Intro Part 2: Evidence-based Practice & Practice-based evidence

Within education there are two broadly competing educational philosophies—traditional and progressive (Snider, 2006). Traditional education emphasises the need for students to progress through the curriculum in specific steps for each curriculum area, by achieving mastery of each preceding step, before progression on to the next; whilst, in contrast, progressive education promotes methods that are intended to foster children’s innate interest in learning; although this latter type of education relies on children progressing only as rapidly as they would learn on their own without any direct intervention (Fredrick, Deltz, Bryceland, & Hummel, 2002).

In order to develop and provide effective educational practices it is essential that education follow evidenced-based practice and practice-based evidence approaches. The former refers to the use of well-controlled scientific research in determining what has been shown to work. The latter refers to methods of monitoring practice that clearly demonstrates that practice is having the desired effects that were expected from the research evidence (i.e., in the case of education, is effective educational practice). Viewed from this context it is clear that educational provision and approaches are too often based on current trends, rather than scientific evidence and these educational ‘fads’ cycle according to the prevailing approach to learning that may be currently in favour (Kozloff, 2005; Slavin, 2008). In many cases the approaches have not been adequately researched before they are rapidly adopted in educational settings throughout the country (Slavin, 1989).

There have been effective teaching tools available for quite some time with accomplished research-proven track records (Bijou, 1970; Heward, 2005; Maloney, 1998; Moran & Malott, 2004), yet there appears to be a “knowledge to practice gap” (Heward, 2005, p. 317) that prevents their complete and wholesale adoption into mainstream educational practices (Lindsley, 1992). This failure to adopt proven practices is analogous, for instance, to the delay in time between understanding the benefits of citrus fruits in the prevention and treatment of scurvy (1601), and its eventual implementation as a treatment, leading to it being finally eradicated in the mercantile marine—after a delay of 264 years (Barbash, 2011; Lamb, 2001; Mosteller, 1981; Skinner, 1984). Heward (2005) believes that there is a “more pressing (and possibly larger) gap we must close . . . between what research has discovered about effective instruction and what is practiced in the majority of classrooms.” (p. 317).

In her book, Snider describes how educational practices should mythsfollow the example from medicine in its timely transition toward becoming a mature science (Snider, 2006; Snider & Roehl, 2007). A view supported by Carnine (2000; Hargreaves, 1997) as he considers how education is at a similar juncture of development toward scientific status, as medicine was in the early part of the twentieth century before it rose to the challenge of becoming a mature profession. There are a number of issues that need to be considered if you desire to raise the educational performance of young children. These issues revolve around remediation of existing failure, prevention of future failure, and (perhaps within the context of finite resources) the pursuit of excellence for all children. The first issue is how can we stop or reverse the failure that many children in our primary education system are experiencing. The second is how can we monitor learning effectively so that we can prevent significant failure before it occurs. And last, how can we implement effective educational practices that can produce excellent learning for all children. Creative Commons License Evidence-based Practice & Practice-based evidence by Dr Mike Beverley is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


Barbash, S. (2011). Clear Teaching: with Direct Instruction, Siegfried Engelman discovered a better way of teaching.   Retrieved from

Bijou, S. W. (1970). What psychology has to offer education—now. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3(1), 3-65. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1970.3-65

Carnine, D. (2000). Why education experts resist effective practices (And what it would take to make education more like medicine). Washington, DC: Thomas. B. Fordham Foundation.

Fredrick, L. D., Deltz, S. L., Bryceland, J. A., & Hummel, J. H. (2002). Behavior analysis, education, and effective schooling. Reno, Nevada: Context Press.

Hargreaves, D. H. (1997). In defence of research for evidence‐based teaching: A rejoinder to Martyn Hammersley. British Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 405-419. doi: 10.1080/0141192970230402

Heward, W. L. (2005). Reasons applied behaviour analysis is good for education and why those reasons have been insufficient. In W. L.

Heward, T. E. Heron, N. A. Neef, S. M. Peterson, D. M. Sainato, G. Cartledge, R. Gardner III, L. D. Peterson, S. B. Hershe & J. C. Dardig (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education: achievements, challenges, and opportunities (pp. 316-348). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Kozloff, M. A. (2005). Fads in general education: Fad, fraud, and folly. In J. W. Jacobson, R. M. Foxx & J. A. Mulick (Eds.), Controversial Therapies for Developmental Disabilities (pp. 159-173). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lamb, J. (2001). Preserving the self in the south seas, 1680-1840: University of Chicago Press. Lindsley, O. R. (1992). Why aren’t effective teaching tools widely adopted? Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 21-26.

Maloney, M. (1998). Teach your children well: A solution to some of North America’s educational problems. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies. Moran, D. J., & Malott, R. W. (Eds.). (2004). Evidence-based educational methods. San Diego, California: Elsevier Academic Press.

Mosteller, F. (1981). Innovation and evaluation. Science, 211, 881-886. Skinner, B. F. (1984). The shame of American education. American Psychologist, 39(9), 947-954.

Slavin, R. E. (1989). PET and the pendulum: Faddism in education and how to stop it. Phi Delta Capan, 70, 752-758. Slavin, R. E. (2008). Evidence-based reform in education: what will it take? European Educational Research Journal, 7(1), 124-128.

Snider, V. E. (2006). Myths and misconceptions about teaching: What really happens in the classroom. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Snider, V. E., & Roehl, R. (2007). Teachers’ beliefs about pedagogy and related issues. Psychology in the Schools, 44(8), 873-886. Retrieved from doi:10.1002/pits.20272


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s