Brokering knowledge from laboratory experiments in evidence‐based education: The case of interleaving

Paul Rowlandson, Adrian Simpson
{"title":"Brokering knowledge from laboratory experiments in evidence‐based education: The case of interleaving","authors":"Paul Rowlandson, Adrian Simpson","doi":"10.1002/berj.4037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The turn to ‘evidence‐based education’ in the past three decades favours one type of evidence: experiment. Knowledge brokers ground recommendations for classroom practice on reports of experimental research. This paper distinguishes <jats:italic>field</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>laboratory</jats:italic> experiments, on the basis of control and precision of causal ascription. Briefly noting problems with knowledge brokers’ extrapolating from field experiments, the paper's main focus is on extrapolating from laboratory experiments, using the case of ‘interleaving’. It argues that knowledge brokers often extrapolate from laboratory experiments as if they are field experiments. By considering both laboratory and ‘extra‐lab’ interleaving studies, it suggests that an alternative extrapolation—creating laboratory effects in the classroom—has little pedagogical value. The conclusion suggests focussing on mechanisms, contexts and outcomes as a more useful basis for brokering pedagogical knowledge from laboratory experiments.","PeriodicalId":501494,"journal":{"name":"British Educational Research Journal ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Educational Research Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.4037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The turn to ‘evidence‐based education’ in the past three decades favours one type of evidence: experiment. Knowledge brokers ground recommendations for classroom practice on reports of experimental research. This paper distinguishes field and laboratory experiments, on the basis of control and precision of causal ascription. Briefly noting problems with knowledge brokers’ extrapolating from field experiments, the paper's main focus is on extrapolating from laboratory experiments, using the case of ‘interleaving’. It argues that knowledge brokers often extrapolate from laboratory experiments as if they are field experiments. By considering both laboratory and ‘extra‐lab’ interleaving studies, it suggests that an alternative extrapolation—creating laboratory effects in the classroom—has little pedagogical value. The conclusion suggests focussing on mechanisms, contexts and outcomes as a more useful basis for brokering pedagogical knowledge from laboratory experiments.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
循证教育中实验室实验的知识中介:交错案例
在过去的三十年里,"循证教育 "倾向于一种证据:实验。知识经纪人将实验研究报告作为课堂实践建议的基础。本文根据因果关系的控制和精确性,对现场实验和实验室实验进行了区分。本文以 "交织 "为例,简要指出了知识经纪人从现场实验中进行推断的问题,并将主要重点放在从实验室实验中进行推断上。论文认为,知识经纪人经常把实验室实验当作实地实验来推断。通过对实验室和 "实验室外 "交织研究的考虑,文章指出,另一种外推法--在课堂上创造实验室效果--几乎没有教学价值。结论建议将重点放在机制、背景和结果上,以此作为从实验室实验中获取教学知识的更有用的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reshaping curriculum adaptation in the age of artificial intelligence: Mapping teachers' AI‐driven curriculum adaptation patterns Physical education in alternative provision schools: A case of spatial (in)justice? The ‘Friday effect’: School attendance over the weeki From challenge to innovation: A grassroots study of teachers’ classroom assessment innovations Math task experiences and motivation to learn more: How prior knowledge and interest interact with Task‐Interest & Task‐Difficulty perceptions and feed a desire to reengage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1