things will not happen. If these latter things do happen, it is a clear signal that something is wrong with the theory. It may need to be modified, or we may need to look for an entirely new theory. Either way, we will end up with a theory that is closer to the truth.

In contrast, if a theory does not rule out any possible observations, then the theory can never be changed, and we are frozen into our current way of thinking with no possibility of progress. A successful theory cannot posit or account for every possible happening. Such a theory robs itself of any predictive power.

What we are talking about here is a certain type of intellectual honesty. In science, the proponent of a theory is always asked to address this question before the data are collected: "What data pattern would cause you to give up, or at least to alter, this theory?" In the same way, the falsifiability criterion is a useful consumer protection for the teacher when evaluating claims of educational effectiveness. Proponents of an educational practice should be asked for evidence; they should also be willing to admit that contrary data will lead them to abandon the practice. True scientific knowledge is held tentatively and is subject to change based on contrary evidence. Educational remedies not based on scientific evidence will often fail to put themselves at risk by specifying what data patterns would prove them false.

Objectivity and intellectual honesty

Objectivity, another form of intellectual honesty in research, means that we let nature "speak for itself" without imposing our wishes on it--that we report the results of experimentation as accurately as we can and that we interpret them as fairly as possible. (The fact that this goal is unattainable for any single human being should not dissuade us from holding objectivity as a value.)

In the language of the general public, open-mindedness means being open to possible theories and explanations for a particular phenomenon. But in science it means that and something more. Philosopher Jonathan Adler (1998) teaches us that science values another aspect of open-mindedness even more highly: "What truly marks an open-minded person is the willingness to follow where evidence leads. The open-minded person is willing to defer to impartial investigations rather than to his own predilections...Scientific method is attunement to the world, not to ourselves" (p. 44).

Objectivity is critical to the process of science, but it does not mean that such attitudes must characterize each and every scientist for science as a whole to work. Jacob Bronowski (1973, 1977) often argued that the unique power of science to reveal knowledge about the world does not arise because scientists are uniquely virtuous (that they are completely objective or that they are never biased in interpreting findings, for example). It arises because fallible scientists are immersed in a process of checks and balances --a process in which scientists are always there to criticize and to root out errors. Philosopher Daniel Dennett (1999/2000) points out that "scientists take themselves to be just as weak and fallible as anybody else, but recognizing those very sources of error in themselvesÉthey have devised elaborate systems to tie their own hands, forcibly preventing their frailties and prejudices from infecting their results" (p. 42). More humorously, psychologist Ray Nickerson (1998) makes the related point that the vanities of scientists are actually put to use by the scientific process, by noting that it is "not so much the critical attitude that individual scientists have taken with respect to their own ideas that has given science its success...but more the fact that individual scientists have been highly motivated to demonstrate that hypotheses that are held by some other scientists are false" (p. 32). These authors suggest that the strength of scientific knowledge comes not because scientists are virtuous, but from the social process where scientists constantly cross-check each others' knowledge and conclusions.

The public criteria of peer review and replication of findings exist in part to keep checks on the objectivity of individual scientists. Individuals cannot hide bias and nonobjectivity by personalizing their claims and keeping them from public scrutiny. Science does not accept findings that have failed the tests of replication and peer review precisely because it wants to ensure that all findings in science are in the public domain, as defined above. Purveyors of pseudoscientific educational practices fail the test of objectivity and are often identifiable by their attempts to do an "end run" around the public mechanisms of science by avoiding established peer review mechanisms and the information-sharing mechanisms that make replication possible. Instead, they attempt to promulgate their findings directly to consumers, such as teachers.

The principle of converging evidence

The principle of converging evidence has been well illustrated in the controversies surrounding the teaching of reading. The methods of systematic empiricism employed in the study of reading acquisition are many and varied. They include case studies, correlational studies, experimental studies, narratives, quasi-experimental studies, surveys, epidemiological studies and many others. The results of many of these studies have been synthesized in several important research syntheses (Adams, 1990; Ehri et al., 2001; National Reading Panel, 2000; Pressley, 1998; Rayner et al., 2002; Reading Coherence Initiative, 1999; Share & Stanovich, 1995; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; Snowling, 2000; Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 2001; Stanovich, 2000). These studies were used in a process of establishing converging evidence, a principle that governs the drawing of the conclusion that a particular educational practice is research-based.

The principle of converging evidence is applied in situations requiring a judgment about where the "preponderance of evidence" points. Most areas of science contain competing theories. The extent to which a particular study can be seen as uniquely supporting one particular theory depends on whether other competing explanations have been ruled out. A particular experimental result is never equally relevant to all competing theories. An experiment may be a very strong test of one or two alternative theories but a weak test of others. Thus, research is considered highly convergent when a series of experiments consistently supports a given theory while collectively eliminating the most important competing explanations. Although no single experiment can rule out all alternative explanations, taken collectively, a series of partially diagnostic experiments can lead to a strong conclusion if the data converge.

Contrast this idea of converging evidence with the mistaken view that a problem in science can be solved with a single, crucial experiment, or that a single critical insight can advance theory and overturn all previous knowledge. This view of scientific progress fits nicely with the operation of the news media, in which history is tracked by presenting separate, disconnected "events" in bite-sized units. This is a gross misunderstanding of scientific progress and, if taken too seriously, leads to misconceptions about how conclusions are reached about research-based practices.

One experiment rarely decides an issue, supporting one theory and ruling out all others. Issues are most often decided when the community of scientists gradually begins to agree that the preponderance of evidence supports one alternative theory rather than another. Scientists do not evaluate data from a single experiment that has finally been designed in the perfect way. They most often evaluate data from dozens of experiments, each containing some flaws but providing part of the answer.

Although there are many ways in which an experiment can go wrong (or become confounded ), a scientist with experience working on a particular problem usually has a good idea of what most of the critical factors are, and there are usually only a few. The idea of converging evidence tells us to examine the pattern of flaws running through the research literature because the nature of this pattern can either support or undermine the conclusions that we might draw.

For example, suppose that the findings from a number of different experiments were largely consistent in supporting a particular conclusion. Given the imperfect nature of experiments, we would evaluate the extent and nature of the flaws in these studies. If all the experiments were flawed in a similar way, this circumstance would undermine confidence in the conclusions drawn from them because the consistency of the outcome may simply have resulted from a particular, consistent flaw. On the other hand, if all the experiments were flawed in different ways, our confidence in the conclusions increases because it is less likely that the consistency in the results was due to a contaminating factor that confounded all the experiments. As Anderson and Anderson (1996) note, "When a conceptual hypothesis survives many potential falsifications based on different sets of assumptions, we have a robust effect." (p. 742).

Suppose that five different theoretical summaries (call them A, B, C, D, and E) of a given set of phenomena exist at one time and are investigated in a series of experiments. Suppose that one set of experiments represents a strong test of theories A, B, and C, and that the data largely refute theories A and B and support C. Imagine also that another set of experiments is a particularly strong test of theories C, D, and E, and that the data largely refute theories D and E and support C. In such a situation, we would have strong converging evidence for theory C. Not only do we have data supportive of theory C, but we have data that contradict its major competitors. Note that no one experiment tests all the theories, but taken together, the entire set of experiments allows a strong inference.

In contrast, if the two sets of experiments each represent strong tests of B, C, and E, and the data strongly support C and refute B and E, the overall support for theory C would be less strong than in our previous example. The reason is that, although data supporting theory C have been generated, there is no strong evidence ruling out two viable alternative theories (A and D). Thus research is highly convergent when a series of experiments consistently supports a given theory while collectively eliminating the most important competing explanations. Although no single experiment can rule out all alternative explanations, taken collectively, a series of partially diagnostic experiments can lead to a strong conclusion if the data converge in the manner of our first example.

Increasingly, the combining of evidence from disparate studies to form a conclusion is being done more formally by the use of the statistical technique termed meta-analysis (Cooper & Hedges, 1994; Hedges & Olkin, 1985; Hunter & Schmidt, 1990; Rosenthal, 1995; Schmidt, 1992; Swanson, 1999) which has been used extensively to establish whether various medical practices are research based. In a medical context, meta-analysis:

involves adding together the data from many clinical trials to create a single pool of data big enough to eliminate much of the statistical uncertainty that plagues individual trials...The great virtue of meta-analysis is that clear findings can emerge from a group of studies whose findings are scattered all over the map. (Plotkin,1996, p. 70)

The use of meta-analysis for determining the research validation of educational practices is just the same as in medicine. The effects obtained when one practice is compared against another are expressed in a common statistical metric that allows comparison of effects across studies. The findings are then statistically amalgamated in some standard ways (Cooper & Hedges, 1994; Hedges & Olkin, 1985; Swanson, 1999) and a conclusion about differential efficacy is reached if the amalgamation process passes certain statistical criteria. In some cases, of course, no conclusion can be drawn with confidence, and the result of the meta-analysis is inconclusive.

More and more commentators on the educational research literature are calling for a greater emphasis on meta-analysis as a way of dampening the contentious disputes about conflicting studies that plague education and other behavioral sciences (Kavale & Forness, 1995; Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1989; Schmidt, 1996; Stanovich, 2001; Swanson, 1999). The method is useful for ending disputes that seem to be nothing more than a "he-said, she-said" debate. An emphasis on meta-analysis has often revealed that we actually have more stable and useful findings than is apparent from a perusal of the conflicts in our journals.

The National Reading Panel (2000) found just this in their meta-analysis of the evidence surrounding several issues in reading education. For example, they concluded that the results of a meta-analysis of the results of 66 comparisons from 38 different studies indicated "solid support for the conclusion that systematic phonics instruction makes a bigger contribution to children's growth in reading than alternative programs providing unsystematic or no phonics instruction" (p. 2-84). In another section of their report, the National Reading Panel reported that a meta-analysis of 52 studies of phonemic awareness training indicated that "teaching children to manipulate the sounds in language helps them learn to read. Across the various conditions of teaching, testing, and participant characteristics, the effect sizes were all significantly greater than chance and ranged from large to small, with the majority in the moderate range. Effects of phonemic awareness training on reading lasted well beyond the end of training" (p. 2-5).

A statement by a task force of the American Psychological Association (Wilkinson, 1999) on statistical methods in psychology journals provides an apt summary for this section. The task force stated that investigators should not "interpret a single study's results as having importance independent of the effects reported elsewhere in the relevant literature" (p. 602). Science progresses by convergence upon conclusions. The outcomes of one study can only be interpreted in the context of the present state of the convergence on the particular issue in question.

The logic of the experimental method

Scientific thinking is based on the ideas of comparison, control, and manipulation . In a true experimental study, these characteristics of scientific investigation must be arranged to work in concert.

Comparison alone is not enough to justify a causal inference. In methodology texts, correlational investigations (which involve comparison only) are distinguished from true experimental investigations that warrant much stronger causal inferences because they involve comparison, control, and manipulation. The mere existence of a relationship between two variables does not guarantee that changes in one are causing changes in the other. Correlation does not imply causation.

There are two potential problems with drawing causal inferences from correlational evidence. The first is called the third-variable problem. It occurs when the correlation between the two variables does not indicate a direct causal path between them but arises because both variables are related to a third variable that has not even been measured.

The second reason is called the directionality problem. It creates potential interpretive difficulties because even if two variables have a direct causal relationship, the direction of that relationship is not indicated by the mere presence of the correlation. In short, a correlation between variables A and B could arise because changes in A are causing changes in B or because changes in B are causing changes in A. The mere presence of the correlation does not allow us to decide between these two possibilities.

The heart of the experimental method lies in manipulation and control. In contrast to a correlational study, where the investigator simply observes whether the natural fluctuation in two variables displays a relationship, the investigator in a true experiment manipulates the variable thought to be the cause (the independent variable) and looks for an effect on the variable thought to be the effect (the dependent variable ) while holding all other variables constant by control and randomization. This method removes the third-variable problem because, in the natural world, many different things are related. The experimental method may be viewed as a way of prying apart these naturally occurring relationships. It does so because it isolates one particular variable (the hypothesized cause) by manipulating it and holding everything else constant (control).

When manipulation is combined with a procedure known as random assignment (in which the subjects themselves do not determine which experimental condition they will be in but, instead, are randomly assigned to one of the experimental groups), scientists can rule out alternative explanations of data patterns. By using manipulation, experimental control, and random assignment, investigators construct stronger comparisons so that the outcome eliminates alternative theories and explanations.

The need for both correlational methods and true experiments

As strong as they are methodologically, studies employing true experimental logic are not the only type that can be used to draw conclusions. Correlational studies have value. The results from many different types of investigation, including correlational studies, can be amalgamated to derive a general conclusion. The basis for conclusion rests on the convergence observed from the variety of methods used. This is most certainly true in classroom and curriculum research. It is necessary to amalgamate the results from not only experimental investigations, but correlational studies, nonequivalent control group studies, time series designs, and various other quasi-experimental designs and multivariate correlational designs, All have their strengths and weaknesses. For example, it is often (but not always) the case that experimental investigations are high in internal validity, but limited in external validity, whereas correlational studies are often high in external validity, but low in internal validity.

Internal validity concerns whether we can infer a causal effect for a particular variable. The more a study employs the logic of a true experiment (i.e., includes manipulation, control, and randomization), the more we can make a strong causal inference. External validity concerns the generalizability of the conclusion to the population and setting of interest. Internal and external validity are often traded off across different methodologies. Experimental laboratory investigations are high in internal validity but may not fully address concerns about external validity. Field classroom investigations, on the other hand, are often quite high in external validity but because of the logistical difficulties involved in carrying them out, they are often quite low in internal validity. That is why we need to look for a convergence of results, not just consistency from one method. Convergence increases our confidence in the external and internal validity of our conclusions.

Again, this underscores why correlational studies can contribute to knowledge. First, some variables simply cannot be manipulated for ethical reasons (for instance, human malnutrition or physical disabilities). Other variables, such as birth order, sex, and age, are inherently correlational because they cannot be manipulated, and therefore the scientific knowledge concerning them must be based on correlational evidence. Finally, logistical difficulties in classroom and curriculum research often make it impossible to achieve the logic of the true experiment. However, this circumstance is not unique to educational or psychological research. Astronomers obviously cannot manipulate all the variables affecting the objects they study, yet they are able to arrive at conclusions.

Complex correlational techniques are essential in the absence of experimental research because complex correlational statistics such as multiple regression, path analysis, and structural equation modeling that allow for the partial control of third variables when those variables can be measured. These statistics allow us to recalculate the correlation between two variables after the influence of other variables is removed. If a potential third variable can be measured, complex correlational statistics can help us determine whether that third variable is determining the relationship. These correlational statistics and designs help to rule out certain causal hypotheses, even if they cannot demonstrate the true causal relation definitively.

Stages of scientific investigation: The Role of Case Studies and Qualitative Investigations

The educational literature includes many qualitative investigations that focus less on issues of causal explanation and variable control and more on thick description , in the manner of the anthropologist (Geertz, 1973, 1979). The context of a person's behavior is described as much as possible from the standpoint of the participant. Many different fields (e.g., anthropology, psychology, education) contain case studies where the focus is detailed description and contextualization of the situation of a single participant (or very few participants).

The usefulness of case studies and qualitative investigations is strongly determined by how far scientific investigation has advanced in a particular area. The insights gained from case studies or qualitative investigations may be quite useful in the early stages of an investigation of a certain problem. They can help us determine which variables deserve more intense study by drawing attention to heretofore unrecognized aspects of a person's behavior and by suggesting how understanding of behavior might be sharpened by incorporating the participant's perspective.

However, when we move from the early stages of scientific investigation, where case studies may be very useful, to the more mature stages of theory testing--where adjudicating between causal explanations is the main task--the situation changes drastically. Case studies and qualitative description are not useful at the later stages of scientific investigation because they cannot be used to confirm or disconfirm a particular causal theory. They lack the comparative information necessary to rule out alternative explanations.

Where qualitative investigations are useful relates strongly to a distinction in philosophy of science between the context of discovery and the context of justification . Qualitative research, case studies, and clinical observations support a context of discovery where, as Levin and O'Donnell (2000) note in an educational context, such research must be regarded as "preliminary/exploratory, observational, hypothesis generating" (p. 26). They rightly point to the essential importance of qualitative investigations because "in the early stages of inquiry into a research topic, one has to look before one can leap into designing interventions, making predictions, or testing hypotheses" (p. 26). The orientation provided by qualitative investigations is critical in such cases. Even more important, the results of quantitative investigations--which must sometimes abstract away some of the contextual features of a situation--are often contextualized by the thick situational description provided by qualitative work.

However, in the context of justification, variables must be measured precisely, large groups must be tested to make sure the conclusion generalizes and, most importantly, many variables must be controlled because alternative causal explanations must be ruled out. Gersten (2001) summarizes the value of qualitative research accurately when he says that "despite the rich insights they often provide, descriptive studies cannot be used as evidence for an intervention's efficacy...descriptive research can only suggest innovative strategies to teach students and lay the groundwork for development of such strategies" (p. 47). Qualitative research does, however, help to identify fruitful directions for future experimental studies.

Nevertheless, here is why the sole reliance on qualitative techniques to determine the effectiveness of curricula and instructional strategies has become problematic. As a researcher, you desire to do one of two things.

Objective A

The researcher wishes to make some type of statement about a relationship, however minimal. That is, you at least want to use terms like greater than, or less than, or equal to. You want to say that such and such an educational program or practice is better than another. "Better than" and "worse than" are, of course, quantitative statements--and, in the context of issues about what leads to or fosters greater educational achievement, they are causal statements as well . As quantitative causal statements, the support for such claims obviously must be found in the experimental logic that has been outlined above. To justify such statements, you must adhere to the canons of quantitative research logic.

Objective B

The researcher seeks to adhere to an exclusively qualitative path that abjures statements about relationships and never uses comparative terms of magnitude. The investigator desires to simply engage in thick description of a domain that may well prompt hypotheses when later work moves on to the more quantitative methods that are necessary to justify a causal inference.

Investigators pursuing Objective B are doing essential work. They provide quantitative information with suggestions for richer hypotheses to study. In education, however, investigators sometimes claim to be pursuing Objective B but slide over into Objective A without realizing they have made a crucial switch. They want to make comparative, or quantitative, statements, but have not carried out the proper types of investigation to justify them. They want to say that a certain educational program is better than another (that is, it causes better school outcomes). They want to give educational strictures that are assumed to hold for a population of students, not just to the single or few individuals who were the objects of the qualitative study. They want to condemn an educational practice (and, by inference, deem an alternative quantitatively and causally better). But instead of taking the necessary course of pursuing Objective A, they carry out their investigation in the manner of Objective B.

Let's recall why the use of single case or qualitative description as evidence in support of a particular causal explanation is inappropriate. The idea of alternative explanations is critical to an understanding of theory testing. The goal of experimental design is to structure events so that support of one particular explanation simultaneously disconfirms other explanations. Scientific progress can occur only if the data that are collected rule out some explanations. Science sets up conditions for the natural selection of ideas. Some survive empirical testing and others do not.

This is the honing process by which ideas are sifted so that those that contain the most truth are found. But there must be selection in this process: data collected as support for a particular theory must not leave many other alternative explanations as equally viable candidates. For this reason, scientists construct control or comparison groups in their experimentation. These groups are formed so that, when their results are compared with those from an experimental group, some alternative explanations are ruled out.

Case studies and qualitative description lack the comparative information necessary to prove that a particular theory or educational practice is superior, because they fail to test an alternative; they rule nothing out. Take the seminal work of Jean Piaget for example. His case studies were critical in pointing developmental psychology in new and important directions, but many of his theoretical conclusions and causal explanations did not hold up in controlled experiments (Bjorklund, 1995; Goswami, 1998; Siegler, 1991).

In summary, as educational psychologist Richard Mayer (2000) notes, "the domain of science includes both some quantitative and qualitative methodologies" (p. 39), and the key is to use each where it is most effective (see Kamil, 1995). Likewise, in their recent book on research-based best practices in comprehension instruction, Block and Pressley (2002) argue that future progress in understanding how comprehension works will depend on a healthy interaction between qualitative and quantitative approaches. They point out that getting an initial idea of the comprehension processes involved in hypertext and Web-based environments will involve detailed descriptive studies using think-alouds and assessments of qualitative decision making. Qualitative studies of real reading environments will set the stage for more controlled investigations of causal hypotheses.

