Classrooms are complex places. It can be hard to work out what classroom practices are most effective in improving learning outcomes, behaviour, and wellbeing. But there’s general acceptance that collecting evidence about what works is a good way to make progress.

In the spring of 2023, a group of educators, researchers, and policymakers met at the Université Paris Cité to discuss how to address the challenges of establishing what works best in classrooms, and for which children, and in which contexts.

The CEN has now published a new paper in the Journal Mind, Brain and Education based on this international roundtable, entitled Evaluating What Works in the Classroom: Best Practice and Future Opportunities.

The paper, lead authored by CEN member Astrid Bowen, summarises consensus from presentations and discussions across the three-day event. It considers what the main challenges are for evaluating “What Works” in classroom practices and potential solutions for overcoming these.

There were four key areas which arose most frequently during the roundtable discussions. These were issues concerning: (1) who is involved in evaluations and when; (2) a need for methodological innovation; (3) communication; and (4) the understanding and use of evidence by educators and policymakers.

Throughout the discussion, the roundtable tackled some of the key issues that have hindered translational research efforts and implementing the science of learning in education, including the need for shifting ownership of evaluation research to educators, and refining research methodologies to better capture intervention effects in real classroom situations.

Here are highlights from the paper:

What is already known about this topic?

• Improving student learning is a global concern, and teachers and policymakers want to know “what works” in practice to improve student outcomes.
• In the United Kingdom and United States, randomised controlled trial (RCT) designs have come to be viewed as the “gold standard” for intervention evaluation in education.
• Due to a variety of practical and methodological concerns, as well as issues with how findings from RCT trials can be interpreted, there are issues with relying exclusively upon this method to assess effectiveness in the classroom.

What does this paper add and how?

• This paper outlines the most pressing challenges surrounding how to assess “what works” to improve learning outcomes, most of which require nuanced, multi-level solutions.
• Collaboration between research institutes in the UK and Europe provided international insights on how particular challenges are being addressed in different countries and research contexts and a range of case examples from real evaluations.
• As well as consensus on current issues, some broad outstanding questions – such as which outcomes are the most important to target? – are also provided to prompt discussion and a move to greater consensus between research, policy and practice in these areas.

What are the implications for practice and/or policy?

• The goals of translation should be built into evaluation design at the outset. For example, by designing evaluations alongside educators to understand what is and is not feasible in their contexts.
• New and improved research tools are required to assess outcomes for large and small populations of students: standardised data systems at the school level; better standardised measures assessing outcomes beyond subject knowledge.
• Educators and decision-makers should have access to research literacy training, in order to facilitate a research mindset and the skills to engage with evaluation evidence.

Read the full article at: https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12430