Evidence-Based Instruction: Methods, Standards, and Limits

Defining Evidence-Based Instruction

Proponents of evidence-based instruction represent one end of the teaching methods continuum, where practices that have been tested empirically using rigorous research designs are considered the only valid form of instruction (Odom et al., 2005). At the other end of the spectrum are methods that may have some basis for use—such as intuition or theory—but that have not been subjected to empirical scrutiny and are nonetheless considered valid to use. Evidence-based instruction, or scientific research-based instruction, consists of instructional practices or programs for which empirical data have been collected to determine effectiveness (Odom et al., 2005).

In these types of practices and programs, rigorous research designs have been conducted to evaluate effectiveness. Such designs can include randomized controlled trials, quasi-experiments, single-subject designs, correlational methods, and qualitative research. The most empirically sound designs—randomized controlled experiments—are used to demonstrate that students exposed to a practice show significant improvements compared to a matched group of students who are not exposed to it. In these tightly controlled studies, researchers have greater confidence that observed changes are due to the specific practice or intervention being tested, rather than to other variables such as teacher characteristics, student characteristics, or environmental conditions.

The types of educational practices with the strongest research evidence have been examined across large numbers of students, in a wide range of settings, and with diverse subgroups. Often, relatively few studies meet such rigorous criteria, and reviewing available research to determine whether it fits this category can be a lengthy, complex, and expensive process (Odom et al., 2005).

References

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Executive summary. Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Condelli, L., & Wrigley, H. S. (2004). Identifying promising interventions for adult ESL literacy students: A review of the literature. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

Foorman, B. R., & Torgesen, J. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction that promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 203–213.

Odom, S. L., Brantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner, R. H., Thompson, B., & Harris, K. R. (2005). Research in special education: Scientific methods and evidence-based practices. Exceptional Children, 71, 137–149.

Roberts, G., Torgesen, J. K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008). Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 63–69.

Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2012). WWC evidence review protocol for science interventions. Washington, DC: Author.

White, E., & Smith, C. S. (2002). Theme issues on scientific research in education. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 3–29.