The progression to more powerful methods

A final useful concept is the progression to more powerful research methods ("more powerful" in this context meaning more diagnostic of a causal explanation). Research on a particular problem often proceeds from weaker methods (ones less likely to yield a causal explanation) to ones that allow stronger causal inferences. For example, interest in a particular hypothesis may originally emerge from a particular case study of unusual interest. This is the proper role for case studies: to suggest hypotheses for further study with more powerful techniques and to motivate scientists to apply more rigorous methods to a research problem. Thus, following the case studies, researchers often undertake correlational investigations to verify whether the link between variables is real rather than the result of the peculiarities of a few case studies. If the correlational studies support the relationship between relevant variables, then researchers will attempt experiments in which variables are manipulated in order to isolate a causal relationship between the variables.

Summary of principles that support research-based inferences about best practice

Our sketch of the principles that support research-based inferences about best practice in education has revealed that:

• Science progresses by investigating solvable, or testable, empirical problems.
• To be testable, a theory must yield predictions that could possible be shown to be wrong.
• The concepts in the theories in science evolve as evidence accumulates. Scientific knowledge is not infallible knowledge, but knowledge that has at least passed some minimal tests. The theories behind research-based practice can be proven wrong, and therefore they contain a mechanism for growth and advancement.
• Theories are tested by systematic empiricism. The data obtained from empirical research are in the public domain in the sense that they are presented in a manner that allows replication and criticism by other scientists.
• Data and theories in science are considered in the public domain only after publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
• Empiricism is systematic because it strives for the logic of control and manipulation that characterizes a true experiment.
• Correlational techniques are helpful when the logic of an experiment cannot be approximated, but because these techniques only help rule out hypotheses, they are considered weaker than true experimental methods.
• Researchers use many different methods to arrive at their conclusions, and the strengths and weaknesses of these methods vary. Most often, conclusions are drawn only after a slow accumulation of data from many studies.

Scientific thinking in educational practice: Reason-based practice in the absence of direct evidence

Some areas in educational research, to date, lack a research-based consensus, for a number of reasons. Perhaps the problem or issue has not been researched extensively. Perhaps research into the issue is in the early stages of investigation, where descriptive studies are suggesting interesting avenues, but no controlled research justifying a causal inference has been completed. Perhaps many correlational studies and experiments have been conducted on the issue, but the research evidence has not yet converged in a consistent direction.

Even if teachers know the principles of scientific evaluation described earlier, the research literature sometimes fails to give them clear direction. They will have to fall back on their own reasoning processes as informed by their own teaching experiences. In those cases, teachers still have many ways of reasoning scientifically.

Tracing the link from scientific research to scientific thinking in practice

Scientific thinking in can be done in several ways. Earlier we discussed different types of professional publications that teachers can read to improve their practice. The most important defining feature of these outlets is whether they are peer reviewed. Another defining feature is whether the publication contains primary research rather than presenting opinion pieces or essays on educational issues. If a journal presents primary research, we can evaluate the research using the formal scientific principles outlined above.

If the journal is presenting opinion pieces about what constitutes best practice, we need to trace the link between those opinions and archival peer-reviewed research. We would look to see whether the authors have based their opinions on peer-reviewed research by reading the reference list. Do the authors provide a significant amount of original research citations (is their opinion based on more than one study)? Do the authors cite work other than their own (have the results been replicated)? Are the cited journals peer-reviewed? For example, in the case of best practice for reading instruction, if we came across an article in an opinion-oriented journal such as Intervention in School and Clinic, we might look to see if the authors have cited work that has appeared in such peer-reviewed journals as Journal of Educational Psychology , Elementary School Journal , Journal of Literacy Research , Scientific Studies of Reading , or the Journal of Learning Disabilities .

These same evaluative criteria can be applied to presenters at professional development workshops or papers given at conferences. Are they conversant with primary research in the area on which they are presenting? Can they provide evidence for their methods and does that evidence represent a scientific consensus? Do they understand what is required to justify causal statements? Are they open to the possibility that their claims could be proven false? What evidence would cause them to shift their thinking?

An important principle of scientific evaluation--the connectivity principle (Stanovich, 2001)--can be generalized to scientific thinking in the classroom. Suppose a teacher comes upon a new teaching method, curriculum component, or process. The method is advertised as totally new, which provides an explanation for the lack of direct empirical evidence for the method. A lack of direct empirical evidence should be grounds for suspicion, but should not immediately rule it out. The principle of connectivity means that the teacher now has another question to ask: "OK, there is no direct evidence for this method, but how is the theory behind it (the causal model of the effects it has) connected to the research consensus in the literature surrounding this curriculum area?" Even in the absence of direct empirical evidence on a particular method or technique, there could be a theoretical link to the consensus in the existing literature that would support the method.

For further tips on translating research into classroom practice, see Warby, Greene, Higgins, & Lovitt (1999). They present a format for selecting, reading, and evaluating research articles, and then importing the knowledge gained into the classroom.

Let's take an imaginary example from the domain of treatments for children with extreme reading difficulties. Imagine two treatments have been introduced to a teacher. No direct empirical tests of efficacy have been carried out using either treatment. The first, Treatment A, is a training program to facilitate the awareness of the segmental nature of language at the phonological level. The second, Treatment B, involves giving children training in vestibular sensitivity by having them walk on balance beams while blindfolded. Treatment A and B are equal in one respect--neither has had a direct empirical test of its efficacy, which reflects badly on both. Nevertheless, one of the treatments has the edge when it comes to the principle of connectivity. Treatment A makes contact with a broad consensus in the research literature that children with extraordinary reading difficulties are hampered because of insufficiently developed awareness of the segmental structure of language. Treatment B is not connected to any corresponding research literature consensus. Reason dictates that Treatment A is a better choice, even though neither has been directly tested.

Direct connections with research-based evidence and use of the connectivity principle when direct empirical evidence is absent give us necessary cross-checks on some of the pitfalls that arise when we rely solely on personal experience. Drawing upon personal experience is necessary and desirable in a veteran teacher, but it is not sufficient for making critical judgments about the effectiveness of an instructional strategy or curriculum. The insufficiency of personal experience becomes clear if we consider that the educational judgments--even of veteran teachers--often are in conflict. That is why we have to adjudicate conflicting knowledge claims using the scientific method.

Let us consider two further examples that demonstrate why we need controlled experimentation to verify even the most seemingly definitive personal observations. In the 1990s, considerable media and professional attention were directed at a method for aiding the communicative capacity of autistic individuals. This method is called facilitated communication. Autistic individuals who had previously been nonverbal were reported to have typed highly literate messages on a keyboard when their hands and arms were supported over the typewriter by a so-called facilitator. These startlingly verbal performances by autistic children who had previously shown very limited linguistic behavior raised incredible hopes among many parents of autistic children.

Unfortunately, claims for the efficacy of facilitated communication were disseminated by many media outlets before any controlled studies had been conducted. Since then, many studies have appeared in journals in speech science, linguistics, and psychology and each study has unequivocally demonstrated the same thing: the autistic child's performance is dependent upon tactile cueing from the facilitator. In the experiments, it was shown that when both child and facilitator were looking at the same drawing, the child typed the correct name of the drawing. When the viewing was occluded so that the child and the facilitator were shown different drawings, the child typed the name of the facilitator's drawing, not the one that the child herself was looking at (Beck & Pirovano, 1996; Burgess, Kirsch, Shane, Niederauer, Graham, & Bacon, 1998; Hudson, Melita, & Arnold, 1993; Jacobson, Mulick, & Schwartz, 1995; Wheeler, Jacobson, Paglieri, & Schwartz, 1993). The experimental studies directly contradicted the extensive case studies of the experiences of the facilitators of the children. These individuals invariably deny that they have inadvertently cued the children. Their personal experience, honest and heartfelt though it is, suggests the wrong model for explaining this outcome. The case study evidence told us something about the social connections between the children and their facilitators. But that is something different than what we got from the controlled experimental studies, which provided direct tests of the claim that the technique unlocks hidden linguistic skills in these children. Even if the claim had turned out to be true, the verification of the proof of its truth would not have come from the case studies or personal experiences, but from the necessary controlled studies.

Another example of the need for controlled experimentation to test the insights gleaned from personal experience is provided by the concept of learning styles--the idea that various modality preferences (or variants of this theme in terms of analytic/holistic processing or "learning styles") will interact with instructional methods, allowing teachers to individualize learning. The idea seems to "feel right" to many of us. It does seem to have some face validity, but it has never been demonstrated to work in practice. Its modern incarnation (see Gersten, 2001, Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 2001) takes a particularly harmful form, one where students identified as auditory learners are matched with phonics instruction and visual and/or kinesthetic learners matched with holistic instruction. The newest form is particularly troublesome because the major syntheses of reading research demonstrate that many children can benefit from phonics-based instruction, not just "auditory" learners (National Reading Panel, 2000; Rayner et al., 2002; Stanovich, 2000). Excluding students identified as "visual/kinesthetic" learners from effective phonics instruction is a bad instructional practice--bad because it is not only not research based, it is actually contradicted by research.

A thorough review of the literature by Arter and Jenkins (1979) found no consistent evidence for the idea that modality strengths and weaknesses could be identified in a reliable and valid way that warranted differential instructional prescriptions. A review of the research evidence by Tarver and Dawson (1978) found likewise that the idea of modality preferences did not hold up to empirical scrutiny. They concluded, "This review found no evidence supporting an interaction between modality preference and method of teaching reading" (p. 17). Kampwirth and Bates (1980) confirmed the conclusions of the earlier reviews, although they stated their conclusions a little more baldly: "Given the rather general acceptance of this idea, and its common-sense appeal, one would presume that there exists a body of evidence to support it. UnfortunatelyÉno such firm evidence exists" (p. 598).

More recently, the idea of modality preferences (also referred to as learning styles, holistic versus analytic processing styles, and right versus left hemispheric processing) has again surfaced in the reading community. The focus of the recent implementations refers more to teaching to strengths, as opposed to remediating weaknesses (the latter being more the focus of the earlier efforts in the learning disabilities field). The research of the 1980s was summarized in an article by Steven Stahl (1988). His conclusions are largely negative because his review of the literature indicates that the methods that have been used in actual implementations of the learning styles idea have not been validated. Stahl concludes: "As intuitively appealing as this notion of matching instruction with learning style may be, past research has turned up little evidence supporting the claim that different teaching methods are more or less effective for children with different reading styles" (p. 317).

Obviously, such research reviews cannot prove that there is no possible implementation of the idea of learning styles that could work. However, the burden of proof in science rests on the investigator who is making a new claim about the nature of the world. It is not incumbent upon critics of a particular claim to show that it "couldn't be true." The question teachers might ask is, "Have the advocates for this new technique provided sufficient proof that it works?" Their burden of responsibility is to provide proof that their favored methods work. Teachers should not allow curricular advocates to avoid this responsibility by introducing confusion about where the burden of proof lies. For example, it is totally inappropriate and illogical to ask "Has anyone proved that it can't work?" One does not "prove a negative" in science. Instead, hypotheses are stated, and then must be tested by those asserting the hypotheses.

Reason-based practice in the classroom

Effective teachers engage in scientific thinking in their classrooms in a variety of ways: when they assess and evaluate student performance, develop Individual Education Plans (IEPs) for their students with disabilities, reflect on their practice, or engage in action research. For example, consider the assessment and evaluation activities in which teachers engage. The scientific mechanisms of systematic empiricism--iterative testing of hypotheses that are revised after the collection of data--can be seen when teachers plan for instruction: they evaluate their students' previous knowledge, develop hypotheses about the best methods for attaining lesson objectives, develop a teaching plan based on those hypotheses, observe the results, and base further instruction on the evidence collected.

This assessment cycle looks even more like the scientific method when teachers (as part of a multidisciplinary team) are developing and implementing an IEP for a student with a disability. The team must assess and evaluate the student's learning strengths and difficulties, develop hypotheses about the learning problems, select curriculum goals and objectives, base instruction on the hypotheses and the goals selected, teach, and evaluate the outcomes of that teaching. If the teaching is successful (goals and objectives are attained), the cycle continues with new goals. If the teaching has been unsuccessful (goals and objectives have not been achieved), the cycle begins again with new hypotheses. We can also see the principle of converging evidence here. No one piece of evidence might be decisive, but collectively the evidence might strongly point in one direction.

Scientific thinking in practice occurs when teachers engage in action research. Action research is research into one's own practice that has, as its main aim, the improvement of that practice. Stokes (1997) discusses how many advances in science came about as a result of "use-inspired research" which draws upon observations in applied settings. According to McNiff, Lomax, and Whitehead (1996), action research shares several characteristics with other types of research: "it leads to knowledge, it provides evidence to support this knowledge, it makes explicit the process of enquiry through which knowledge emerges, and it links new knowledge with existing knowledge" (p. 14). Notice the links to several important concepts: systematic empiricism, publicly verifiable knowledge, converging evidence, and the connectivity principle.

Teachers and Research Commonality in a "what works" epistemology

Many educational researchers have drawn attention to the epistemological commonalities between researchers and teachers (Gersten, Vaughn, Deshler, & Schiller, 1997; Stanovich, 1993/1994). A "what works" epistemology is a critical source of underlying unity in the world views of educators and researchers (Gersten & Dimino, 2001; Gersten, Chard, & Baker, 2000). Empiricism, broadly construed (as opposed to the caricature of white coats, numbers, and test tubes that is often used to discredit scientists) is about watching the world, manipulating it when possible, observing outcomes, and trying to associate outcomes with features observed and with manipulations. This is what the best teachers do. And this is true despite the grain of truth in the statement that "teaching is an art." As Berliner (1987) notes: "No one I know denies the artistic component to teaching. I now think, however, that such artistry should be research-based. I view medicine as an art, but I recognize that without its close ties to science it would be without success, status, or power in our society. Teaching, like medicine, is an art that also can be greatly enhanced by developing a close relationship to science (p. 4)."

In his review of the work of the Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties for the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998), Pearson (1999) warned educators that resisting evaluation by hiding behind the "art of teaching" defense will eventually threaten teacher autonomy. Teachers need creativity, but they also need to demonstrate that they know what evidence is, and that they recognize that they practice in a profession based in behavioral science. While making it absolutely clear that he opposes legislative mandates, Pearson (1999) cautions:

We have a professional responsibility to forge best practice out of the raw materials provided by our most current and most valid readings of research...If professional groups wish to retain the privileges of teacher prerogative and choice that we value so dearly, then the price we must pay is constant attention to new knowledge as a vehicle for fine-tuning our individual and collective views of best practice. This is the path that other professions, such as medicine, have taken in order to maintain their professional prerogative, and we must take it, too. My fear is that if the professional groups in education fail to assume this responsibility squarely and openly, then we will find ourselves victims of the most onerous of legislative mandates (p. 245).

Those hostile to a research-based approach to educational practice like to imply that the insights of teachers and those of researchers conflict. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Take reading, for example. Teachers often do observe exactly what the research shows--that most of their children who are struggling with reading have trouble decoding words. In an address to the Reading Hall of Fame at the 1996 meeting of the International Reading Association, Isabel Beck (1996) illustrated this point by reviewing her own intellectual history (see Beck, 1998, for an archival version). She relates her surprise upon coming as an experienced teacher to the Learning Research and Development Center at the University of Pittsburgh and finding "that there were some people there (psychologists) who had not taught anyone to read, yet they were able to describe phenomena that I had observed in the course of teaching reading" (Beck, 1996, p. 5). In fact, what Beck was observing was the triangulation of two empirical approaches to the same issue--two perspectives on the same underlying reality. And she also came to appreciate how these two perspectives fit together: "What I knew were a number of whats--what some kids, and indeed adults, do in the early course of learning to read. And what the psychologists knew were some whys--why some novice readers might do what they do" (pp. 5-6).

Beck speculates on why the disputes about early reading instruction have dragged on so long without resolution and posits that it is due to the power of a particular kind of evidence--evidence from personal observation. The determination of whole language advocates is no doubt sustained because "people keep noticing the fact that some children or perhaps many children--in any event a subset of children--especially those who grow up in print-rich environments, don't seem to need much more of a boost in learning to read than to have their questions answered and to point things out to them in the course of dealing with books and various other authentic literacy acts" (Beck, 1996, p. 8). But Beck points out that it is equally true that proponents of the importance of decoding skills are also fueled by personal observation: "People keep noticing the fact that some children or perhaps many children--in any event a subset of children--don't seem to figure out the alphabetic principle, let alone some of the intricacies involved without having the system directly and systematically presented" (p. 8). But clearly we have lost sight of the basic fact that the two observations are not mutually exclusive--one doesn't negate the other. This is just the type of situation for which the scientific method was invented: a situation requiring a consensual view, triangulated across differing observations by different observers.

Teachers, like scientists, are ruthless pragmatists (Gersten & Dimino, 2001; Gersten, Chard, & Baker, 2000). They believe that some explanations and methods are better than others. They think there is a real world out there--a world in flux, obviously--but still one that is trackable by triangulating observations and observers. They believe that there are valid, if fallible, ways of finding out which educational practices are best. Teachers believe in a world that is predictable and controllable by manipulations that they use in their professional practice, just as scientists do. Researchers and educators are kindred spirits in their approach to knowledge, an important fact that can be used to forge a coalition to bring hard-won research knowledge to light in the classroom.

• Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Adler, J. E. (1998, January). Open minds and the argument from ignorance. Skeptical Inquirer , 22 (1), 41-44.
• Anderson, C. A., & Anderson, K. B. (1996). Violent crime rate studies in philosophical context: A destructive testing approach to heat and Southern culture of violence effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70 , 740-756.
• Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J., & Wilkinson, I. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers . Washington, D. C.: National Institute of Education.
• Arter, A. and Jenkins, J. (1979). Differential diagnosis-prescriptive teaching: A critical appraisal, Review of Educational Research , 49 , 517-555.
• Beck, A. R., & Pirovano, C. M. (1996). Facilitated communications' performance on a task of receptive language with children and youth with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 26 , 497-512.
• Beck, I. L. (1996, April). Discovering reading research: Why I didn't go to law school . Paper presented at the Reading Hall of Fame, International Reading Association, New Orleans.
• Beck, I. (1998). Understanding beginning reading: A journey through teaching and research. In J. Osborn & F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 11-31). New York: Guilford Press.
• Berliner, D. C. (1987). Knowledge is power: A talk to teachers about a revolution in the teaching profession. In D. C. Berliner & B. V. Rosenshine (Eds.), Talks to teachers (pp. 3-33). New York: Random House.
• Bjorklund, D. F. (1995). Children's thinking: Developmental function and individual differences (Second Edition) . Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices . New York: Guilford Press.
• Bronowski, J. (1956). Science and human values . New York: Harper & Row.
• Bronowski, J. (1973). The ascent of man . Boston: Little, Brown.
• Bronowski, J. (1977). A sense of the future . Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Burgess, C. A., Kirsch, I., Shane, H., Niederauer, K., Graham, S., & Bacon, A. (1998). Facilitated communication as an ideomotor response. Psychological Science , 9 , 71-74.
• Chard, D. J., & Osborn, J. (1999). Phonics and word recognition in early reading programs: Guidelines for accessibility. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice , 14 , 107-117.
• Cooper, H. & Hedges, L. V. (Eds.), (1994). The handbook of research synthesis . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Cunningham, P. M., & Allington, R. L. (1994). Classrooms that work: They all can read and write . New York: HarperCollins.
• Dawkins, R. (1998). Unweaving the rainbow . Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
• Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin's dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life . New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Dennett, D. C. (1999/2000, Winter). Why getting it right matters. Free Inquiry , 20 (1), 40-43.
• Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S., Stahl, S., & Willows, D. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research , 71 , 393-447.
• Foster, E. A., Jobling, M. A., Taylor, P. G., Donnelly, P., Deknijff, P., Renemieremet, J., Zerjal, T., & Tyler-Smith, C. (1998). Jefferson fathered slave's last child. Nature , 396 , 27-28.
• Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. R. (1996). How to design and evaluate research in education (Third Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures . New York: Basic Books.
• Geertz, C. (1979). From the native's point of view: On the nature of anthropological understanding. In P. Rabinow & W. Sullivan (Eds.), Interpretive social science (pp. 225-242). Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Gersten, R. (2001). Sorting out the roles of research in the improvement of practice. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice , 16 (1), 45-50.
• Gersten, R., Chard, D., & Baker, S. (2000). Factors enhancing sustained use of research-based instructional practices. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33 (5), 445-457.
• Gersten, R., & Dimino, J. (2001). The realities of translating research into classroom practice. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice , 16 (2), 120-130.
• Gersten, R., Vaughn, S., Deshler, D., & Schiller, E. (1997).What we know about using research findings: Implications for improving special education practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 30 (5), 466-476.
• Goswami, U. (1998). Cognition in children . Hove, England: Psychology Press.
• Gross, P. R., Levitt, N., & Lewis, M. (1997). The flight from science and reason . New York: New York Academy of Science.
• Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis . New York: Academic Press.
• Holton, G., & Roller, D. (1958). Foundations of modern physical science . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Hudson, A., Melita, B., & Arnold, N. (1993). A case study assessing the validity of facilitated communication. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 23 , 165-173.
• Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Jacobson, J. W., Mulick, J. A., & Schwartz, A. A. (1995). A history of facilitated communication: Science, pseudoscience, and antiscience. American Psychologist , 50 , 750-765.
• Kamil, M. L. (1995). Some alternatives to paradigm wars in literacy research. Journal of Reading Behavior , 27 , 243-261.
• Kampwirth, R., and Bates, E. (1980). Modality preference and teaching method: A review of the research, Academic Therapy , 15 , 597-605.
• Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1995). The nature of learning disabilities: Critical elements of diagnosis and classification . Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Levin, J. R., & O'Donnell, A. M. (2000). What to do about educational research's credibility gaps? Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology , 5 , 1-87.
• Liberman, A. M. (1999). The reading researcher and the reading teacher need the right theory of speech. Scientific Studies of Reading , 3 , 95-111.
• Magee, B. (1985). Philosophy and the real world: An introduction to Karl Popper . LaSalle, IL: Open Court.
• Mayer, R. E. (2000). What is the place of science in educational research? Educational Researcher , 29 (6), 38-39.
• McNiff, J.,Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (1996). You and your action research project . London: Routledge.
• Medawar, P. B. (1982). Pluto's republic . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Medawar, P. B. (1984). The limits of science . New York: Harper & Row.
• Medawar, P. B. (1990). The threat and the glory . New York: Harper Collins.
• Moats, L. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science . Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.
• National Reading Panel: Reports of the Subgroups. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction . Washington, DC.
• Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology , 2 , 175-220.
• Pearson, P. D. (1993). Teaching and learning to read: A research perspective. Language Arts , 70 , 502-511.
• Pearson, P. D. (1999). A historically based review of preventing reading difficulties in young children. Reading Research Quarterly , 34 , 231-246.
• Plotkin, D. (1996, June). Good news and bad news about breast cancer. Atlantic Monthly , 53-82.
• Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Pressley, M. (1998). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching . New York: Guilford Press.
• Pressley, M., Rankin, J., & Yokol, L. (1996). A survey of the instructional practices of outstanding primary-level literacy teachers. Elementary School Journal , 96 , 363-384.
• Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 Years of research. Psychological Bulletin , 124 , 372-422.
• Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2002, March). How should reading be taught? Scientific American , 286 (3), 84-91.
• Reading Coherence Initiative. (1999). Understanding reading: What research says about how children learn to read . Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
• Rosenthal, R. (1995). Writing meta-analytic reviews. Psychological Bulletin , 118 , 183-192.
• Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. American Psychologist , 44 , 1276-1284.
• Shankweiler, D. (1999). Words to meaning. Scientific Studies of Reading , 3 , 113-127.
• Share, D. L., & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading development: Accommodating individual differences into a model of acquisition. Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology , 1 , 1-57.
• Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.) (2002). Scientific research in education . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Siegler, R. S. (1991). Children's thinking (Second Edition) . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Snowling, M. (2000). Dyslexia (Second Edition) . Oxford: Blackwell.
• Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (2001). What science offers teachers of reading. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice , 16 (1), 51-57.
• Stahl, S. (December, 1988). Is there evidence to support matching reading styles and initial reading methods? Phi Delta Kappan , 317-327.
• Stanovich, K. E. (1993/1994). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher , 47 (4), 280-291.
• Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers . New York: Guilford Press.
• Stanovich, K. E. (2001). How to think straight about psychology (Sixth Edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
• Swanson, H. L. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes . New York: Guilford Press.
• Tarver, S. G., & Dawson, E. (1978). Modality preference and the teaching of reading: A review, Journal of Learning Disabilities , 11, 17-29.
• Vaughn, S., & Dammann, J. E. (2001). Science and sanity in special education. Behavioral Disorders , 27, 21-29.
• Warby, D. B., Greene, M. T., Higgins, K., & Lovitt, T. C. (1999). Suggestions for translating research into classroom practices. Intervention in School and Clinic , 34 (4), 205-211.
• Wheeler, D. L., Jacobson, J. W., Paglieri, R. A., & Schwartz, A. A. (1993). An experimental assessment of facilitated communication. Mental Retardation , 31 , 49-60.
• Wilkinson, L. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist , 54 , 595-604.
• Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The unity of knowledge . New York: Knopf.

For additional copies of this document:

Contact the National Institute for Literacy at ED Pubs PO Box 1398, Jessup, Maryland 20794-1398

Phone 1-800-228-8813 Fax 301-430-1244 [email protected]

Date Published: 2003 Date Posted: March 2010

Rick Hess Straight Up

Education policy maven Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute think tank offers straight talk on matters of policy, politics, research, and reform. Read more from this blog.

How, Exactly, Is Research Supposed to Improve Education?

• Share article

This week Dylan Wiliam , eclectic Wales native and emeritus professor at University College London , takes over the blog. Dylan began his career as a math teacher in London (having followed his “jazz-folk” band to the capital city) before eventually stumbling into academe. His books include Creating the Schools Our Children Need and Leadership for Teacher Learning . Across a varied career, he has taught in urban public schools, directed a large-scale testing program, spent three years as senior research director at the Educational Testing Service (ETS), and served a number of roles in university administration, including dean of a school of education at King’s College London. Dylan, whose advice usually costs a pretty penny, will spend the week offering pro bono thoughts and tips to educators struggling to get school going this fall.

As educators, schools and districts work to overcome the damage to students’ education caused by the coronavirus pandemic, it seems obvious that our efforts should be guided by the best evidence we can find about what is likely to be most effective.

The good news is that, over the last 20 or so years, there have been substantial improvements in the way that research findings are summarized and made available to practitioners and policymakers. Increasingly, educational researchers have stepped out of their “ivory towers” and tackled issues of immediate and direct relevance. And, just as importantly, they have taken seriously the task of communicating their research findings to those who might actually use them in real settings (see, for example, here and here ).

The bad news is that producing meaningful syntheses of research turns out to be much more difficult in education than it is in, say, medicine. Too little attention is given to figuring out how even well-established research findings might be implemented in real schools and classrooms.

Let’s start with research synthesis. For many years, research reviews typically took a “narrative” approach. Researchers read the relevant studies and then figured out the best story to tell. Some reviewers were more systematic, tallying the number of positive and negative results in a particular field, but such an approach treated all experiments as if they were the same size and had the same size of impact. In 1976, Gene V. Glass proposed a technique that he called “meta-analysis” by which the results of different studies could be expressed on a common metric, called “effect size,” and thus compared more meaningfully. This approach is now the standard approach to research synthesis in the health sciences.

Unfortunately, as I explain here , meta-analysis is much harder to do well in education for a variety of reasons. Combining different reports on “cooperative learning” might group together studies with very different approaches to cooperative learning, studies with younger students tend to produce larger effect sizes, and different ways of assessing student achievement can produce very different results for the same experiment. Also, since it is much easier to get studies published if the results are dramatic, the studies that are published tend to be the ones where everything went just right, so the published studies tend to overstate the effects in other settings.

These problems are compounded when the results of different meta-analyses are combined in a process sometimes called “meta-meta-analysis.” The number of assumptions made in these analyses make it impossible to determine what is really going on. The whole thing is reminiscent of the old joke about someone who, after a speed-reading course, said, “I was able to go through War and Peace in 20 minutes. It’s about Russia.”

Even when studies are conducted and reported carefully, it is not at all obvious that the results would be relevant across different contexts. While it may seem obvious that studies conducted on undergraduate students are unlikely to provide meaningful insights about how to teach kindergarten, or that those conducted in urban settings may not generalize to rural settings, that intuition can easily get lost when trying to digest the large amounts of information presented in a meta-analysis. It is also important to note that even when we have a well-designed randomized control trial, all we know about is the differences between the control and experimental groups. The schools and districts that chose to participate in the experiment may be different from those that did not.

Class-size-reduction studies are a case in point. Any class-size-reduction program requires additional teachers, so the quality of those teachers is a crucial determinant of the success of the program. Probably the best known such study—the Tennessee STAR study—required recruiting an extra 50 teachers, and it is reasonable to suppose that these were as good as those already employed. However, when such a program requires hundreds, or thousands of extra teachers, it is not at all clear that the additional teachers employed will be as good as those already working in the schools. Worse, the quality of available teachers is likely to vary from district to district. A class-size-reduction program may increase student achievement in one district, yet reduce it in another, due to the difficulty of recruiting good teachers. Similar arguments apply to multitiered systems of support. More intensive instruction in smaller groups is likely to be effective when those teaching the smaller groups are as effective as those teaching the class from which the students were withdrawn. But if those teaching the smaller groups are less effective, then a multitiered system may actually reduce student achievement .

The important point here is that those “on the ground"—the administrators in that district—will know far more about teacher recruitment than those in a state department of education. They have to look at whether the research solves a problem that the district has, how much extra student achievement will be generated, how much it will cost (in money and in educator time), and whether it is possible to implement the reform in their own setting. Research is essential in helping districts avoid things that are unlikely to benefit students, like catering to students’ preferred learning styles , and can identify some “best bets” for schools and districts, but research can never provide step-by-step instructions on how to improve student outcomes.

To simplify somewhat, everything works somewhere, and nothing works everywhere. The important question is, “Under what circumstances might this work” and that is something that those “on the ground” are best placed to determine.

Educators cannot afford to ignore research evidence—there are just too many “blind alleys” that look attractive but are unlikely to help students—but they have to choose judiciously. Some interventions may have small effects, but if they do not take up too much time, they can be highly cost-effective. Others may have larger effects but will take time and energy to implement, and, crucially, what works best for one district may not work for the next district. It is imperative, now in the midst of unprecedented educational challenges more than ever, that district leaders become “critical consumers” of research.

The opinions expressed in Rick Hess Straight Up are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Best Education Research Topics | Inspiration & Ideas

Introduction

What is education research, how do you choose a research topic in education, research topics for education research.

Education research plays a vital role in shaping the future of teaching and learning by exploring new methods, policies, and practices that can improve educational outcomes. Whether you are an educator, a student, or a researcher, selecting the right research topic in education is crucial for contributing meaningful insights to the field. This article provides inspiration and ideas for choosing compelling education research topics, covering a range of areas such as early childhood education, educational leadership, academic performance, and more. By exploring various educational research topics, you can address current challenges in education and help shape the policies and practices that impact learners at all levels.

Education research is the systematic study of teaching and learning processes, educational policies, and the factors that influence educational outcomes. It encompasses a wide range of topics, from the effectiveness of different teaching methods to the impact of social, economic, and cultural factors on student achievement. The goal of education research is to generate evidence-based insights that can inform educational practice, guide policy decisions, and ultimately improve the quality of education for all learners.

Researchers in the field of education use various methodologies to explore their topics, including qualitative methods like interviews and case studies , and quantitative methods such as surveys and experiments. These methods allow researchers to collect and analyze data that can provide a deeper understanding of how education systems work and how they can be improved. For example, a study might examine the impact of early childhood education on long-term academic success, or investigate the effectiveness of professional development programs for teachers.

Education research is critical not only for advancing theoretical knowledge but also for addressing practical challenges in the classroom. By understanding what works, for whom, and under what conditions, educators and policymakers can make more informed decisions that benefit students. Furthermore, education research often highlights the disparities and inequities in educational opportunities and outcomes, prompting efforts to create more inclusive and equitable learning environments. Whether the focus is on curriculum development, teacher training, student assessment, or policy reform, education research provides the foundation for continuous improvement in education.

Choosing a research topic in education involves careful consideration of your interests, the relevance of the topic, and its feasibility. Here are three key factors to guide you in selecting an effective research topic in the field of education.

Identify your interests and passions

The first step in choosing a research topic is to reflect on your own interests and passions. What aspects of education do you find most compelling? Whether it's early childhood development, educational technology, or inclusive education, starting with a topic that genuinely interests you will help keep you motivated throughout the research process. Your personal experiences in the field—whether as a teacher, student, or parent—can also provide valuable insights and inspiration for your research. By focusing on a topic that resonates with you, you're more likely to engage deeply with the material, leading to more meaningful and insightful research.

Consider the relevance and impact of the topic

Once you've identified areas of interest, it's important to consider the relevance and potential impact of the topic. Ask yourself whether the topic addresses current challenges or gaps in the field of education. For instance, with the increasing integration of technology in classrooms, a research topic that examines the effects of digital tools on student learning could be highly relevant. Similarly, topics that explore issues like educational equity, teacher retention, or the effectiveness of remote learning have significant implications for policy and practice. Selecting a topic with clear relevance ensures that your research will contribute to ongoing discussions in the field and have a tangible impact on educational outcomes.

Assess feasibility and resources

Feasibility is another critical factor to consider when choosing a research topic. Before committing to a topic, evaluate the resources available to you, including access to data, research materials, and time. Consider whether the topic can be explored within the scope of your project, whether it's a dissertation, thesis, or a smaller research paper . For example, a topic that requires extensive fieldwork or access to specific populations might be challenging if you have limited time or resources. It's also important to think about the availability of literature and previous studies on the topic, as these will form the basis of your literature review and provide context for your research. Choosing a topic that is feasible ensures that you can conduct thorough and rigorous research without becoming overwhelmed by practical constraints.

Identify actionable research insights with ATLAS.ti

Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti and use our intuitive interface to analyze your qualitative data.

Education is a broad and multifaceted field that offers a wealth of research opportunities across various areas of study. This section provides an in-depth exploration of potential research topics in education within seven key areas: early childhood education, educational leadership, academic performance, college students, educational psychology, multicultural education, and student motivation. Each of these areas presents unique challenges and questions, making them rich grounds for research that can contribute to the improvement of educational practices and policies.

Early childhood education

Early childhood education is a critical phase in a child's development, setting the foundation for future learning and growth. Research in this area can address various aspects of early education, from curriculum design to the impact of early intervention programs.

One promising research topic in early childhood education is the role of play-based learning in cognitive and social development. Play in physical education and in casual classroom settings is often viewed as a natural and essential part of childhood, and many educators advocate for its inclusion in early education programs. However, there is ongoing debate about the most effective ways to integrate play with formal learning objectives. Research could explore how different types of play, such as free play, guided play, and structured play, influence children's cognitive abilities, social skills, and emotional well-being. Additionally, studies could examine the long-term benefits of play-based learning, comparing outcomes for children who participate in play-focused programs with those in more traditional, academically focused settings.

Another important area of research is the impact of early childhood education on later academic achievement. There is substantial evidence that high-quality early education programs can lead to better academic outcomes in later years, particularly for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Researchers could investigate the specific elements of early childhood programs that contribute to these positive outcomes, such as teacher qualifications, class size, parental involvement, and the use of evidence-based curricula. This research could also examine how early education programs can be tailored to meet the needs of diverse populations, including children with disabilities and those from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.

Finally, the transition from early childhood education to primary school is a critical period that can have lasting effects on a child's academic trajectory. Research could explore strategies for smoothing this transition, such as the alignment of curricula between preschool and primary school, the role of family engagement, and the effectiveness of transition programs designed to prepare children for the shift to more structured, formal education. Studies could also investigate the emotional and social challenges children face during this transition and how schools and families can support children through these changes.

Educational leadership

Educational leadership is a key factor in the success of schools and educational institutions. Effective leadership can inspire teachers, improve student outcomes, and drive innovation in education. Research in this area can explore various aspects of leadership, from the characteristics of successful leaders to the strategies they use to achieve their goals.

One important topic in educational leadership is the impact of leadership styles on school performance. Different leadership styles, such as transformational, transactional, and instructional leadership, have been shown to influence various aspects of school culture and effectiveness. Researchers could examine how these leadership styles affect teacher motivation, student achievement, and school climate. For example, a study could compare schools led by transformational leaders, who focus on inspiring and motivating staff, with those led by instructional leaders, who emphasize curriculum and teaching practices. This research could provide insights into which leadership approaches are most effective in different educational contexts.

Another critical area of research is the role of school principals in promoting equity and inclusion. Principals play a crucial role in shaping the culture of their schools and ensuring that all students, regardless of their background, have access to a high-quality education. Research could explore how principals can foster an inclusive school environment, support diverse learners, and address disparities in academic achievement. This could include studies on the strategies principals use to implement inclusive practices, the challenges they face in promoting equity, and the impact of their efforts on student outcomes.

Educational leadership also involves decision-making and the ability to manage change effectively. As schools face increasing pressure to adapt to new technologies, policies, and societal expectations, the ability of leaders to guide their institutions through these changes is more important than ever. Research could investigate how school leaders make decisions in complex, dynamic environments, and how they manage the process of change. This could include studies on the decision-making processes of successful leaders, the factors that influence their decisions, and the outcomes of their decisions for students, teachers, and the broader school community.

Academic performance

Student academic performance is a central concern in education research, as it is often used as a measure of both student success and the effectiveness of educational systems. Understanding the factors that influence academic performance can help educators develop strategies to support all students in reaching their full potential.

One key area of research is the impact of socio-economic status (SES) on academic performance. Numerous studies have shown that students from lower SES backgrounds tend to perform worse academically compared to their more affluent peers. Researchers could explore the specific mechanisms through which SES affects academic outcomes, such as access to resources, parental involvement, and exposure to stressors. Additionally, research could investigate interventions that aim to mitigate the effects of SES on academic performance, such as tutoring programs, after-school activities, and school-based support services.

Another important topic is the role of teacher quality in student achievement. Research has consistently shown that teachers are one of the most significant factors influencing student performance. Studies could examine what specific teacher characteristics, such as qualifications, experience, and instructional practices, have the greatest impact on student outcomes. Furthermore, researchers could investigate how professional development programs for teachers can enhance their effectiveness in the classroom, leading to better academic results for students.

The use of technology in education is another area that has significant implications for academic performance. With the increasing integration of digital tools and platforms into the classroom, research could explore how technology affects student learning. This could include studies on the effectiveness of online learning compared to traditional face-to-face instruction, the impact of educational apps and games on student engagement and achievement, and the challenges and opportunities of using technology to support diverse learners. Additionally, research could examine how teachers can effectively integrate technology into their teaching practices to enhance student learning.

College students

The college years are a critical period of personal and academic development, making them a rich area for education research. Research on college students can explore a wide range of topics, from factors that influence college choice to strategies for supporting student success and well-being.

One important research topic is the impact of financial aid on college access and retention. The rising cost of higher education has made financial aid an essential resource for many students. Researchers could investigate how different types of financial aid, such as grants, scholarships, and loans, affect students' decisions to enroll in and persist through college. This research could also examine the barriers that prevent students from accessing financial aid and how institutions can better support students in navigating the financial aid process.

Another key area of research is the factors that contribute to college student retention and success. While many students start college, not all complete their degrees. Research could explore the reasons why some students struggle to stay enrolled, such as academic challenges, student mental health issues, and financial pressures. Additionally, studies could investigate the effectiveness of programs and services designed to support student retention, such as academic advising, tutoring centers, and mental health resources. Understanding these factors can help colleges develop strategies to support students throughout their college journey.

