Evidence-based does not mean what you think it means ... in the US anyways
autside.substack.com
A recent article from Peter Greene discusses the meaning of "evidence-based" when used to describe education programs and the lack of consistency in how that term is defined and applied. It notes that the federal government has a very broad definition of "evidence-based" that requires only a single study showing some positive effect. When researchers reviewed over 1,300 education programs rated by 12 different clearinghouses, only about 30% that were rated by multiple clearinghouses received similar effectiveness ratings. The article argues this shows "evidence-based" can mean very different things to different reviewers and often lacks rigorous proof that a program truly works. It suggests the variability allows ineffective programs to be labelled "evidence-based." The article concludes by saying the term is so broadly defined by law that it has little consistent meaning regarding program effectiveness.
Hmmm… sounds familiar.
The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
Evidence-based does not mean what you think it means ... in the US anyways
Evidence-based does not mean what you think it means ... in the US anyways
Evidence-based does not mean what you think it means ... in the US anyways
A recent article from Peter Greene discusses the meaning of "evidence-based" when used to describe education programs and the lack of consistency in how that term is defined and applied. It notes that the federal government has a very broad definition of "evidence-based" that requires only a single study showing some positive effect. When researchers reviewed over 1,300 education programs rated by 12 different clearinghouses, only about 30% that were rated by multiple clearinghouses received similar effectiveness ratings. The article argues this shows "evidence-based" can mean very different things to different reviewers and often lacks rigorous proof that a program truly works. It suggests the variability allows ineffective programs to be labelled "evidence-based." The article concludes by saying the term is so broadly defined by law that it has little consistent meaning regarding program effectiveness.
Hmmm… sounds familiar.
The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.