The mental health of college students is another critical issue that has gained increasing attention in recent years. College students face a range of stressors, including academic pressures, social challenges, and the transition to independence. Research could explore the prevalence of mental health issues among college students, the factors that contribute to these issues, and the effectiveness of campus mental health services. Additionally, studies could examine how colleges can create supportive environments that promote student well-being and reduce the stigma associated with seeking help for mental health concerns.

Educational psychology

Educational psychology is the study of how people learn and develop in educational settings. This field of research can provide valuable insights into the cognitive, emotional, and social processes that underlie learning, as well as the factors that influence educational outcomes.

One important area of research in educational psychology is the role of motivation in learning. Motivation is a key factor that drives student engagement and academic achievement. Researchers could explore the different types of motivation, such as intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and how they impact learning outcomes. For example, studies could examine how intrinsic motivation, or the desire to learn for its own sake, affects students' persistence and performance in challenging subjects. Additionally, research could investigate how teachers can foster motivation in the classroom, such as through the use of praise, rewards, and goal-setting strategies.

Another critical topic in educational psychology is the impact of cognitive development on learning. Cognitive development refers to the changes in thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving abilities that occur as children grow. Research could explore how different stages of cognitive development affect students' ability to learn and process information. For example, studies could examine how younger students' limited working memory capacity impacts their ability to solve complex math problems, or how older students' advanced reasoning skills allow them to engage in abstract thinking. Understanding these developmental differences can help educators design instruction that is appropriate for students' cognitive abilities.

The role of social and emotional learning (SEL) in education is another important area of research in educational psychology. SEL refers to the process through which students develop the skills to manage their emotions, build healthy relationships, and make responsible decisions. Research could explore how SEL programs impact students' academic performance, behavior, and overall well-being. Additionally, studies could investigate the best practices for implementing SEL in schools, such as integrating SEL into the curriculum, providing professional development for teachers, and creating a supportive school climate that promotes social and emotional growth.

Multicultural education

Multicultural education is an approach to teaching and learning that seeks to promote equity, respect for diversity, and inclusion in the classroom. Research in this area can explore how educators can create learning environments that reflect and honor the diverse cultural backgrounds of their students.

One important research topic in multicultural education is the development and implementation of culturally responsive teaching practices. Culturally responsive teaching involves recognizing and valuing students' cultural identities and incorporating their cultural experiences into the curriculum and instructional practices. Researchers could explore how teachers can develop culturally responsive teaching practices and the impact of these practices on student engagement and achievement. For example, studies could examine how incorporating students' cultural traditions, languages, and perspectives into the classroom can enhance their sense of belonging and motivation to learn.

Another key area of research is the role of multicultural education in reducing achievement gaps. Achievement gaps between students of different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds are a persistent issue in education. Research could explore how multicultural education can address these gaps by promoting equity and inclusion in the classroom. For example, studies could examine how culturally responsive teaching practices can help close achievement gaps by providing all students with access to high-quality, culturally relevant instruction. Additionally, research could investigate the impact of multicultural education programs on students' attitudes toward diversity and their ability to interact effectively with people from different cultural backgrounds.

The integration of multicultural education into teacher preparation programs is another important research topic. Preparing teachers to work in diverse classrooms is essential for promoting equity and inclusion in education. Research could explore how teacher preparation programs can equip future educators with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to implement multicultural education in their classrooms. For example, studies could examine the effectiveness of coursework, field experiences, and professional development opportunities that focus on multicultural education. Additionally, research could investigate how teacher preparation programs can address the biases and stereotypes that educators may bring to the classroom and how they can foster a commitment to social justice and equity in education.

Student motivation

Student motivation is a critical factor in academic success and is influenced by a range of internal and external factors. Understanding what drives students to engage in learning can help educators design more effective instructional strategies and support student achievement.

One important research topic in student motivation is the impact of goal setting on academic performance. Goal setting is a powerful motivational tool that can help students focus their efforts and persist in the face of challenges. Research could explore how different types of goals, such as short-term versus long-term goals or mastery-oriented versus performance-oriented goals, affect students' motivation and academic outcomes. For example, studies could examine how setting specific, challenging, and achievable goals can enhance students' motivation to succeed in difficult subjects. Additionally, research could investigate teachers' roles in preparing students in setting and achieving their goals, such as through the use of goal-setting frameworks, feedback, and reflection activities.

Another key area of research is the role of self-efficacy in student motivation. Self-efficacy refers to a student's belief in their ability to succeed in specific tasks or situations. Research has shown that students with high self-efficacy are more likely to take on challenging tasks, persist in the face of difficulties, and achieve higher academic outcomes. Researchers could explore how self-efficacy develops and how it can be enhanced through instructional practices, such as providing opportunities for success, offering constructive feedback, and modeling effective problem-solving strategies. Additionally, studies could examine how self-efficacy interacts with other motivational factors, such as interest, effort, and resilience, to influence student performance.

The impact of classroom environment on student motivation is another important research topic. The classroom environment, including the physical space, social dynamics, and instructional practices, plays a significant role in shaping students' motivation to learn. Research could explore how different aspects of the classroom environment, such as the presence of supportive relationships, the availability of resources, and the use of engaging instructional strategies, influence students' motivation and engagement. For example, studies could examine how a positive classroom climate, characterized by mutual respect, collaboration, and high expectations, fosters students' motivation to participate and succeed in learning activities. Additionally, research could investigate how teachers can create a motivating classroom environment by using strategies such as differentiation, student-centered learning, and the incorporation of students' interests and preferences into the curriculum.

Make the most of your research with ATLAS.ti

Powerful tools turn your data into critical insights. See how by downloading a free trial of ATLAS.ti.

The World Bank Group is the largest financier of education in the developing world, working in 94 countries and committed to helping them reach SDG4: access to inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning opportunities for all by 2030.

Education is a human right, a powerful driver of development, and one of the strongest instruments for reducing poverty and improving health, gender equality, peace, and stability. It delivers large, consistent returns in terms of income, and is the most important factor to ensure equity and inclusion.

For individuals, education promotes employment, earnings, health, and poverty reduction. Globally, there is a  9% increase in hourly earnings for every extra year of schooling . For societies, it drives long-term economic growth, spurs innovation, strengthens institutions, and fosters social cohesion.  Education is further a powerful catalyst to climate action through widespread behavior change and skilling for green transitions.

Developing countries have made tremendous progress in getting children into the classroom and more children worldwide are now in school. But learning is not guaranteed, as the  2018 World Development Report  (WDR) stressed.

Making smart and effective investments in people’s education is critical for developing the human capital that will end extreme poverty. At the core of this strategy is the need to tackle the learning crisis, put an end to  Learning Poverty , and help youth acquire the advanced cognitive, socioemotional, technical and digital skills they need to succeed in today’s world. 

In low- and middle-income countries, the share of children living in  Learning Poverty  (that is, the proportion of 10-year-old children that are unable to read and understand a short age-appropriate text) increased from 57% before the pandemic to an estimated  70%  in 2022.

However, learning is in crisis. More than 70 million more people were pushed into poverty during the COVID pandemic, a billion children lost a year of school , and three years later the learning losses suffered have not been recouped .  If a child cannot read with comprehension by age 10, they are unlikely to become fluent readers. They will fail to thrive later in school and will be unable to power their careers and economies once they leave school.

The effects of the pandemic are expected to be long-lasting. Analysis has already revealed deep losses, with international reading scores declining from 2016 to 2021 by more than a year of schooling.  These losses may translate to a 0.68 percentage point in global GDP growth.  The staggering effects of school closures reach beyond learning. This generation of children could lose a combined total of  US$21 trillion in lifetime earnings  in present value or the equivalent of 17% of today’s global GDP – a sharp rise from the 2021 estimate of a US$17 trillion loss. 

Action is urgently needed now – business as usual will not suffice to heal the scars of the pandemic and will not accelerate progress enough to meet the ambitions of SDG 4. We are urging governments to implement ambitious and aggressive Learning Acceleration Programs to get children back to school, recover lost learning, and advance progress by building better, more equitable and resilient education systems.

Last Updated: Mar 25, 2024

The World Bank’s global education strategy is centered on ensuring learning happens – for everyone, everywhere. Our vision is to ensure that everyone can achieve her or his full potential with access to a quality education and lifelong learning. To reach this, we are helping countries build foundational skills like literacy, numeracy, and socioemotional skills – the building blocks for all other learning. From early childhood to tertiary education and beyond – we help children and youth acquire the skills they need to thrive in school, the labor market and throughout their lives.

Investing in the world’s most precious resource – people – is paramount to ending poverty on a livable planet.  Our experience across more than 100 countries bears out this robust connection between human capital, quality of life, and economic growth: when countries strategically invest in people and the systems designed to protect and build human capital at scale, they unlock the wealth of nations and the potential of everyone.

Building on this, the World Bank supports resilient, equitable, and inclusive education systems that ensure learning happens for everyone. We do this by generating and disseminating evidence, ensuring alignment with policymaking processes, and bridging the gap between research and practice.

The World Bank is the largest source of external financing for education in developing countries, with a portfolio of about $26 billion in 94 countries including IBRD, IDA and Recipient-Executed Trust Funds. IDA operations comprise 62% of the education portfolio.

The investment in FCV settings has increased dramatically and now accounts for 26% of our portfolio.

World Bank projects reach at least 425 million students -one-third of students in low- and middle-income countries.

The World Bank’s Approach to Education

Five interrelated pillars of a well-functioning education system underpin the World Bank’s education policy approach:

• Learners are prepared and motivated to learn;
• Teachers are prepared, skilled, and motivated to facilitate learning and skills acquisition;
• Learning resources (including education technology) are available, relevant, and used to improve teaching and learning;
• Schools are safe and inclusive; and
• Education Systems are well-managed, with good implementation capacity and adequate financing.

The Bank is already helping governments design and implement cost-effective programs and tools to build these pillars.

Our Principles:

• We pursue systemic reform supported by political commitment to learning for all children. 
• We focus on equity and inclusion through a progressive path toward achieving universal access to quality education, including children and young adults in fragile or conflict affected areas , those in marginalized and rural communities,  girls and women , displaced populations,  students with disabilities , and other vulnerable groups.
• We focus on results and use evidence to keep improving policy by using metrics to guide improvements.   
• We want to ensure financial commitment commensurate with what is needed to provide basic services to all. 
• We invest wisely in technology so that education systems embrace and learn to harness technology to support their learning objectives.   

Laying the groundwork for the future

Country challenges vary, but there is a menu of options to build forward better, more resilient, and equitable education systems.

Countries are facing an education crisis that requires a two-pronged approach: first, supporting actions to recover lost time through remedial and accelerated learning; and, second, building on these investments for a more equitable, resilient, and effective system.

Recovering from the learning crisis must be a political priority, backed with adequate financing and the resolve to implement needed reforms.  Domestic financing for education over the last two years has not kept pace with the need to recover and accelerate learning. Across low- and lower-middle-income countries, the  average share of education in government budgets fell during the pandemic , and in 2022 it remained below 2019 levels.

The best chance for a better future is to invest in education and make sure each dollar is put toward improving learning.  In a time of fiscal pressure, protecting spending that yields long-run gains – like spending on education – will maximize impact.  We still need more and better funding for education.  Closing the learning gap will require increasing the level, efficiency, and equity of education spending—spending smarter is an imperative.

• Education technology  can be a powerful tool to implement these actions by supporting teachers, children, principals, and parents; expanding accessible digital learning platforms, including radio/ TV / Online learning resources; and using data to identify and help at-risk children, personalize learning, and improve service delivery.

Looking ahead

We must seize this opportunity  to reimagine education in bold ways. Together, we can build forward better more equitable, effective, and resilient education systems for the world’s children and youth.

Accelerating Improvements

Supporting countries in establishing time-bound learning targets and a focused education investment plan, outlining actions and investments geared to achieve these goals.

Launched in 2020, the  Accelerator Program  works with a set of countries to channel investments in education and to learn from each other. The program coordinates efforts across partners to ensure that the countries in the program show improvements in foundational skills at scale over the next three to five years. These investment plans build on the collective work of multiple partners, and leverage the latest evidence on what works, and how best to plan for implementation.  Countries such as Brazil (the state of Ceará) and Kenya have achieved dramatic reductions in learning poverty over the past decade at scale, providing useful lessons, even as they seek to build on their successes and address remaining and new challenges.  

Universalizing Foundational Literacy

Readying children for the future by supporting acquisition of foundational skills – which are the gateway to other skills and subjects.

The  Literacy Policy Package (LPP)   consists of interventions focused specifically on promoting acquisition of reading proficiency in primary school. These include assuring political and technical commitment to making all children literate; ensuring effective literacy instruction by supporting teachers; providing quality, age-appropriate books; teaching children first in the language they speak and understand best; and fostering children’s oral language abilities and love of books and reading.

Advancing skills through TVET and Tertiary

Ensuring that individuals have access to quality education and training opportunities and supporting links to employment.

Tertiary education and skills systems are a driver of major development agendas, including human capital, climate change, youth and women’s empowerment, and jobs and economic transformation. A comprehensive skill set to succeed in the 21st century labor market consists of foundational and higher order skills, socio-emotional skills, specialized skills, and digital skills. Yet most countries continue to struggle in delivering on the promise of skills development. 

The World Bank is supporting countries through efforts that address key challenges including improving access and completion, adaptability, quality, relevance, and efficiency of skills development programs. Our approach is via multiple channels including projects, global goods, as well as the Tertiary Education and Skills Program . Our recent reports including Building Better Formal TVET Systems and STEERing Tertiary Education provide a way forward for how to improve these critical systems.

Addressing Climate Change

Mainstreaming climate education and investing in green skills, research and innovation, and green infrastructure to spur climate action and foster better preparedness and resilience to climate shocks.

Our approach recognizes that education is critical for achieving effective, sustained climate action. At the same time, climate change is adversely impacting education outcomes. Investments in education can play a huge role in building climate resilience and advancing climate mitigation and adaptation. Climate change education gives young people greater awareness of climate risks and more access to tools and solutions for addressing these risks and managing related shocks. Technical and vocational education and training can also accelerate a green economic transformation by fostering green skills and innovation. Greening education infrastructure can help mitigate the impact of heat, pollution, and extreme weather on learning, while helping address climate change. 

Examples of this work are projects in Nigeria (life skills training for adolescent girls), Vietnam (fostering relevant scientific research) , and Bangladesh (constructing and retrofitting schools to serve as cyclone shelters).

Strengthening Measurement Systems

Enabling countries to gather and evaluate information on learning and its drivers more efficiently and effectively.

The World Bank supports initiatives to help countries effectively build and strengthen their measurement systems to facilitate evidence-based decision-making. Examples of this work include:

(1) The  Global Education Policy Dashboard (GEPD) : This tool offers a strong basis for identifying priorities for investment and policy reforms that are suited to each country context by focusing on the three dimensions of practices, policies, and politics.

• Highlights gaps between what the evidence suggests is effective in promoting learning and what is happening in practice in each system; and
• Allows governments to track progress as they act to close the gaps.

The GEPD has been implemented in 13 education systems already – Peru, Rwanda, Jordan, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Islamabad, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sierra Leone, Niger, Gabon, Jordan and Chad – with more expected by the end of 2024.

(2)  Learning Assessment Platform (LeAP) : LeAP is a one-stop shop for knowledge, capacity-building tools, support for policy dialogue, and technical staff expertise to support student achievement measurement and national assessments for better learning.

Supporting Successful Teachers

Helping systems develop the right selection, incentives, and support to the professional development of teachers.

Currently, the World Bank Education Global Practice has over 160 active projects supporting over 18 million teachers worldwide, about a third of the teacher population in low- and middle-income countries. In 12 countries alone, these projects cover 16 million teachers, including all primary school teachers in Ethiopia and Turkey, and over 80% in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Vietnam.

A World Bank-developed classroom observation tool, Teach, was designed to capture the quality of teaching in low- and middle-income countries. It is now 3.6 million students.

While Teach helps identify patterns in teacher performance, Coach leverages these insights to support teachers to improve their teaching practice through hands-on in-service teacher professional development (TPD).

Our recent report on Making Teacher Policy Work proposes a practical framework to uncover the black box of effective teacher policy and discusses the factors that enable their scalability and sustainability.

 Supporting Education Finance Systems

Strengthening country financing systems to mobilize resources for education and make better use of their investments in education.

Our approach is to bring together multi-sectoral expertise to engage with ministries of education and finance and other stakeholders to develop and implement effective and efficient public financial management systems; build capacity to monitor and evaluate education spending, identify financing bottlenecks, and develop interventions to strengthen financing systems; build the evidence base on global spending patterns and the magnitude and causes of spending inefficiencies; and develop diagnostic tools as public goods to support country efforts.

Working in Fragile, Conflict, and Violent (FCV) Contexts

The massive and growing global challenge of having so many children living in conflict and violent situations requires a response at the same scale and scope. Our education engagement in the Fragility, Conflict and Violence (FCV) context, which stands at US$5.35 billion, has grown rapidly in recent years, reflecting the ever-increasing importance of the FCV agenda in education. Indeed, these projects now account for more than 25% of the World Bank education portfolio.

Education is crucial to minimizing the effects of fragility and displacement on the welfare of youth and children in the short-term and preventing the emergence of violent conflict in the long-term. 

Support to Countries Throughout the Education Cycle

Our support to countries covers the entire learning cycle, to help shape resilient, equitable, and inclusive education systems that ensure learning happens for everyone. 

The ongoing  Supporting  Egypt  Education Reform project , 2018-2025, supports transformational reforms of the Egyptian education system, by improving teaching and learning conditions in public schools. The World Bank has invested $500 million in the project focused on increasing access to quality kindergarten, enhancing the capacity of teachers and education leaders, developing a reliable student assessment system, and introducing the use of modern technology for teaching and learning. Specifically, the share of Egyptian 10-year-old students, who could read and comprehend at the global minimum proficiency level, increased to 45 percent in 2021.

In  Nigeria , the $75 million  Edo  Basic Education Sector and Skills Transformation (EdoBESST)  project, running from 2020-2024, is focused on improving teaching and learning in basic education. Under the project, which covers 97 percent of schools in the state, there is a strong focus on incorporating digital technologies for teachers. They were equipped with handheld tablets with structured lesson plans for their classes. Their coaches use classroom observation tools to provide individualized feedback. Teacher absence has reduced drastically because of the initiative. Over 16,000 teachers were trained through the project, and the introduction of technology has also benefited students.

Through the $235 million  School Sector Development Program  in  Nepal  (2017-2022), the number of children staying in school until Grade 12 nearly tripled, and the number of out-of-school children fell by almost seven percent. During the pandemic, innovative approaches were needed to continue education. Mobile phone penetration is high in the country. More than four in five households in Nepal have mobile phones. The project supported an educational service that made it possible for children with phones to connect to local radio that broadcast learning programs.

From 2017-2023, the $50 million  Strengthening of State Universities  in  Chile  project has made strides to improve quality and equity at state universities. The project helped reduce dropout: the third-year dropout rate fell by almost 10 percent from 2018-2022, keeping more students in school.

The World Bank’s first  Program-for-Results financing in education  was through a $202 million project in  Tanzania , that ran from 2013-2021. The project linked funding to results and aimed to improve education quality. It helped build capacity, and enhanced effectiveness and efficiency in the education sector. Through the project, learning outcomes significantly improved alongside an unprecedented expansion of access to education for children in Tanzania. From 2013-2019, an additional 1.8 million students enrolled in primary schools. In 2019, the average reading speed for Grade 2 students rose to 22.3 words per minute, up from 17.3 in 2017. The project laid the foundation for the ongoing $500 million  BOOST project , which supports over 12 million children to enroll early, develop strong foundational skills, and complete a quality education.

The $40 million  Cambodia  Secondary Education Improvement project , which ran from 2017-2022, focused on strengthening school-based management, upgrading teacher qualifications, and building classrooms in Cambodia, to improve learning outcomes, and reduce student dropout at the secondary school level. The project has directly benefited almost 70,000 students in 100 target schools, and approximately 2,000 teachers and 600 school administrators received training.

The World Bank is co-financing the $152.80 million  Yemen  Restoring Education and Learning Emergency project , running from 2020-2024, which is implemented through UNICEF, WFP, and Save the Children. It is helping to maintain access to basic education for many students, improve learning conditions in schools, and is working to strengthen overall education sector capacity. In the time of crisis, the project is supporting teacher payments and teacher training, school meals, school infrastructure development, and the distribution of learning materials and school supplies. To date, almost 600,000 students have benefited from these interventions.

The $87 million  Providing an Education of Quality in  Haiti  project supported approximately 380 schools in the Southern region of Haiti from 2016-2023. Despite a highly challenging context of political instability and recurrent natural disasters, the project successfully supported access to education for students. The project provided textbooks, fresh meals, and teacher training support to 70,000 students, 3,000 teachers, and 300 school directors. It gave tuition waivers to 35,000 students in 118 non-public schools. The project also repaired 19 national schools damaged by the 2021 earthquake, which gave 5,500 students safe access to their schools again.

In 2013, just 5% of the poorest households in  Uzbekistan  had children enrolled in preschools. Thanks to the  Improving Pre-Primary and General Secondary Education Project , by July 2019, around 100,000 children will have benefitted from the half-day program in 2,420 rural kindergartens, comprising around 49% of all preschool educational institutions, or over 90% of rural kindergartens in the country.

In addition to working closely with governments in our client countries, the World Bank also works at the global, regional, and local levels with a range of technical partners, including foundations, non-profit organizations, bilaterals, and other multilateral organizations. Some examples of our most recent global partnerships include:

UNICEF, UNESCO, FCDO, USAID, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation:  Coalition for Foundational Learning

The World Bank is working closely with UNICEF, UNESCO, FCDO, USAID, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as the  Coalition for Foundational Learning  to advocate and provide technical support to ensure foundational learning.  The World Bank works with these partners to promote and endorse the  Commitment to Action on Foundational Learning , a global network of countries committed to halving the global share of children unable to read and understand a simple text by age 10 by 2030.

Australian Aid, Bernard van Leer Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Canada, Echida Giving, FCDO, German Cooperation, William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, Conrad Hilton Foundation, LEGO Foundation, Porticus, USAID: Early Learning Partnership

The Early Learning Partnership (ELP) is a multi-donor trust fund, housed at the World Bank.  ELP leverages World Bank strengths—a global presence, access to policymakers and strong technical analysis—to improve early learning opportunities and outcomes for young children around the world.

We help World Bank teams and countries get the information they need to make the case to invest in Early Childhood Development (ECD), design effective policies and deliver impactful programs. At the country level, ELP grants provide teams with resources for early seed investments that can generate large financial commitments through World Bank finance and government resources. At the global level, ELP research and special initiatives work to fill knowledge gaps, build capacity and generate public goods.

UNESCO, UNICEF:  Learning Data Compact

UNESCO, UNICEF, and the World Bank have joined forces to close the learning data gaps that still exist and that preclude many countries from monitoring the quality of their education systems and assessing if their students are learning. The three organizations have agreed to a  Learning Data Compact , a commitment to ensure that all countries, especially low-income countries, have at least one quality measure of learning by 2025, supporting coordinated efforts to strengthen national assessment systems.

UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS):   Learning Poverty Indicator

Aimed at measuring and urging attention to foundational literacy as a prerequisite to achieve SDG4, this partnership was launched in 2019 to help countries strengthen their learning assessment systems, better monitor what students are learning in internationally comparable ways and improve the breadth and quality of global data on education.

FCDO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation:  EdTech Hub

Supported by the UK government’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), in partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the EdTech Hub is aimed at improving the quality of ed-tech investments. The Hub launched a rapid response Helpdesk service to provide just-in-time advisory support to 70 low- and middle-income countries planning education technology and remote learning initiatives.

MasterCard Foundation

Our Tertiary Education and Skills  global program, launched with support from the Mastercard Foundation, aims to prepare youth and adults for the future of work and society by improving access to relevant, quality, equitable reskilling and post-secondary education opportunities.  It is designed to reframe, reform, and rebuild tertiary education and skills systems for the digital and green transformation.

Choosing our Future: Education for Climate Action

Bridging the AI divide: Breaking down barriers to ensure women’s leadership and participation in the Fifth Industrial Revolution

Common challenges and tailored solutions: How policymakers are strengthening early learning systems across the world

Compulsory education boosts learning outcomes and climate action

Areas of focus.

Data & Measurement

Early Childhood Development

Financing Education

Foundational Learning

Fragile, Conflict & Violent Contexts

Girls’ Education

Inclusive Education

Skills Development

Technology (EdTech)  

Tertiary Education

Initiatives

• Show More +
• Invest in Childcare
• Global Education Policy Dashboard
• Global Education Evidence Advisory Panel
• Show Less -

Collapse and Recovery: How the COVID-19 Pandemic Eroded Human Capital and What to Do About It

BROCHURES & FACT SHEETS

Flyer: Education Factsheet - May 2024

Publication: Realizing Education's Promise: A World Bank Retrospective – August 2023

Flyer: Education and Climate Change - November 2022

Brochure: Learning Losses - October 2022

STAY CONNECTED

Human Development Topics

Around the bank group.

Find out what the Bank Group's branches are doing in education

Global Education Newsletter - June 2024

What's happening in the World Bank Education Global Practice? Read to learn more.

Learning Can't Wait: A commitment to education in Latin America and the ...

A new IDB-World Bank report describes challenges and priorities to address the educational crisis.

Human Capital Project

The Human Capital Project is a global effort to accelerate more and better investments in people for greater equity and economic growth.

Impact Evaluations

Research that measures the impact of education policies to improve education in low and middle income countries.

Education Videos

Watch our latest videos featuring our projects across the world

Additional Resources

Skills & Workforce Development

Technology (EdTech)

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

40+ Reasons Why Research Is Important in Education

Do you ever wonder why research is so essential in education? What impact does it really have on teaching and learning?

These are questions that plague many students and educators alike.

According to experts, here are the reasons why research is important in the field of education.

Joseph Marc Zagerman, Ed.D. 

Assistant Professor of Project Management, Harrisburg University of Science and Technology 

Wisdom is knowledge rightly applied. Conducting research is all about gaining wisdom. It can be an exciting part of a college student’s educational journey — be it a simple research paper, thesis, or dissertation. 

Related: What Is the Difference Between Knowledge and Wisdom?

As we know, there is primary research and secondary research: 

• Primary research is first-hand research where the primary investigator (PI) or researcher uses a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methodology approach in gaining original data. The process of conducting primary research is fascinating but beyond the scope of this article. 
• In contrast, secondary research examines secondhand information by describing or summarizing the work of others. This article focuses on the benefits of conducting secondary research by immersing oneself in the literature.  

Research develops students into becoming more self-sufficient

There are many benefits for college students to engage in scholarly research. For example, the research process itself develops students into becoming more self-sufficient. 

In other words,  students enhance their ability to ferret out information  regarding a specific topic with a more functional deep dive into the subject matter under investigation. 

The educational journey of  conducting research allows students to see the current conversations  taking place regarding a specific topic. One can parse out the congruity and incongruity among scholars about a particular topic. 

Developing one’s  fundamental library skills  is a tremendous upside in becoming self-sufficient. And yet another benefit of conducting scholarly research is reviewing other writing styles, which often enhances one’s reading and writing skills.   

Conducting an annotated bibliography is often a critical first step in conducting scholarly research. Reviewing, evaluating, and synthesizing information from several sources further  develops a student’s critical thinking skills. 

Related: 9 Critical Thinking Examples

Furthermore, in becoming immersed in the literature, students can recognize associated gaps , problems , or opportunities for additional research. 

From a doctoral perspective, Boote & Beile (2005) underscore the importance of conducting a literature review as the foundation for sound research and acquiring the skills and knowledge in analyzing and synthesizing information.  

So, if conducting research is beneficial for college students, why do some college students have problems with the process or believe it doesn’t add value? 

First off, conducting research is hard work . It takes time. Not to make a sweeping generalization, but some college students embrace a  “fast-food”  expectation of academic assignments. 

For example, finish a quiz, complete a discussion board, or watch a YouTube video and check it off your academic to-do list right away. In contrast, conducting a literature review takes time. It’s hard work.

It requires discipline, focus, and effective time management strategies. 

Yet, good, bad, or indifferent, it remains that the process of conducting research is often perceived as a non-value-added activity for many college students. Why is this so? Is there a better way?   

From an educational standpoint, research assignments should not be a “one and done.” Instead, every course should provide opportunities for students to engage in research of some sort. 

If a student must complete a thesis or dissertation as part of their degree requirement, the process should begin early enough in the program. 

But perhaps the most important note for educators is to align the research process with real-world takeaways . That builds value . That is what wisdom is all about. 

Dr. John Clark, PMP 

Corporate Faculty (Project Management), Harrisburg University of Science and Technology 

Research provides a path to progress and prosperity

The research integrates the known with the unknown. Research becomes the path to progress and prosperity. Extant knowledge, gathered through previous research, serves as the foundation to attaining new knowledge. 

The essence of research is a continuum.

Only through research is the attainment of new knowledge possible. New knowledge, formed through new research, is contributed back to the knowledge community. In the absence of research, the continuum of knowledge is severed. 

Reminiscent of the continuum of knowledge, the desire and understanding to conduct research must transcend into the next generation. This magnifies the relevance to convey the techniques and the desire to seek new knowledge to the younger generations. 

Humbly, it is argued that education possibly serves to facilitate the importance of research. The synergy between research and education perpetuates the continuum of knowledge. 

Through education, the younger generations are instilled with the inspiration to address the challenges of tomorrow. 

Related: Why Is Education Important in Our Life?

It plants the seeds for scientific inquiry into the next generation

Research, whether qualitative or quantitative , is grounded in scientific methods . Instructing our students in the fundamentals of empirically-based research effectively plants the seeds for scientific inquiry into the next generation. 

The application and pursuit of research catalyze critical thinking . Rather than guiding our students to apply pre-existing and rote answers to yesterday’s challenges, research inspires our students to examine phenomena through new and intriguing lenses. 

The globalized and highly competitive world of today effectively demands the younger generations to think  critically  and  creatively  to respond to the new challenges of the future. 

Consequently, through research and education, the younger generations are  inspired  and  prepared  to find new knowledge that advances our community. Ultimately, the synergy between research and education benefits society for generations to come. 

Professor John Hattie and Kyle Hattie

Authors, “ 10 Steps to Develop Great Learners “

Research serves many purposes

Imagine your doctor or pilot disregarding research and relying on experience, anecdotes, and opinions. Imagine them being proud of not having read a research article since graduation. Imagine them depending on the tips and tricks of colleagues.

Research serves many great purposes, such as:

• Keeping up to date with critical findings
• Hearing the critiques of current methods of teaching and running schools
• Standing on the shoulders of giants to see our world better

Given that so much educational research is now available, reading syntheses of the research, hearing others’ interpretation and implementation of the research, and seeing the research in action helps. 

What matters most is the interpretation of the research — your interpretation, the author’s interpretation, and your colleagues’ interpretation. It is finding research that improves our ways of thinking, our interpretations, and our impact on students. 

There is also much to be gained from reading about the methods of research, which provide ways for us to question our own impact, our own theories of teaching and learning, and help us critique our practice by standing on the shoulders of others. 

Research also helps to know what is exciting, topical, and important.

It enables us to hear other perspectives

Statements without research evidence are but opinions. Research is not only about what is published in journals or books, but what we discover in our own classes and schools, provided we ask,  “What evidence would I accept that I am wrong?” 

This is the defining question separating research from opinion. As humans, we are great at self-confirmation — there are always students who succeed in our class, we are great at finding evidence we were right, and we can use this evidence to justify our teaching. 

But what about those who did not succeed? We can’t be blind about them, and we should not ascribe their lack of improvement to them (poor homes, unmotivated, too far behind) but to us. 

We often need to hear other perspectives of the evidence we collect from our classes and hear more convincing explanations and interpretations about what worked best and what did not; who succeeded and who did not; and were the gains sufficient. 

When we do this with the aim of improving our impact on our students, then everyone is the winner.

It provides explanations and bigger picture interpretations

Research and evaluation on your class and school can be triangulated with research studies in the literature to provide alternative explanations, to help see the importance (or not) of the context of your school. And we can always write our experiences and add to the research.

For example, we have synthesized many studies of how best parents can influence their children to become great learners. Our fundamental interpretation of the large corpus of studies is that it matters more how parents think when engaged in parenting. 

For instance, the expectations, listening and responsive skills, how they react to error and struggle, and whether their feedback was heard, understood, and actionable. 

Research is more than summarizing ; it provides explanations and bigger picture interpretations, which we aimed at in our “10 steps for Parents” book.

Dr. Glenn Mitchell, MPH, CPE, FACEP

Vice Provost for Institutional Effectiveness , Harrisburg University of Science and Technology 

Research gives us better knowledge workers

There is a tremendous value for our society from student participation in scientific research. At all levels – undergraduate, master’s, and Ph.D. —students learn the scientific method that has driven progress since the Enlightenment over 300 years ago. 

• They learn to observe carefully and organize collected data efficiently. 
• They know how to test results for whether or not they should be believed or were just a chance finding. 
• They learn to estimate the strength of the data they collect and see in other scientists’ published work. 

With its peer review and wide visibility, the publication process demands that the work be done properly , or it will be exposed as flawed or even falsified. 

So students don’t just learn how to do experiments, interviews, or surveys. They learn that the process demands rigor and ethical conduct to obtain valid and reliable results. 

Supporting and educating a new generation of science-minded citizens makes our population more likely to support proven facts and take unproven allegations with a grain of salt until they are rigorously evaluated and reviewed. 

Thus, educating our students about research and involving them with hands-on opportunities to participate in research projects gives us better knowledge workers to advance technology and produce better citizens.

Chris A. Sweigart, Ph.D.

Board Certified Family Physician | Education Consultant, Limened

Research plays a critical role in education as a guide for effective practices, policies, and procedures in our schools. 

Evidence-based practice, which involves educators intentionally engaging in instructional practices and programs with strong evidence for positive outcomes from methodologically sound research, is essential to ensure the greatest probability of achieving desired student outcomes in schools.

It helps educators have greater confidence to help students achieve outcomes

There are extensive options for instructional practices and programs in our schools, many of which are promoted and sold by educational companies. In brief, some of these works benefit students, and others don’t, producing no results or even negatively impacting students.

Educators need ways to filter through the noise to find practices that are most likely to actually produce positive results with students. 

When a practice has been identified as evidence-based, that means an array of valid, carefully controlled research studies have been conducted that show significant, positive outcomes from engaging in the practice. 

By choosing to engage in these practices, educators can have greater confidence in their ability to help students achieve meaningful outcomes.

There are organizations focused on evaluating the research base for programs and practices to determine whether they are evidence-based. 

For example, some websites provide overviews of evidence-based practices in education while my website provides practical guides for teachers on interventions for academic and behavioral challenges with a research rating scale. 

Educators can use these resources to sift through the research, which can sometimes be challenging to access and translate, especially for busy teachers.

It supports vulnerable student populations

Schools may be especially concerned about the success of vulnerable student populations, such as students with disabilities , who are at far greater risk than their peers of poor short and long-term outcomes. 

In many cases, these students are already behind their peers one or more years academically and possibly facing other challenges.

With these vulnerable populations, it’s imperative that we engage in practices that benefit them and do so faster than typical practice—because these students need to catch up! 

That said, every minute and dollar we spend on a practice not supported by research is a gamble on students’ well-being and futures that may only make things worse. 

These populations of students need our best in education, which means choosing practices with sound evidence that are most likely to help.  

If I were going to a doctor for a serious illness, I would want them to engage in practice guided by the cutting edge of medical science to ensure my most significant chance of becoming healthy again. And I want the same for our students who struggle in school.

Will Shaw PhD, MSc

Sport Scientist and Lecturer | Co-founder, Sport Science Insider

Research creates new knowledge and better ideas

At the foundation of learning is sharing knowledge, ideas, and concepts. However, few concepts are set in stone; instead, they are ever-evolving ideas that hopefully get closer to the truth . 

Research is the process that underpins this search for new and better-defined ideas. For this reason, it is crucial to have very close links between research and teaching. The further the gap, the less informed teaching will become. 

Research provides answers to complicated problems

Another key concept in education is sharing the reality that most problems are complicated — but these are often the most fun to try to solve. Such as, how does the brain control movement? Or how can we optimize skill development in elite athletes?

Here, research can be used to show how many studies can be pulled together to find answers to these challenging problems. But students should also understand that these answers aren’t perfect and should be challenged.

Again, this process creates a deeper learning experience and students who are better equipped for the world we live in.

Basic understanding of research aids students in making informed decisions

We’re already seeing the worlds of tech and data drive many facets of life in a positive direction — this will no doubt continue. However, a byproduct of this is that data and science are commonly misunderstood, misquoted, or, in the worst cases, deliberately misused to tell a false story. 

If students have a basic understanding of research, they can make informed decisions based on reading the source and their own insight. 

This doesn’t mean they have to mean they disregard all headlines instead, they can decide to what extent the findings are trustworthy and dig deeper to find meaning. 

A recent example is this BBC News story  that did an excellent job of reporting a study looking at changes in brain structure as a result of mild COVID. The main finding of a 2% average loss in brain structure after mild COVID sounds alarming and is one of the findings from the study. 

However, if students have the ability to scan the full article  linked in the BBC article, they could learn that: 

• The measure that decreased by 2% was a ‘proxy’ (estimate) for tissue damage 
• Adults show 0.2 – 0.3% loss every year naturally
• Some covid patients didn’t show any loss at all, but the average loss between the COVID and control group was 2%
• We have no idea currently if these effects last more than a few weeks or months (more research is in progress)

This is an excellent research paper, and it is well-reported, but having the ability to go one step further makes so much more sense of the findings. This ability to understand the basics of research makes the modern world far easier to navigate.

Helen Crabtree

Teacher and Owner, GCSE Masterclass

It enables people to discover different ideas 

Research is crucial to education. It enables people to discover different ideas, viewpoints, theories, and facts. From there, they will weigh up the validity of each theory for themselves. 

Finding these things out for oneself causes a student to think more deeply and come up with their personal perspectives, hypotheses, and even to question widely held facts. This is crucial for independent thought and personal development.

To distortion and manipulation — a frighteningly Orwellian future awaits us if research skills are lost. 

You only need to look at current world events and how freedom of the media and genuine journalistic investigation (or research) is distorting the understanding of the real world in the minds of many people in one of the most powerful countries in the world. 

Only those who are able to conduct research and evaluate the independence of facts can genuinely understand the world. 

Genuine research opens young people’s eyes to facts and opinions

Furthermore, learning how to conduct genuine research instead of merely a Wikipedia or Google search is a skill in itself, allowing students to search through archives and find material that is not widely known about and doesn’t appear at the top of search engines. 

Genuine research will open young people’s eyes to facts and opinions that may otherwise be hidden. This can be demonstrated when we look at social media and its algorithms.

Essentially, if you repeatedly read or “like” pieces with a specific worldview, the algorithm will send you more articles or videos that further back up that view. 

This, in turn, creates an echo chamber whereby your own opinion is repeatedly played back to you with no opposing ideas or facts, reinforcing your view in a one-sided way.

Conducting genuine research is the antidote.

Lastly, by conducting research, people discover how to write articles, dissertations, and conduct their own experiments to justify their ideas. A world without genuine, quality research is a world that is open.

Pritha Gopalan, Ph.D.

Director of Research and Learning, Newark Trust for Education

It allows us to understand progress and areas of development

Research is vital in education because it helps us be intentional about how we frame and document our practice. At The Trust , we aim to synthesize standards-based and stakeholder-driven frames to ensure that quality also means equity.

Research gives us a lens to look across time and space and concretely understand our progress and areas for improvement. We are  careful  to include all voices through representative and network sampling to include multiple perspectives from different sites.

Good research helps us capture variation in practice, document innovation, and share bright spots and persistent challenges with peers for mutual learning and growth. 

This is key to our work as educators and a city-based voice employing and seeking to amplify asset-based discourses in education.

Research represents stakeholders’ aspirations and needs

When done in  culturally sustaining  and  equitable ways , research powerfully represents stakeholder experiences, interests, aspirations, and needs. Thus, it is critical to informed philanthropy, advocacy, and the continuous improvement of practice. 

Our organization is constantly evolving in our own cultural competence . It embodies this pursuit in our research so that the voices of the educators, families, children, and partners that we work with are harmonized .

This is done to create the “big picture” of where we are and where we need to get together to ensure equitable and quality conditions for learning in Newark.

Get to Know Yourself Better with Our FREE Quizzes! (no email sign-up necessary):

• How Well Do You Know Yourself?
• Are You Living Your Full Potential?
• How Self-Motivated Are You?
• Is It the Right Time for a Big Change?
• Are You Living a Balanced Life?
• Are You Handling Stress Effectively?

Explore our quiz categories: Business Quizzes , Career Quizzes , Personality Quizzes, Relationship Quizzes , Well-Being Quizzes

Jessica Robinson

Educator | Human Resources and Marketing Manager, SpeakingNerd

Research makes the problem clearer

In the words of Stanley Arnold,  “Every problem contains within itself the seeds of its own solution.”  These words truly highlight the nature of problems and solutions. 

If you understand a problem thoroughly, you eventually approach closer to the solution for you begin to see what makes the problem arise. When the root of the problem is clear, the solution becomes obvious. 

For example, if you suffer from headaches frequently, your doctor will get specific tests done to understand the exact problem (which is research). Once the root cause of the headache becomes clear, your doctor will give you suitable medicines to help you heal. 

This implies that to reach a solution, it is crucial for us to understand the problem first. Research helps us with that. By making the problem clearer, it helps us pave closer to the solution. 

As the main aim of education is to produce talented individuals who can generate innovative solutions to the world’s problems, research is of utmost importance. 

Research boosts critical thinking skills

Critical thinking is defined as observing, understanding, analyzing, and interpreting information and arguments to form suitable conclusions. 

In today’s world, critical thinking skills are the most valued skills. Companies look for a candidate’s critical thinking skills before hiring him. This is because critical thinking skills promote innovation, and innovation is the need of the hour in almost every sector. 

Further, research is one of the most effective ways of developing critical thinking skills. When you conduct research, you eventually learn the art of observing, evaluating, analyzing, interpreting information, and deriving conclusions. So, this is another major reason why research is crucial in education. 

Research promotes curiosity

In the words of Albert Einstein ,  “Curiosity is more important than knowledge.”  Now, you may wonder why so? Basically, curiosity is a strong desire to learn or know things. It motivates you to pursue an everlasting journey of learning. 

Every curious individual observes things, experiments, and learns. It seems that knowledge follows curiosity, but the vice versa is not true. An individual may gain a lot of knowledge about multiple things despite not being curious. But, then, he might not use his knowledge to engage in innovation because of the lack of curiosity. 

Hence, his knowledge might become futile, or he may just remain a bookworm. So, curiosity is more important than knowledge, and research promotes curiosity. How? 

The answer is because research helps you plunge into things. You observe what is not visible to everyone. You explore the wonders of nature and other phenomena. The more you know, the more you understand that you don’t know, which ignites curiosity. 

Research boosts confidence and self-esteem

Developing confident individuals is one of the major goals of education. When students undertake the journey of research and come up with important conclusions or results, they develop immense confidence in their knowledge and skills. 

Related: Why is Self Confidence Important?

They feel as if they can do anything. This is another important reason why research is crucial in education. 

Research helps students evolve into independent learners

Most of the time, teachers guide students on the path of learning. But, research opportunities give students chances to pave their own learning path. 

It is like they pursue a journey of learning by themselves. They consult different resources that seem appropriate, use their own methods, and shape the journey on their own. 

This way, they evolve into independent learners, which is excellent as it sets the foundation for lifelong learning. 

Theresa Bertuzzi

Chief Program Development Officer and Co-founder, Tiny Hoppers

Research helps revamp the curriculum and include proven best techniques

Research is critical in education as our world is constantly evolving, so approaches and solutions need to be updated to  best suit  the current educational climate. 

With the influx of child development and psychology studies, educators and child product development experts are  honing  how certain activities, lessons, behavior management, etc., can impact a child’s development.

For example, child development research has led to the development of toy blocks, jigsaws, and shape sorters, which have proven to be linked to: 

• Spatial thinking
• Logical reasoning
• Shape and color recognition

There is  no one-size-fits-all  when approaching educational practices; therefore, we can  revamp  the curriculum and include proven best techniques and methodologies by continuously researching past strategies and looking into new tactics. 

Effective teaching requires practical evidence approaches rather than making it a guessing game. 

The combination of work done by child educators of all ages, and research in child development psychology allow new developments in toys, activities, and practical resources for other educators, child care workers, and parents. Such ensures children can  reap  the benefits of child development research. 

It enables a better understanding of how to adapt methods of instruction

In addition, with all of the various learning styles, researching the diversity in these types will enable a better understanding of how to adapt methods of instruction to all learners’ needs. 

Child development research gives educators, child care workers, and parents the ability to guide the average child at specific age ranges, but  each child is unique in their own needs . 

It is important to note that while this is the average, it is up to the educator and childcare provider to  adapt accordingly  to each child based on their individual needs. 

Scott Winstead

Education Technology Expert | Founder, My eLearning World

It’s the most important tool for expanding our knowledge

Research is an integral part of education for teachers and students alike. It’s our most important tool for expanding our knowledge and understanding of different topics and ideas.

• Educators need to be informed about the latest research to make good decisions and provide students with quality learning opportunities.
• Research provides educators with valuable information about how students learn best so they can be more effective teachers. 
• It also helps us develop new methods and techniques for teaching and allows educators to explore different topics and ideas in more detail.
• For students, research allows them to explore new topics and develop critical thinking skills along with analytical and communication skills.

In short, research is vital in education because it helps us learn more about the world around us and improves the quality of education for everyone involved.

Connor Ondriska

CEO, SpanishVIP

It creates better experiences and improves the quality of education

Research continues to be so important in education because we should constantly be improving as educators. If one of the goals of education is to continually work on making a better world, then the face of education a century ago shouldn’t look the same today. 

You can apply that same logic on a shorter scale, especially with the technological boom . So research is a way that educators can learn about what’s working, what isn’t, and what are the areas we need to focus on. 

For example, we focus purely on distance learning, which means we need to innovate in a field that doesn’t have a ton of research yet. If we’re being generous, we can say that distance education became viable in the 1990s, but people are just now accepting it as a valid way to learn. 

Since you can’t necessarily apply everything you know about traditional pedagogy to an online setting, It’s an entirely different context that requires its own study. 

As more research comes out about the effectiveness and understanding of this type of education, we can adapt as educators to help our students. Ultimately, that research will help us create better experiences and improve the quality of distance education. 

The key here is to make sure that research is available and that teachers actually respond to it. In that sense, ongoing research and continual teacher training can go hand-in-hand. 

It leads to more effective educational approaches

Research in the field of language learning is significant. We’re constantly changing our understanding of how languages are learned. Over just the last century, there have been dozens of new methodologies and approaches. 

Linguists/pedagogues have frequently re-interpreted the language-learning process, and all of this analytical research has revolutionized the way we understand language. 

We started with simple Grammar Translation (how you would learn Latin), and now research focuses on more holistic communication techniques. So we’ve definitely come a long way, but we should keep going. 

Now with distance education, we’re experiencing another shift in language learning. You don’t need to memorize textbook vocabulary. You don’t need to travel abroad to practice with native speakers. 

Thanks to ongoing research, we’ve developed our own method of learning Spanish that’s been shown to be 10x more efficient than traditional classroom experiences. 

So if we’ve been able to do so, then maybe someone will develop an even better methodology in the future. So research and innovation are only leading to more effective educational approaches that benefit the entire society.  

Research helps everyone in the education field to become better

This stands in both the public and private sectors. Even though we’re an education business, public schools should also be adapting to new ways to utilize distance learning. 

As more technology becomes readily available to students, teachers should capitalize on that to ensure everyone receives a better education.

Related: How Important Is Technology in Education  

There is now a vast body of research about technology in the language classroom, so why not take advantage of that research and create better lesson plans? 

So as new research appears, everyone in the education field will become a better teacher. And that statement will stand ten years from now. Education needs to adapt to the needs of society, but we need research to know how we can do that appropriately .  

James Bacon, MSEd

Director of Outreach and Operations, Edficiency

Research gives schools confidence to adopt different practices

Research in education is important to inform teachers, administrators, and even parents about what practices have been shown to impact different outcomes that can be important, like:

• Student learning outcomes (often measured by test scores)
• Graduation and/or attendance rates
• Social-emotional skills 
• College and/or job matriculation rates, among many others

Research can give insights into which programs, teaching methods, curricula, schedules, and other structures provide which benefits to which groups and thus give schools the confidence to adopt these different practices.

It measures the impact of innovations 

Research in education also enables us to measure different innovations that are tried in schools, which is also essential to push the field of education further. 

It also ensures that students learn individually and collectively more than those we’ve educated in the past, or at least in different ways, to respond to changes and help shape society’s future. 

Research can give us the  formal feedback  to know if innovations happening in classrooms, schools, and districts across the country (and the world) are having the  intended  impact and whether or not they should be continued, expanded, discontinued, or used only in specific contexts.

Without research, we might continue to innovate to the detriment of our students and education system without knowing it.

Loic Bellet

Business English Coach, Speak Proper English

It provides numerous advantages to explore profession

Developing a research-based approach to enhance your practice gives you the evidence you need to make changes in your classroom, school, and beyond. 

In the light of the ongoing discussion over what works and why, there are numerous advantages to exploring your profession, whether for immediate improvement via action research and, more broadly, for acquiring awareness and knowledge on topics of interest and significance. 

There are several advantages to incorporating research into your practice. This is why research is a part of teacher education from the beginning. 

Research can be used to:

• Assist you in discovering solutions to specific issues that may arise in your school or classroom.
• Support professional knowledge, competence, and understanding of learning
• Connect you to information sources and expert support networks.
• When implementing change, such as curriculum, pedagogy, or assessment, it’s important to spell out the goals, processes, and objectives.
• Improve your organizational, local, and national grasp of your professional and policy environment, allowing you to educate and lead better strategically and effectively.
• Inside your school and more broadly within the profession, develop your agency, impact, self-efficacy, and voice.
• Each of these may entail an investigation based on evidence out of your environment and evidence from other sources.

Although research methodologies have progressed significantly, the importance of research alone has grown . 

We’ve seen online research gaining popularity, and the value of research is increasing by the day. As a result, companies are looking for online access researchers to work with them and carry out research for accurate data from the internet. 

Furthermore, research became a requirement for survival. We’ll have to do it nonetheless. We can’t make business judgments, launch businesses, or prove theories without extensive research. There has been a lot of effort to create research a base of info and advancement.

Saikiran Chandha

CEO and Founder, Typeset

It offers factual or evidence-based learning approach

It’s evident that research and education are intertwined! On a broader spectrum, education is something that you perceive as a fundamental part of your learning process (in your institutions, colleges, school, etc.). 

It improves your skills, knowledge, social and moral values. But on the other hand, research is something that you owe to as it provides you with the scientific and systemic solution to your educational hardships. 

For example: Research aids in implementing different teaching methods, identifying learning difficulties and addressing them, curriculum development, and more. 

Accordingly, research plays a significant role in offering a factual or evidence-based learning approach to academic challenges and concerns. 

And the two primary benefits of research in education are:

Research helps to improve the education system

Yes, the prime focus of research is to excavate, explore and discover a new, innovative, and creative approach to enhance the teaching and learning methods based on the latest educational needs and advancements. 

Research fuels your knowledge bank

Research is all about learning new things, data sourcing, analysis, and more. So, technically, research replenishes your knowledge bank with factual data. 

Thus, it helps educators or teachers develop their subject knowledge, aids in-depth harvest erudition, and increases overall classroom performance.

Chaye McIntosh, MS, LCADC

Clinical Director,  ChoicePoint Health

It improves the learning curve

Research, I believe, is a fundamental part of education, be it by the student or the teacher. 

When you research a topic, you will not just learn and read about stuff related to the topic but also branch out and learn new and different things. This improves the learning curve, and you delve deeper into topics, develop interest and increase your knowledge. 

Academically and personally, I can grow every day and attain the confidence that the abundance of information brings me.

It builds up understanding and perspective

Research can help you build up understanding and perspective regarding the niche of choice; help you evaluate and analyze it with sound theories and a factual basis rather than just learning just for the sake of it.

Educationally, it can help you form informed opinions and sound logic that can be beneficial in school and routinely. Not only this,  when you do proper research on any educational topic and learn about the facts and figures, chances are you will score better than your classmates who only have textbook knowledge.  

So the research will give you an edge over your peers and help you perform better in exams and classroom discussions.

Matthew Carter

Attorney,  Inc and Go

Solid research is a skill you need in all careers

That goes double for careers like mine. You might think that attorneys learn all the answers in law school, but in fact, we know how to find the answers we need through research. 

Doctors and accountants will tell you the same thing. No one can ever hold all the knowledge they need. You have to be able to find the correct answer quickly. School is the perfect place to learn that.

Research enables you to weigh sources and find the best ones

How do you know the source you have found is reliable? If you are trained in research, you’ve learned how to weigh sources and find the best ones. 

Comparing ideas and using them to draw bigger conclusions helps you not only in your career but in your life. As we have seen politically in the last few years, it enables you to be a more informed citizen.

Research makes you more persuasive

Want to have more civil conversations with your family over the holidays? Being able to dig into a body of research and pull out answers that you actually understand makes you a more effective speaker. 

People are more likely to believe you when you have formed an opinion through research rather than parroting something you saw on the news. They may even appreciate your efforts to make the conversation more logical and civil.

As for me, I spend a lot of time researching business formation now, and I use that in my writing. 

George Tsagas

Owner, eMathZone

Research helps build holistic knowledge

Your background will cause you to approach a topic with a preconceived notion. When you take the time to see the full context of a situation, your perspective changes. 

Researching one topic also expands your perspective of other topics. The information you uncover when studying a particular subject can inform other tangential subjects in the future as you build a greater knowledge of the world and how connected it is. 

As a result, any initial research you do will be a building block for future studies. You will begin each subsequent research process with more information. You will continue to broaden your perspective each time.

Research helps you become more empathic

Even if you don’t change your mind on a subject, researching that topic will expose you to other points of view and help you understand why people might feel differently about a situation. 

The more knowledge you gain about how others think, the more likely you are to humanize them and be more empathetic to diverse viewpoints and backgrounds in the future.

Research teaches you how to learn

Through the research process, you discover where you have information gaps and what questions to ask in order to solve them. It helps you approach a subject with curiosity and a willingness to learn rather than thinking you have the right answer from the beginning.

Georgi Georgiev

Owner, GIGA calculator

It helps us learn about the status quo of existing literature

The starting point of every scientific and non-scientific paper is in-depth literature research.

It helps to:

• gather casual evidence about a specific research topic
• answer a specific scientific question
• learn about the status quo of existing literature
• identify potential problems and raise new questions

Anyone writing a scientific paper needs evidence based on facts to back up theories, hypotheses, assumptions, and claims. However, since most authors can’t derive all the evidence on their own, they have to rely on the evidence provided by existing scientific (and peer-reviewed) literature. 

Subsequently, comprehensive literature research is inevitable. Only by delving deeply into a research topic will the authors gather the data and evidence necessary for a differentiated examination of the current status quo. 

This, in turn, will allow them to develop new ideas and raise new questions. 

Craig Miller

Co-Founder,  Academia Labs LLC

Research supplements knowledge gaps

In the academe, research is critical. Our daily lives revolve around research, making research an integral part of education.

If you want to know which restaurant in your area serves the best steak, you’d have to research on the internet and read reviews. If you want to see the procedure for making an omelet, you’d have to research on the internet or ask your parents. Hence, research is part of our lives, whether we want it or not.

It is no secret that there are a lot of knowledge gaps in the knowledge pool. Research is the only thing that can supplement these gaps and answer the questions with no answers.

It will also provide the correct information to long-debated questions like the shape of the Earth and the evolution of man.

With every information readily available to us with just a click and a scroll on the internet, research is crucial in identifying which data are factual and which are just fake news . More than that, it helps transfer correct information from one person to another while combating the spread of false information.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the importance of research.

Research plays a critical role in advancing our knowledge and understanding of the world around us. Here are some key reasons why research is so important:

• Generates new knowledge : Research is a process of discovering new information and insights. It allows us to explore questions that have not yet been answered, and to generate new ideas and theories that can help us make sense of the world.

• Improves existing knowledge : Research also allows us to build on existing knowledge, by testing and refining theories, and by uncovering new evidence that supports or challenges our understanding of a particular topic.

• Drives innovation : Many of the greatest innovations in history have been driven by research. Whether it’s developing new technologies, discovering new medical treatments, or exploring new frontiers in science, research is essential for pushing the boundaries of what is possible.

• Informs decision-making : Research provides the evidence and data needed to make informed decisions. Whether it’s in business, government, or any other field, research helps us understand the pros and cons of different options, and to choose the course of action that is most likely to achieve our goals.

• Promotes critical thinking : Conducting research requires us to think critically, analyze data, and evaluate evidence. These skills are not only valuable in research, but also in many other areas of life, such as problem-solving, decision-making, and communication.

What is the ultimate goal of a research?

The ultimate goal of research is to uncover new knowledge, insights, and understanding about a particular topic or phenomenon. Through careful investigation, analysis, and interpretation of data, researchers aim to make meaningful contributions to their field of study and advance our collective understanding of the world around us.

There are many different types of research, each with its own specific goals and objectives. Some research seeks to test hypotheses or theories, while others aim to explore and describe a particular phenomenon. Still, others may be focused on developing new technologies or methods for solving practical problems.

Regardless of the specific goals of a given research project, all research shares a common aim: to generate new knowledge and insights that can help us better understand and navigate the complex world we live in.

Of course, conducting research is not always easy or straightforward.

Researchers must contend with a wide variety of challenges, including finding funding, recruiting participants, collecting and analyzing data, and interpreting their results. But despite these obstacles, the pursuit of knowledge and understanding remains a fundamental driving force behind all scientific inquiry.

How can research improve the quality of life?

Research can improve the quality of life in a variety of ways, from advancing medical treatments to informing social policies that promote equality and justice. Here are some specific examples:

• Medical research : Research in medicine and healthcare can lead to the development of new treatments, therapies, and technologies that improve health outcomes and save lives.

For example, research on vaccines and antibiotics has helped to prevent and treat infectious diseases, while research on cancer has led to new treatments and improved survival rates.

• Environmental research : Research on environmental issues can help us to understand the impact of human activities on the planet and develop strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

For example, research on renewable energy sources can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment for future generations.

• Social research : Research on social issues can help us to understand and address social problems such as poverty, inequality, and discrimination.

For example, research on the effects of poverty on child development can inform policies and programs that support families and promote child well-being.

• Technological research : Research on technology can lead to the development of new products and services that improve quality of life, such as assistive technologies for people with disabilities or smart home systems that promote safety and convenience.

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

As you found this post useful...

Share it on social media!

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

The Editors

• Trivia Quizzes
• Memory Games
• Spot the Differences
• Sliding Puzzles

Research Topics & Ideas: Education

170+ Research Ideas To Fast-Track Your Dissertation, Thesis Or Research Project

I f you’re just starting out exploring education-related topics for your dissertation, thesis or research project, you’ve come to the right place. In this post, we’ll help kickstart your research topic ideation process by providing a hearty list of research topics and ideas , including examples from actual dissertations and theses..

PS – This is just the start…

We know it’s exciting to run through a list of research topics, but please keep in mind that this list is just a starting point . To develop a suitable education-related research topic, you’ll need to identify a clear and convincing research gap , and a viable plan of action to fill that gap.

If this sounds foreign to you, check out our free research topic webinar that explores how to find and refine a high-quality research topic, from scratch. Alternatively, if you’d like hands-on help, consider our 1-on-1 coaching service .

Overview: Education Research Topics

• How to find a research topic (video)
• List of 50+ education-related research topics/ideas
• List of 120+ level-specific research topics 
• Examples of actual dissertation topics in education
• Tips to fast-track your topic ideation (video)
• Where to get extra help

Education-Related Research Topics & Ideas

Below you’ll find a list of education-related research topics and idea kickstarters. These are fairly broad and flexible to various contexts, so keep in mind that you will need to refine them a little. Nevertheless, they should inspire some ideas for your project.

• The impact of school funding on student achievement
• The effects of social and emotional learning on student well-being
• The effects of parental involvement on student behaviour
• The impact of teacher training on student learning
• The impact of classroom design on student learning
• The impact of poverty on education
• The use of student data to inform instruction
• The role of parental involvement in education
• The effects of mindfulness practices in the classroom
• The use of technology in the classroom
• The role of critical thinking in education
• The use of formative and summative assessments in the classroom
• The use of differentiated instruction in the classroom
• The use of gamification in education
• The effects of teacher burnout on student learning
• The impact of school leadership on student achievement
• The effects of teacher diversity on student outcomes
• The role of teacher collaboration in improving student outcomes
• The implementation of blended and online learning
• The effects of teacher accountability on student achievement
• The effects of standardized testing on student learning
• The effects of classroom management on student behaviour
• The effects of school culture on student achievement
• The use of student-centred learning in the classroom
• The impact of teacher-student relationships on student outcomes
• The achievement gap in minority and low-income students
• The use of culturally responsive teaching in the classroom
• The impact of teacher professional development on student learning
• The use of project-based learning in the classroom
• The effects of teacher expectations on student achievement
• The use of adaptive learning technology in the classroom
• The impact of teacher turnover on student learning
• The effects of teacher recruitment and retention on student learning
• The impact of early childhood education on later academic success
• The impact of parental involvement on student engagement
• The use of positive reinforcement in education
• The impact of school climate on student engagement
• The role of STEM education in preparing students for the workforce
• The effects of school choice on student achievement
• The use of technology in the form of online tutoring

Level-Specific Research Topics

Looking for research topics for a specific level of education? We’ve got you covered. Below you can find research topic ideas for primary, secondary and tertiary-level education contexts. Click the relevant level to view the respective list.

Research Topics: Pick An Education Level

Primary education.

• Investigating the effects of peer tutoring on academic achievement in primary school
• Exploring the benefits of mindfulness practices in primary school classrooms
• Examining the effects of different teaching strategies on primary school students’ problem-solving skills
• The use of storytelling as a teaching strategy in primary school literacy instruction
• The role of cultural diversity in promoting tolerance and understanding in primary schools
• The impact of character education programs on moral development in primary school students
• Investigating the use of technology in enhancing primary school mathematics education
• The impact of inclusive curriculum on promoting equity and diversity in primary schools
• The impact of outdoor education programs on environmental awareness in primary school students
• The influence of school climate on student motivation and engagement in primary schools
• Investigating the effects of early literacy interventions on reading comprehension in primary school students
• The impact of parental involvement in school decision-making processes on student achievement in primary schools
• Exploring the benefits of inclusive education for students with special needs in primary schools
• Investigating the effects of teacher-student feedback on academic motivation in primary schools
• The role of technology in developing digital literacy skills in primary school students
• Effective strategies for fostering a growth mindset in primary school students
• Investigating the role of parental support in reducing academic stress in primary school children
• The role of arts education in fostering creativity and self-expression in primary school students
• Examining the effects of early childhood education programs on primary school readiness
• Examining the effects of homework on primary school students’ academic performance
• The role of formative assessment in improving learning outcomes in primary school classrooms
• The impact of teacher-student relationships on academic outcomes in primary school
• Investigating the effects of classroom environment on student behavior and learning outcomes in primary schools
• Investigating the role of creativity and imagination in primary school curriculum
• The impact of nutrition and healthy eating programs on academic performance in primary schools
• The impact of social-emotional learning programs on primary school students’ well-being and academic performance
• The role of parental involvement in academic achievement of primary school children
• Examining the effects of classroom management strategies on student behavior in primary school
• The role of school leadership in creating a positive school climate Exploring the benefits of bilingual education in primary schools
• The effectiveness of project-based learning in developing critical thinking skills in primary school students
• The role of inquiry-based learning in fostering curiosity and critical thinking in primary school students
• The effects of class size on student engagement and achievement in primary schools
• Investigating the effects of recess and physical activity breaks on attention and learning in primary school
• Exploring the benefits of outdoor play in developing gross motor skills in primary school children
• The effects of educational field trips on knowledge retention in primary school students
• Examining the effects of inclusive classroom practices on students’ attitudes towards diversity in primary schools
• The impact of parental involvement in homework on primary school students’ academic achievement
• Investigating the effectiveness of different assessment methods in primary school classrooms
• The influence of physical activity and exercise on cognitive development in primary school children
• Exploring the benefits of cooperative learning in promoting social skills in primary school students

Secondary Education

• Investigating the effects of school discipline policies on student behavior and academic success in secondary education
• The role of social media in enhancing communication and collaboration among secondary school students
• The impact of school leadership on teacher effectiveness and student outcomes in secondary schools
• Investigating the effects of technology integration on teaching and learning in secondary education
• Exploring the benefits of interdisciplinary instruction in promoting critical thinking skills in secondary schools
• The impact of arts education on creativity and self-expression in secondary school students
• The effectiveness of flipped classrooms in promoting student learning in secondary education
• The role of career guidance programs in preparing secondary school students for future employment
• Investigating the effects of student-centered learning approaches on student autonomy and academic success in secondary schools
• The impact of socio-economic factors on educational attainment in secondary education
• Investigating the impact of project-based learning on student engagement and academic achievement in secondary schools
• Investigating the effects of multicultural education on cultural understanding and tolerance in secondary schools
• The influence of standardized testing on teaching practices and student learning in secondary education
• Investigating the effects of classroom management strategies on student behavior and academic engagement in secondary education
• The influence of teacher professional development on instructional practices and student outcomes in secondary schools
• The role of extracurricular activities in promoting holistic development and well-roundedness in secondary school students
• Investigating the effects of blended learning models on student engagement and achievement in secondary education
• The role of physical education in promoting physical health and well-being among secondary school students
• Investigating the effects of gender on academic achievement and career aspirations in secondary education
• Exploring the benefits of multicultural literature in promoting cultural awareness and empathy among secondary school students
• The impact of school counseling services on student mental health and well-being in secondary schools
• Exploring the benefits of vocational education and training in preparing secondary school students for the workforce
• The role of digital literacy in preparing secondary school students for the digital age
• The influence of parental involvement on academic success and well-being of secondary school students
• The impact of social-emotional learning programs on secondary school students’ well-being and academic success
• The role of character education in fostering ethical and responsible behavior in secondary school students
• Examining the effects of digital citizenship education on responsible and ethical technology use among secondary school students
• The impact of parental involvement in school decision-making processes on student outcomes in secondary schools
• The role of educational technology in promoting personalized learning experiences in secondary schools
• The impact of inclusive education on the social and academic outcomes of students with disabilities in secondary schools
• The influence of parental support on academic motivation and achievement in secondary education
• The role of school climate in promoting positive behavior and well-being among secondary school students
• Examining the effects of peer mentoring programs on academic achievement and social-emotional development in secondary schools
• Examining the effects of teacher-student relationships on student motivation and achievement in secondary schools
• Exploring the benefits of service-learning programs in promoting civic engagement among secondary school students
• The impact of educational policies on educational equity and access in secondary education
• Examining the effects of homework on academic achievement and student well-being in secondary education
• Investigating the effects of different assessment methods on student performance in secondary schools
• Examining the effects of single-sex education on academic performance and gender stereotypes in secondary schools
• The role of mentoring programs in supporting the transition from secondary to post-secondary education

Tertiary Education

• The role of student support services in promoting academic success and well-being in higher education
• The impact of internationalization initiatives on students’ intercultural competence and global perspectives in tertiary education
• Investigating the effects of active learning classrooms and learning spaces on student engagement and learning outcomes in tertiary education
• Exploring the benefits of service-learning experiences in fostering civic engagement and social responsibility in higher education
• The influence of learning communities and collaborative learning environments on student academic and social integration in higher education
• Exploring the benefits of undergraduate research experiences in fostering critical thinking and scientific inquiry skills
• Investigating the effects of academic advising and mentoring on student retention and degree completion in higher education
• The role of student engagement and involvement in co-curricular activities on holistic student development in higher education
• The impact of multicultural education on fostering cultural competence and diversity appreciation in higher education
• The role of internships and work-integrated learning experiences in enhancing students’ employability and career outcomes
• Examining the effects of assessment and feedback practices on student learning and academic achievement in tertiary education
• The influence of faculty professional development on instructional practices and student outcomes in tertiary education
• The influence of faculty-student relationships on student success and well-being in tertiary education
• The impact of college transition programs on students’ academic and social adjustment to higher education
• The impact of online learning platforms on student learning outcomes in higher education
• The impact of financial aid and scholarships on access and persistence in higher education
• The influence of student leadership and involvement in extracurricular activities on personal development and campus engagement
• Exploring the benefits of competency-based education in developing job-specific skills in tertiary students
• Examining the effects of flipped classroom models on student learning and retention in higher education
• Exploring the benefits of online collaboration and virtual team projects in developing teamwork skills in tertiary students
• Investigating the effects of diversity and inclusion initiatives on campus climate and student experiences in tertiary education
• The influence of study abroad programs on intercultural competence and global perspectives of college students
• Investigating the effects of peer mentoring and tutoring programs on student retention and academic performance in tertiary education
• Investigating the effectiveness of active learning strategies in promoting student engagement and achievement in tertiary education
• Investigating the effects of blended learning models and hybrid courses on student learning and satisfaction in higher education
• The role of digital literacy and information literacy skills in supporting student success in the digital age
• Investigating the effects of experiential learning opportunities on career readiness and employability of college students
• The impact of e-portfolios on student reflection, self-assessment, and showcasing of learning in higher education
• The role of technology in enhancing collaborative learning experiences in tertiary classrooms
• The impact of research opportunities on undergraduate student engagement and pursuit of advanced degrees
• Examining the effects of competency-based assessment on measuring student learning and achievement in tertiary education
• Examining the effects of interdisciplinary programs and courses on critical thinking and problem-solving skills in college students
• The role of inclusive education and accessibility in promoting equitable learning experiences for diverse student populations
• The role of career counseling and guidance in supporting students’ career decision-making in tertiary education
• The influence of faculty diversity and representation on student success and inclusive learning environments in higher education

Education-Related Dissertations & Theses

While the ideas we’ve presented above are a decent starting point for finding a research topic in education, they are fairly generic and non-specific. So, it helps to look at actual dissertations and theses in the education space to see how this all comes together in practice.

Below, we’ve included a selection of education-related research projects to help refine your thinking. These are actual dissertations and theses, written as part of Master’s and PhD-level programs, so they can provide some useful insight as to what a research topic looks like in practice.

• From Rural to Urban: Education Conditions of Migrant Children in China (Wang, 2019)
• Energy Renovation While Learning English: A Guidebook for Elementary ESL Teachers (Yang, 2019)
• A Reanalyses of Intercorrelational Matrices of Visual and Verbal Learners’ Abilities, Cognitive Styles, and Learning Preferences (Fox, 2020)
• A study of the elementary math program utilized by a mid-Missouri school district (Barabas, 2020)
• Instructor formative assessment practices in virtual learning environments : a posthumanist sociomaterial perspective (Burcks, 2019)
• Higher education students services: a qualitative study of two mid-size universities’ direct exchange programs (Kinde, 2020)
• Exploring editorial leadership : a qualitative study of scholastic journalism advisers teaching leadership in Missouri secondary schools (Lewis, 2020)
• Selling the virtual university: a multimodal discourse analysis of marketing for online learning (Ludwig, 2020)
• Advocacy and accountability in school counselling: assessing the use of data as related to professional self-efficacy (Matthews, 2020)
• The use of an application screening assessment as a predictor of teaching retention at a midwestern, K-12, public school district (Scarbrough, 2020)
• Core values driving sustained elite performance cultures (Beiner, 2020)
• Educative features of upper elementary Eureka math curriculum (Dwiggins, 2020)
• How female principals nurture adult learning opportunities in successful high schools with challenging student demographics (Woodward, 2020)
• The disproportionality of Black Males in Special Education: A Case Study Analysis of Educator Perceptions in a Southeastern Urban High School (McCrae, 2021)

As you can see, these research topics are a lot more focused than the generic topic ideas we presented earlier. So, in order for you to develop a high-quality research topic, you’ll need to get specific and laser-focused on a specific context with specific variables of interest.  In the video below, we explore some other important things you’ll need to consider when crafting your research topic.

Get 1-On-1 Help

If you’re still unsure about how to find a quality research topic within education, check out our Research Topic Kickstarter service, which is the perfect starting point for developing a unique, well-justified research topic.

Find The Perfect Research Topic

How To Choose A Research Topic: 5 Key Criteria

How To Choose A Research Topic Step-By-Step Tutorial With Examples + Free Topic...

Research Topics & Ideas: Automation & Robotics

Research Topics & Ideas: Robotics 50 Topic Ideas To Kickstart Your Research...

Research Topics & Ideas: Sociology

Research Topics & Ideas: Sociology 50 Topic Ideas To Kickstart Your Research...

Research Topics & Ideas: Public Health & Epidemiology

Research Topics & Ideas: Public Health 50 Topic Ideas To Kickstart Your Research...

Research Topics & Ideas: Neuroscience

Research Topics & Ideas: Neuroscience 50 Topic Ideas To Kickstart Your Research...

📄 FREE TEMPLATES

Research Topic Ideation

Proposal Writing

Literature Review

Methodology & Analysis

Academic Writing

Referencing & Citing

Apps, Tools & Tricks

The Grad Coach Podcast

70 Comments

This is an helpful tool 🙏

Special education

Really appreciated by this . It is the best platform for research related items

Research title related to school of students

How are you

I think this platform is actually good enough.

Research title related to students

My field is research measurement and evaluation. Need dissertation topics in the field

Assalam o Alaikum I’m a student Bs educational Resarch and evaluation I’m confused to choose My thesis title please help me in choose the thesis title

Good idea I’m going to teach my colleagues

You can find our list of nursing-related research topic ideas here: https://gradcoach.com/research-topics-nursing/

Write on action research topic, using guidance and counseling to address unwanted teenage pregnancy in school

Thanks a lot

I learned a lot from this site, thank you so much!

Thank you for the information.. I would like to request a topic based on school major in social studies

parental involvement and students academic performance

Science education topics?

plz tell me if you got some good topics, im here for finding research topic for masters degree

How about School management and supervision pls.?

Hi i am an Deputy Principal in a primary school. My wish is to srudy foe Master’s degree in Education.Please advice me on which topic can be relevant for me. Thanks.

Thank you so much for the information provided. I would like to get an advice on the topic to research for my masters program. My area of concern is on teacher morale versus students achievement.

Every topic proposed above on primary education is a starting point for me. I appreciate immensely the team that has sat down to make a detail of these selected topics just for beginners like us. Be blessed.

Kindly help me with the research questions on the topic” Effects of workplace conflict on the employees’ job performance”. The effects can be applicable in every institution,enterprise or organisation.

Greetings, I am a student majoring in Sociology and minoring in Public Administration. I’m considering any recommended research topic in the field of Sociology.

I’m a student pursuing Mphil in Basic education and I’m considering any recommended research proposal topic in my field of study

Research Defense for students in senior high

Kindly help me with a research topic in educational psychology. Ph.D level. Thank you.

Project-based learning is a teaching/learning type,if well applied in a classroom setting will yield serious positive impact. What can a teacher do to implement this in a disadvantaged zone like “North West Region of Cameroon ( hinterland) where war has brought about prolonged and untold sufferings on the indegins?

I wish to get help on topics of research on educational administration

I wish to get help on topics of research on educational administration PhD level

I am also looking for such type of title

I am a student of undergraduate, doing research on how to use guidance and counseling to address unwanted teenage pregnancy in school

the topics are very good regarding research & education .

Am an undergraduate student carrying out a research on the impact of nutritional healthy eating programs on academic performance in primary schools

Can i request your suggestion topic for my Thesis about Teachers as an OFW. thanx you

Would like to request for suggestions on a topic in Economics of education,PhD level

Would like to request for suggestions on a topic in Economics of education

Hi 👋 I request that you help me with a written research proposal about education the format

Am offering degree in education senior high School Accounting. I want a topic for my project work

l would like to request suggestions on a topic in managing teaching and learning, PhD level (educational leadership and management)

request suggestions on a topic in managing teaching and learning, PhD level (educational leadership and management)

I would to inquire on research topics on Educational psychology, Masters degree

I am PhD student, I am searching my Research topic, It should be innovative,my area of interest is online education,use of technology in education

request suggestion on topic in masters in medical education .

Look at British Library as they keep a copy of all PhDs in the UK Core.ac.uk to access Open University and 6 other university e-archives, pdf downloads mostly available, all free.

May I also ask for a topic based on mathematics education for college teaching, please?

Please I am a masters student of the department of Teacher Education, Faculty of Education Please I am in need of proposed project topics to help with my final year thesis

Am a PhD student in Educational Foundations would like a sociological topic. Thank

please i need a proposed thesis project regardging computer science

Greetings and Regards I am a doctoral student in the field of philosophy of education. I am looking for a new topic for my thesis. Because of my work in the elementary school, I am looking for a topic that is from the field of elementary education and is related to the philosophy of education.

Masters student in the field of curriculum, any ideas of a research topic on low achiever students

In the field of curriculum any ideas of a research topic on deconalization in contextualization of digital teaching and learning through in higher education

Amazing guidelines

I am a graduate with two masters. 1) Master of arts in religious studies and 2) Master in education in foundations of education. I intend to do a Ph.D. on my second master’s, however, I need to bring both masters together through my Ph.D. research. can I do something like, ” The contribution of Philosophy of education for a quality religion education in Kenya”? kindly, assist and be free to suggest a similar topic that will bring together the two masters. thanks in advance

Hi, I am an Early childhood trainer as well as a researcher, I need more support on this topic: The impact of early childhood education on later academic success.

I’m a student in upper level secondary school and I need your support in this research topics: “Impact of incorporating project -based learning in teaching English language skills in secondary schools”.

Although research activities and topics should stem from reflection on one’s practice, I found this site valuable as it effectively addressed many issues we have been experiencing as practitioners.

Your style is unique in comparison to other folks I’ve read stuff from. Thanks for posting when you have the opportunity, Guess I will just book mark this site.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

• Print Friendly

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications

• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

72% of U.S. high school teachers say cellphone distraction is a major problem in the classroom

Some 72% of high school teachers say that students being distracted by cellphones is a major problem in their classroom.

U.S. public, private and charter schools in 5 charts

During the 2021-22 school year, 83% of the country’s public, private and charter school students in pre-K through 12th grade attended traditional public schools.

Is College Worth It?

Americans have mixed views on the importance of having a degree. 47% say the cost is worth it only if someone doesn’t have to take out loans.

Half of Latinas Say Hispanic Women’s Situation Has Improved in the Past Decade and Expect More Gains

Government data shows gains in education, employment and earnings for Hispanic women, but gaps with other groups remain.

A quarter of U.S. teachers say AI tools do more harm than good in K-12 education

High school teachers are more likely than elementary and middle school teachers to hold negative views about AI tools in education.

Most Americans think U.S. K-12 STEM education isn’t above average, but test results paint a mixed picture

Just 28% of U.S. adults say America is the best in the world or above average in K-12 STEM education compared with other wealthy nations.

About 1 in 4 U.S. teachers say their school went into a gun-related lockdown in the last school year

59% of public K-12 teachers say they are at least somewhat worried about the possibility of a shooting ever happening at their school.

About half of Americans say public K-12 education is going in the wrong direction

A majority of those who say it’s headed in the wrong direction say a major reason is that schools are not spending enough time on core academic subjects.

What Public K-12 Teachers Want Americans To Know About Teaching

Many public K-12 teachers say people should know that teaching is hard job, and that teachers care about students and deserve respect.

What’s It Like To Be a Teacher in America Today?

Public K-12 teachers express low job satisfaction and few are optimistic about the future of U.S. education.

REFINE YOUR SELECTION

• Richard Fry (45)
• Lee Rainie (31)
• Drew DeSilver (21)
• Kim Parker (16)
• D’Vera Cohn (13)
• Katherine Schaeffer (13)
• Amanda Lenhart (10)
• Jens Manuel Krogstad (10)
• Juliana Menasce Horowitz (10)
• Monica Anderson (10)
• Neil G. Ruiz (9)
• Tom Rosentiel (8)
• Cary Funk (7)
• Kiley Hurst (7)
• Brian Kennedy (6)
• Kathryn Zickuhr (6)
• Mark Hugo Lopez (6)
• Anna Brown (5)
• Dana Braga (5)
• John Gramlich (5)
• Kristen Purcell (5)
• A.W. Geiger (4)
• Amanda Barroso (4)
• Andrew Perrin (4)
• Anthony Cilluffo (4)
• Bruce Drake (4)
• Caryle Murphy (4)
• Eileen Patten (4)
• John B. Horrigan (4)
• Kat Devlin (4)
• Laura Silver (4)
• Michael Suh (4)
• Sara Kehaulani Goo (4)
• Abby Budiman (3)
• Amina Dunn (3)
• Chris Baronavski (3)
• Daniel Dockterman (3)
• Emily A. Vogels (3)
• George Gao (3)
• Gretchen Livingston (3)
• Janna Anderson (3)
• Judy Buchanan (3)
• Kristen Bialik (3)
• Linda Friedrich (3)
• Luona Lin (3)
• Meg Hefferon (3)
• Nikki Graf (3)
• Rakesh Kochhar (3)
• Stella Sechopoulos (3)
• Susannah Fox (3)
• Wendy Wang (3)
• Aaron Smith (2)
• Andrea Caumont (2)
• Brooke Auxier (2)
• Carrie Blazina (2)
• Colleen McClain (2)
• Gabriel Borelli (2)
• Hannah Hartig (2)
• J.J. Moncus (2)
• Jan Lauren Boyles (2)
• Jeffrey S. Passel (2)
• Jenn Hatfield (2)
• Jynnah Radford (2)
• Lauren Mora (2)
• Mark Strauss (2)
• Michael Lipka (2)
• Pew Research Center Staff (2)
• Rachel Minkin (2)
• Renee Stepler (2)
• Rich Morin (2)
• Richard Wike (2)
• Ruth Igielnik (2)
• Shannon Greenwood (2)
• Aidan Connaughton (1)
• Alberto F. Cabrera (1)
• Alec Tyson (1)
• Aleksandra Sandstrom (1)
• Alexandra Cahn (1)
• Alissa Scheller (1)
• Amanda Jacklin (1)
• Amy Wells (1)
• Ana Gonzalez-Barrera (1)
• Andrew Daniller (1)
• Andy Cerda (1)
• Ariana Rodriguez-Gitler (1)
• B. Lindsey Lowell (1)
• Becka A. Alper (1)
• Bridget Parker (1)
• Bruce Stokes (1)
• Carolina Aragão (1)
• Carroll Doherty (1)
• Christine Huang (1)
• Christine Tamir (1)
• Chul Lee (1)
• Clara Chen (1)
• Conrad Hackett (1)
• Dalia Fahmy (1)
• Dan Hess (1)
• Danielle Cuddington (1)
• David Masci (1)
• David McClendon (1)
• Felisa Gonzales (1)
• Gabriel Velasco (1)
• J. Baxter Oliphant (1)
• Jacob Poushter (1)
• Janell Fetterolf (1)
• Jeff Diamant (1)
• Jeffrey Gottfried (1)
• Jesse Bennett (1)
• Jessica Vitak (1)
• Jocelyn Kiley (1)
• John Carlo Mandapat (1)
• Katie Simmons (1)
• Khadijah Edwards (1)
• Kristi Walker (1)
• Leslie Davis (1)
• Luis Noe-Bustamante (1)
• Mary Madden (1)
• Max Kalehoff (1)
• Maya Simon (1)
• Meltem Odabaş (1)
• Michael Keegan (1)
• Michelle Faverio (1)
• Mike Graziano (1)
• Mohamad Moslimani (1)
• Nancy Vogt (1)
• Nathan Kommers (1)
• Nick Zanetti (1)
• Oliver Lewis (1)
• Olivia Sidoti (1)
• Paul Taylor (1)
• Pew Research Center: Journalism & Media staff (1)
• Philip Schwadel (1)
• Phillip Connor (1)
• Rebecca Hinze-Pifer (1)
• Risa Gelles-Watnick (1)
• Roberto Suro (1)
• Russell Heimlich (1)
• Sahana Mukherjee (1)
• Sarita Brown (1)
• Scott Swail (1)
• Seth Motel (1)
• Shirin Hakimzadeh (1)
• Sousan Arafeh (1)
• Stephanie Kramer (1)
• Steve Jones (1)
• Ted Van Green (1)
• Travis Mitchell (1)
• Vianney Gómez (1)
• Ziyao Tian (1)

Research Teams

• Social Trends (134)
• Internet and Technology (96)
• Religion (64)
• Race and Ethnicity (60)
• Global Migration and Demography (45)
• Global (43)
• Politics (35)
• Science (27)
• Journalism (17)
• Data Labs (15)
• Pew Research Center (14)
• Methods (13)

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Reserve a study room
• Library Account
• Undergraduate Students
• Graduate Students
• Faculty & Staff

Research Lifecycle Online Learning Objects

• Plan and Design
• Collect and Create
• Analyze and Collaborate
• Evaluate and Archive
• Share and Disseminate
• Access and Reuse

Contact Us for Assistance

The health sciences library.

Call toll-free:  (844) 352-7399 E-mail:   Ask Us More contact information

What is the Research Lifecycle?

Within the context of this guide, we will be referring to the research lifecycle as the steps taken to fund, plan, design, deliver, and disseminate a research project from start to finish. For reference, you can also consult the Harvard Biomedical Data Management page to see this process of research data management.   Another useful resource is the SAGE Research Methods Project Planner tool , which walks you through the research process, step-by-step.

This guide compiles library-created online learning objects designed to address a particular stage of the research process. By grouping them here, we hope to provide easy access to faculty and students looking for asynchronous instruction on literature reviews, synthesis tools (e.g., Covidence), data management, finding a publisher, and where to store your research for reuse. 

Resources to Help You Get Started

Related Resources

• C. Kenneth and Dianne Wright Center for Clinical and Translational Research: Consultation Services "Our team of research professionals help with planning, implementing, conducting, and disseminating research. Our services including identifying and accessing resources, matching researchers with collaborators and providing research training."
• Human Research Protection Program/Institutional Review Board "The OVPRI Human Research Protection Program provides guidance and resources for researchers and IRB members at Virginia Commonwealth University. We review all research involving human participants to facilitate the conduct of ethical research and ensure compliance with federal, state and institutional regulations."
• Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation (OVPRI): Research Development Resources OVPRI provides "a comprehensive range of proposal development and grantsmanship services..."
• Next: Plan and Design >>
• Last Updated: Aug 30, 2024 12:45 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.vcu.edu/researchlifecycle

The Science of Research Mentoring

• Race and Ethnicity

Essential Science Conversations

January 2023

• Transcript (PDF, 80KB)
• Related resources (PDF, 12KB)

Most psychological scientists are expected to be research mentors. But few are trained in mentoring skills, or in the science of mentoring. Join us for a discussion on best practices as a mentor, including mentoring scholars of color.

This program does not offer CE credit.

June Gruber, PhD

An associate professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Colorado and director of the Positive Emotion and Psychopathology Laboratory. Gruber has published over 100 articles and chapters and has edited the Oxford Handbook of Positive Emotion and Psychopathology and Positive Emotion: Integrating the Light Sides and Dark Sides . Gruber also co-writes a column for young scientists for Science Careers and is engaged in co-leading a call to action centered on the mental health crisis sparked by COVID-19.

Jessica L. Borelli, PhD

A professor of psychological science and an associate director of clinical training at UC Irvine.

Mia A. Smith-Bynum, PhD

Senior director for Science Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, APA; professor of family science in the School of Public Health at the University of Maryland, College Park.

Mitch Prinstein, PhD

Chief Science Officer, APA.

More in this series

McGuire and a panel of psychological scientists discuss how your research and expertise can shape policy, garner funding for essential programs, and improve human lives.

October 2022 On Demand Webinar

Discusses what reporters and editors want and need from scientist sources, how psychological scientists can present their work in compelling ways, and the do’s and don’ts when working with the news media.

September 2022 On Demand Webinar

Discusses the need to shift psychology’s focus from the individual researcher, and their career and work, to a truly publicly-engaged science, where the public is involved in all steps of the research process.

April 2022 On Demand Webinar

The NIH Loan Repayment Programs encourage promising researchers and psychological scientists to pursue research careers by repaying up to $50,000 of their qualified student loan debt each year.

October 2021 On Demand Webinar

• School of Education

Postgraduate study

• Meet our postgraduate students

I wanted to help improve young people's services through research

What has your career path been since finishing your Sheffield Methods Institute (SMI) degree?

Since finishing my MA Social Research programme, I have worked as a Data and Research Coordinator for Sheffield Students' Union (SU), utilising the research and data analysis skills I developed through my master's degree to improve student services.

I am about to start a new role as an analyst at the Children's Society. I had a clear idea when starting the MA in Social Research that I wanted to help improve young people's services through research, centering young people's voices in service provision.

When the opportunity to work with the Children's Society arose I was excited to work with an organisation whose work aligns so closely with my research interests and values.

What skills are required for your job?

I design and carry out research projects that utilise quantitative and qualitative research methods, including surveys, focus groups and interviews.

I carry out statistical analysis using R and qualitative analysis using NVivo. I also communicate research findings and recommendations through research reports, presentations and workshops. All of these skills are skills I developed through my MA.

What do you enjoy most about your job?

I love working with a diverse group of people, learning about their experiences and facilitating the improvement of services so they have access to the support they want.

What does a 'typical' day usually look like?

A typical day is a combination of individual work (completing research proposals, conducting analysis, writing reports), team work (feeding back on a project's progress, receiving feedback on proposals, discussing initial findings), and engaging with young people about the issues they face. A typical day is varied, busy, and rewarding.

What’s the best piece of careers advice you’ve received?

Don't be too discouraged if a job application isn't successful. Every opportunity you apply for is good practice and helps you learn about what you would like to do.

What advice would you give to someone wanting to work in a similar role or industry?

Research the organisation you want to work for. Read their annual reports and impact reports. Think about why you want to work there and what you will bring to the organisation. Enthusiasm and dedication are as important as your skills.

Did you do any activities alongside your studies? If so, did they help you get your first graduate job?

I worked at the Students' Union as the Council Administration Assistant whilst studying, taking minutes and recording the decisions Council made. It was through this job I saw the opportunity to work as a Data and Research Coordinator and gain experience using the skills I had learnt.

What did you enjoy most about your SMI degree and what has been the most valuable thing you learnt?

I particularly enjoyed the qualitative modules and learning about creative research methods. It's hard to say what the most valuable thing I learnt was, as I learnt such a valuable range of skills. I think it was the ability to really engage with research participants and be reflective throughout the research process.

What’s your fondest memory of being a student in Sheffield?

I have many happy memories of spending time at the SU on a sunny day.

Social Research MA

• September 2024 start
• 1 year 2 years Full-time Part-time

On this course you'll become well-versed in the theoretical concepts in social research. Choose from a wide range of modules that reflect your interests, and apply your qualitative and quantitative skills to your field of research. Our graduates go on to PhD research or careers that demand world-class research skills.

We offer a generous package of financial support for international students, including undergraduate and postgraduate taught scholarships towards the annual tuition fee. Applications are open for existing offer holders.

• IPR Intranet

INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH

New ipr research: august 2024, get all our news.

Subscribe to newsletter

This month’s new research from our faculty experts investigates how a family-centered education program in Tulsa supports student parents, visibility and wellbeing in the bi+ community, perceptions of a living wage, and how parent-child discussions can help address subtle racism.

Education and Human Development

A Family-Centered Approach to Helping Student Parents Succeed in Higher Education

Approximately four million people juggle parenthood and college in the United States. How can a family-centered education program in Tulsa support these student parents? IPR faculty researchers Lauren Tighe , Teresa Eckrich Sommer , Terri Sabol , and Lindsay Chase-Lansdale investigate the effects of the program in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences . The Community Action Project of Tulsa’s Career Advance program provides education and career training in healthcare to low-income parents with children. Its original model was centered in Head Start and helped parents achieve postsecondary education while their young children received early education programming. The program also provided numerous supportive services such as free tuition and childcare. The second model, which was based in an adult education and workforce agency and designed to serve the broader Tulsa population, began offering parents similar family-centered support and assistance The IPR team conducted a randomized control trial to evaluate the impacts of the adult model. They surveyed 277 racially and ethnically diverse parents, mostly mothers, 191 of whom received access to the program and 86 who did not. After a year in the program, parent participants were more likely to have obtained a vocational certificate or an associate degree compared to those who did not participate. The study is one of the first to show experimentally that a two-generation program might be effective in promoting student parents’ educational success.

Health Inequalities

Visibility, Relationship Dynamics, and Wellbeing the Bi+ Community

Bi+ people—those who are attracted to more than one gender—are the largest group within the LGBTQ+ community, but they often feel invisible. They also experience greater mental health challenges than people who identify as heterosexual, gay, or lesbian. A study by Emma McGorray, IPR social psychologist Eli Finkel , and Brian Feinstein in Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity explores associations between bi+ individuals’ feelings of invisibility and their quality of life, particularly in the context of romantic relationships. The researchers focus on two main questions: whether feeling visible as a bi+ person is linked to greater wellbeing, and which features of romantic relationships are associated with greater feelings of visibility. The team surveyed 450 bi+ individuals who were single, in same-gender relationships, or in mixed-gender relationships. They found that feeling recognized as a bi+ person was linked to higher levels of wellbeing, especially for those who consider their sexual orientation central to their sense of self. Participants in mixed-gender relationships with heterosexual partners reported a lower sense of visibility compared to those in same-gender relationships and those with bi+ partners. The study also revealed that a bi+ individual may feel invisible even when their partner affirms and recognizes their identity. The researchers encourage clinicians working with bi+ individuals to pay attention to their romantic relationships and partner characteristics and to assess how visible and central these individuals consider their bi+ identity. Finkel is a Morton O. Schapiro IPR Faculty Fellow.

Race, Poverty, and Inequality

Perceptions of a Living Wage  

How much money is enough to live on is fundamental to many basic life decisions. In a working paper, IPR adjunct professor Michael Kraus and his colleagues examine how people estimate a living wage, how income shapes their estimates, and how it influences their support for government policies. The researchers asked 1,000 adults across the United States several questions, including what they think is a living wage, the average wage of working adults, and the average wage of workers earning the minimum wage. The participants also reported what they consider to be a basic need, their monthly spending, and their support for redistributive policies. The researchers find that people’s estimates of a living wage are higher than the federal poverty line, the state and federal minimum wage, a popular cost of living calculator called the MIT living wage calculator, and the proposed minimum wage standard of $15 per hour. Participants who reported higher estimates of a living wage were more likely to support redistributive policies, such as expanding programs that improve the living standards of disadvantaged groups or creating a federal job guarantee program. The results show that people generally report a living wage as higher than the federal standard and their beliefs about economic conditions are shaped by their own socioeconomic experiences. Future research should continue to explore income’s influence on perceptions of a living wage and how people calculate leisure as part of a living wage, given its importance for wellbeing.

Parent-Child Discussions Can Help Address Subtle Racism  

Experts recommend that White parents discuss racism with their children to reduce racial bias. However, many parents fail to do so. In a study published in  Developmental Psychology,  IPR psychologist Sylvia Perry and her colleagues  investigate  what sort of language White parents used in guided discussions of race with their 8–12-year-old children and whether the conversations effectively decreased bias.  The researchers recruited 84 White parent and child pairs who participated in a guided discussion task.  Parents and their children watched interactions between a White and Black child that showcased overt prejudice, subtle prejudice, or neutral interactions. Following this, parents used suggested discussion prompts meant to facilitate color-conscious conversations, where prejudice was acknowledged, and discourage colorblind conversations, where prejudice was downplayed. Parents and children separately completed implicit association tests to measure their anti-Black bias before and after the task. The results indicated that parents and children who had discussed race showed a significant decrease in anti-Black bias, with parents’ implicit bias score decreasing from 0.53 to 0.34 and children's implicit bias score decreasing from 0.41 to 0.16. Moreover, over 90% of parents and children used color-conscious language during their discussion, and this was associated with decreased bias in both parents and children. Although some parents also used colorblind language during the guided task, this language weakened but did not erase the positive effects of the color-conscious language on bias reduction. Researchers suggest that it is critical for parents to have honest conversations with their children about racism, even from a young age.

Neighborhoods and Community Safety

Officer-Involved Killings of Unarmed Black People and Racial Disparities in Sleep

Research shows that Black Americans are more likely to report that they sleep less than White Americans, putting them at risk for worse physical and mental health outcomes. In a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine, IPR sociologist Andrew Papachristos and his colleagues investigate whether exposure to police officer-involved killings of unarmed Black people is linked to sleep duration in Black communities. The researchers use data on sleep duration from two nationally representative surveys: the US Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) and the American Time Use Surveys (ATUS). They examined responses from 181,865 Black and 1,799,757 White adults in the BRFSS and 9,858 Black and 46,532 White adults in the ATUS between 2013 and 2019. They also reviewed data from Mapping Police Violence (MPV), an online database tracking officer-involved killings since 2013. They then used data from both surveys to examine changes in sleep duration for Black adults before and after exposure to officer-involved killings of unarmed Black Americans in their area of residence and nationally. The evidence reveals that Black Americans are more likely to report that they got short sleep—less than seven hours of sleep—or very short sleep—less than six hours of sleep—compared to White Americans after police killed an unarmed Black person. Black Americans reported less sleep when the killing was in the state where they lived. These findings highlight the role police violence can play in shaping racial disparities in sleep duration.

Photo credit: Unsplash

Published: August 28, 2024.

Related Research Stories

Faculty Spotlight: Eli Finkel

The Mental Health Effects of School Shootings

How Do Voters Think About Electability?

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Regional study on gender norms, education and boys' dropout rates: call for expressions of interest

The FCDO invites suppliers to submit an expression of interest by 13 September 2024 to conduct research for a study on gender norms, education and boys' drop-out rates in Tanzania and East Africa region.

The deadline for submitting expressions of interest is 11:59pm British Summer Time (BST) on 13 September 2024.

The Evidence Fund was established to support the commissioning of accessible, high-quality research and evidence that will inform policies, programmes and practices. These will contribute to positive development outcomes and poverty reduction in country-specific settings as well as regionally based on the mission of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) Research and Evidence Directorate (RED).

What the fund will achieve

The delivery partner will conduct both quantitative and qualitative analysis in this research project to identify trends. This will inform understanding of the reasons behind boys’ declining enrolment and increasing dropout rates in primary and junior secondary schools across Tanzania and the broader East African region, with a focus on gender norms.

Requirements for organisations

The proposed team should have an appropriate mix of local and international expertise in education research. Expressions of interest from consortia that bring together international and local institutions are welcome.

How to apply

To receive the full terms of reference, email your completed expression of interest template to [email protected] by 11:59pm BST on 13 September 2024. Late submissions will not be considered.

Expression of interest template: Gender norms, education and boys drop-out rates in Tanzania and East Africa

Updates to this page

Is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .