Search

Despite the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN) being tasked with being a core policy tool of the European Union and helping to shape its research funding agenda on preventing violent extremism, very little is known about how it operates, the practices and activities it engages with and the discourses it mobilizes to do so. This study fills this gap through an in-depth investigation into RAN's working group on education, critically examining the construction and enactment of discourses and practices related to the prevention of violent extremism through education. Combining a critical engagement of organizational practices with a discourse analysis of the various RAN EDU outputs, such as manifestos, policy papers and videos, it offers an examination of the discursive terrain of the European Commission, revealing the normative values and ideological assumptions underpinning it, as well as the subject-positioning of students and teachers involved.

Objectivity is a contested issue in history and history education. This study explores history teachers' conceptions about historical objectivity and whether or not their reasoning resonates with their classroom practices. Data was collected through in-depth interviews and lesson observations from 15 public senior high schools in the Central Region of Ghana. Data was thematically analyzed, with three themes forming the main lines of argument in this study. Findings show that participants recognize historical evidence as important to accessing the past reality and regard the interpretive intervention of historians as useful in the reconstruction of the past. Classroom practices reveal minimal attention to the problematization of historical knowledge, as most participants taught history as grand narratives. The study recommends a postmodernist re-orientation of the Ghanaian history curriculum and a continuing professional development of history teachers.

In this paper, using written responses of 37 PSTs preparing to teach grades 1-8 mathematics, we examined explanations they constructed to support their problem solutions and explanations they provided in support of their critiques of student-generated explanations. We also examined features of explanations on which PSTs drew in their critiques of mathematical explanations of students. Our results draw attention to the importance of helping PSTs develop competencies in constructing and critiquing mathematical explanations concurrently. Although explanations PSTs generated for their critiques of student explanations were weaker compared to the explanations PSTs formulated for their own problem solutions, PSTs proficient in generating mathematical explanations were also more proficient in analyzing and critiquing mathematical explanations. We identified seven criteria PSTs used while analyzing and critiquing student-explanations. These criteria reveal what PSTs might value, or pay attention to, as they critique student-explanations. We share implications for mathematics teacher educators to consider and suggest directions for further research.

Digital and social media have grown exponentially to become highly influential spheres of public communication -- increasingly crowded, contested, and corrupted, and increasingly in need of scholarly engagement. Alternative metrics ('altmetrics') that are generated from social and digital media platforms have become more important as indicators of impact and engagement for scholars. In AUR 61/2, we reviewed the growth of amplifier platforms and the academic and contextual reasons for their growth. In this article, we investigate how scholars frame their practices of engagement and impact, how they use 'amplifier platforms', in particular "The Conversation," and to what extent institutions are supporting their staff in these activities. We find that scholars frame engagement and impact as an ethical imperative and place importance on evidence-based messaging; that they are not only interested in seeing their own research amplified, but in amplifying other quality research; that this benefits their other academic activities; that open access models promote republication and increase reach and engagement; and that institutional support for engaging on amplifier platforms is uneven and underdeveloped.

Coherent with mental health literacy curricula, mental health assessment and referral is embedded in Canadian educational contexts. Mental health literacy excludes the substantial scholarly critique of mental health produced by psychiatry, the disciplinary base of the field of mental health. In-school student referrals to mental health professionals may similarly omit important critical information. Key critical areas of concern include scientific evidence, psychiatric drugs, psychiatric diagnosis, misinformation, and potential for harm. Professional ethics codes call for full disclosure of risk and open access to any relevant information needed for informed decision-making. Some mental health interventions commonly take place on an implied consent basis within first-time consult appointments. Consequently, parents and students require access to critical mental health knowledge before or during referral processes. Beyond aligning mental health referral with the ethical principle of informed consent, professional ethics require institutional divestment from any mental health premises and practices that cause harm and lack scientific, intellectual, and ethical integrity.

Data analysis is a significant methodological component when conducting quantitative education studies. Guidelines for conducting data analyses in quantitative education studies are common but often underemphasize four important methodological components impacting the validity of inferences: quality of constructed measures, proper handling of missing data, proper level of measurement of a dependent variable, and model checking. This paper highlights these components for novice researchers to help ensure statistical inferences are valid. We used empirical examples involving contingency tables, group comparisons, regression analysis, and multilevel modelling to illustrate these components using the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) data. For every example, we stated a research question and provided evidence related to the quality of constructed measures since measures with weak reliability and validity evidence can bias estimates and distort inferences. The adequate strategies for handling missing data were also illustrated. The level of measurement for the dependent variable was assessed and the proper statistical technique was utilized accordingly. Model residuals were checked for normality and homogeneity of variance. Recommendations for obtaining stronger inferences and reporting related evidence were also illustrated. This work provides an important methodological resource for novice researchers conducting data analyses by promoting improved practice and stronger inferences.

Teaching and learning have evolved over the years. While the use of lecture is still the dominant mode of teaching in educational institutions, there has been consensus that students need to be active in learning, for which traditional styles of teaching may not be well suited. This calls for an alternative instructional mode: cooperative learning to promote active learning among students. In higher education, interest in cooperative learning has gained momentum since the early 1980s, and this kind of teaching and learning can be conducted in many ways. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of existing evidence pertinent to cooperative learning. In this review, cooperative learning is defined and elements inherent in this pedagogy are discussed. Theoretical perspectives relating to cooperative learning are also outlined. The outcomes pertaining to cooperative learning are then presented, followed by the influence of context on cooperative learning. This review is organized and structured as such to serve as a basis of reference for further research in the field.

Argumentation is an important component of scientific education (Osborne, 2010). However, how students create and evaluate competing arguments in scientific investigations is a complex construct, which presents significant challenges for assessment. We engaged 349 middle and high school students in a virtual scientific investigation based on an authentic problem involving the ecosystem of Yellowstone National Park. Students evaluated three possible causes for vegetation loss in Lamar Valley: tourism, global warming, and killing wolves. Students compared their responses to individual claims to formulate a final decision. The authors developed a coding system to assess student arguments and analysed how students changed their evaluations across the investigation. Four distinct levels of responses reveal the range of student decision making and patterns that have implications for instruction and assessment. Few student evaluations explained both merits and weaknesses of claims.

Scientific reasoning ability (SRA) is widely recognized as an essential goal for science education. There is much discussion on the design and development of assessment frameworks as viable tools to foster SRA. However, established assessments mostly focus on the level of students reasoning attainment. Student ability to use evidence to support reasoning is not adequately addressed and evaluated. In this study, the 6-level SRA assessment framework was conceptualized and validated iteratively via synthesizing literature and a Delphi study. Guided by the framework, an SRA assessment tool adopting and adapting PISA test items and self-created items was developed and administered to 593 secondary students (including 318 8th Graders and 275 9th Graders) in mainland China. Pearson correlation analysis of SRA assessment score and their scores in scientific reasoning provided criterion-related validation for the former (Pearson correlation = 0.527). Rasch analysis conducted further confirmed the validity and reliability of the SRA test and the assessment framework. Combing quantitative and qualitative methods, the study provides a valid and reliable analytical framework of SRA. It can inform the design of SRA assessments in various science education contexts for diversified audiences.

This study was designed to investigate the applicability of the IES/NSF pipeline-of-evidence protocol in ascertaining why two notable educational initiatives spearheaded and financially supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation achieved or not the goal of improved academic outcomes for K-12 public school students. Our interest was not whether there is a sufficient body of high quality research evidence to support the two initiatives but whether the research considered by the Gates Foundation established the likelihood that the initiatives would be successful and worth the decision to dedicate substantial funding, time, and effort required for each versus the many competing programs seeking sponsorship. We found that in the case of Intensive Partnerships for Effective Teaching, foundational, efficacy, and effectiveness research were absent and the Gates foundation discontinued grant support because the initiative had not achieved the goal of improved high school graduation and college attendance among low-income minority students. In the case of Early College High School, we found empirical evidence was manifest at all but the effectiveness stage of the pipeline and the initiative continued to receive funding. Our findings support the importance of widening the net of methodologies that constitute a framework for elements needed to make predictions of effectiveness for any given intervention before investing in scale-up initiatives and the need for private foundations to be transparent in their decision-making process to enable others to scrutinize the research that informs the design of initiatives.

In this study, a world map featured in Divan-i Lugati't-Türk and drawn by Kashgarli Mahmud was made interactive through the use of Seyyah, a geographic information system (GIS) application developed in response to ADDIE, an instructional design teaching model. The geographical symbols and notes on the world map drawn by Kashgarli Mahmud were transferred to Seyyah's database so evidence-based learning could occur. The aim of the research is to evaluate the process of transforming the information obtained by the Social Studies teacher candidates with evidence into a jointly structured knowledge with the political literacy skill. The study is a qualitative action research project using a technical, scientific and collaborative approach. In this context, descriptive analysis was used to interpret the political literacy information which was interpreted and organized by Social Science teacher candidates into Seyyah's database. A standardized open-ended interview was conducted with the teacher candidates to detect the relationship between the use of Seyyah with evidence-based learning, political literacy and culture, the common structuring process and general status of information. Data from ten Social Science teacher candidates was analyzed by content analysis. The Social Science teacher candidates in the study were determined by the maximum diversity method which is a purposeful sampling method. According to the findings from Seyyah's database, Social Studies teacher candidates organized the political literacy information from the world map under four elements: cities; countries; regions and physical geography elements. There were three different categories of political knowledge in other geographical signs and nations themes. Findings obtained from the opinions of candidates show that Seyyah requires the use of high-level thinking skills in evidence-based learning to jointly structure political literacy information in a database, and present and evaluate Turkish culture in a different form.

Background: A raft of initiatives and reforms have been introduced in many countries to attract and recruit school teachers, many of which do not have a clear evidence base, so their effectiveness remains unclear. Prior research has been largely correlational in design. This paper describes a rigorous and comprehensive review of international evidence, synthesising the findings of some of the strongest empirical work so far. Methods: The review synthesises a total of 120 pieces of research from 13 electronic databases, Google/Google scholar and other sources. Each study is weighted by strength of evidence. Results: The strongest evidence suggests that targeted money can encourage people into teaching but does not necessarily keep them in the teaching profession. The money needs to be large enough to compensate for the disadvantages of working in certain schools and areas, and competitive enough to offset the opportunity costs of not being in more lucrative occupations, and its effect is only short-term. Conclusions: Continuing professional development (CPD) and early career support could be promising approaches for retaining teachers in the profession, but the evidence for them is weak. There is no evidence that any other approaches work, largely because of the lack of robust studies.

Drawing inference from data is an important skill for students to understand their everyday life, so that the sampling distribution as a central topic in statistical inference is necessary to be learned by the students. However, little is known about how to teach the topic for high school students, especially in Indonesian context. Therefore, the present study provides a teaching experiment to support the students' informal inferential reasoning in understanding the sampling distribution, as well as the students' perceptions toward the teaching experiment. The subjects in the present study were three 11th-grader of one private school in Yogyakarta majoring in mathematics and natural science. The method of data collection was direct observation of sampling distribution learning process, interviews, and documentation. The present study found that that informal inferential reasoning with problem-based learning using contextual problems and real data could support the students to understand the sampling distribution, and they also gave positive responses about their learning experience.

Amidst the lingering prominence of idealist and rationalist traditions in the philosophy of education, the notion of living, sentient body (or "soma") seems to have received scant attention by educational philosophers hitherto. These traditions--whose strong influence can be traced back to such philosophers as Plato, Descartes, Leibniz and Wolff--elevate and privilege the import of reasoning and mind over the body, rendering the latter ancillary and even distorting to the pursuit of knowledge and truth. Drawing on the idea of somaestehtic philosophy initially proposed by Richard Shusterman, this article first discusses this philosophical outlook and then expands it by foregrounding the notion of the "libidinal body"--that is, the potentiality of the performative dimension of the soma in constructing and reconstructing knowledge. It argues that the soma itself is, in fact, the site of desire for knowledge production and reproduction. To buttress this argument, the article provides evidence from Borneo's Dayaknese communities as one of the instances of the somatic society where the practices of the libidinal body for the community's education are most conspicuous. The article ends with some thoughts on the possible research directions the philosophy of education ought to take to push the field forward in its pursuit for virtue and the good life.

This paper considers the adoption of computational techniques within research designs modeled after the extended case method. Echoing calls to augment the power of contemporary researchers through the adoption of computational text analysis methods, we offer a framework for thinking about how such techniques can be integrated into quasi-ethnographic workflows to address broad, structural sociological claims. We focus, in particular, on how this adoption of novel forms of evidence impacts corpus design and interpretation (which we tie to matters of casing), theoretical elaboration (which we associate to moving empirical claims across scales and empirical domains), and verification (which we see as a process of reflexive scaffolding of theoretical claims). We provide an example of the use of this framework through a study of the marketization of social scientific knowledge in the United Kingdom.

Reviewing complex interventions is challenging because they include many elements that can interact dynamically in a nonlinear manner. A systems perspective offers a way of thinking to help understand complex issues, but its application in evidence synthesis is not established. The aim of this project was to understand how and why systems perspectives have been applied in evidence synthesis. A methodological mapping review was conducted to identify papers using a systems perspective in evidence synthesis. A search was conducted in seven bibliographic databases and three search engines. A total of 101 papers (representing 98 reviews) met the eligibility criteria. Two categories of reviews were identified: (1) reviews using a "systems lens" to frame the topic, generate hypotheses, select studies, and guide the analysis and interpretation of findings (n = 76) and (2) reviews using systems methods to develop a systems model (n = 22). Several methods (e.g., systems dynamic modeling, soft systems approach) were identified, and they were used to identify, rank and select elements, analyze interactions, develop models, and forecast needs. The main reasons for using a systems perspective were to address complexity, view the problem as a whole, and understand the interrelationships between the elements. Several challenges for capturing the true nature and complexity of a problem were raised when performing these methods. This review is a useful starting point when designing evidence synthesis of complex interventions. It identifies different opportunities for applying a systems perspective in evidence synthesis, and highlights both commonplace and less familiar methods.

Systematic searches are integral to identifying the evidence that is used in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) public health guidelines (PHGs). This study analyses the sources, including bibliographic databases and other techniques, required for PHGs. The aims were to analyse the sources used to identify the publications included in NICE PHGs; and to assess whether fewer sources could have been searched to retrieve these publications. Data showing how the included publications had been identified was collated using search summary tables. Three scenarios were created to test various combinations of sources to determine whether fewer sources could have been used. The sample included 29 evidence reviews, compiled using 13 searches, to support 10 PHG topics. Across the PHGs, 23 databases and six other techniques retrieved included publications. A mean reduction in total results of 6.5% could have been made if the minimum set of sources plus Cochrane Library, Embase, and MEDLINE were searched. On average, Cochrane Library, Embase, and MEDLINE contributed 76.8% of the included publications, with other databases adding 11% and other techniques 12.2%. None of the searches had a minimum set that was comprised entirely of databases. There was not a core set of sources for PHGs. A range of databases and techniques, covering a multi-disciplinary evidence base, was required to identify all included publications. It would be possible to reduce the number of sources searched and make some gains in productivity. It is important to create a tailored set of sources to do an efficient search.

By observing, or "noticing," what sparks learning in the classroom, teachers and students alike can cultivate a learning environment centered around personalization and choice. Education experts John Almarode and Paul Emerich France outline strategies for engineering a culture of self-reflection that sets learning in motion.

Background: To improve the use of evidence in policy and practice, many organisations and individuals seek to promote research-policy engagement activities, but little is known about what works. Aims and objectives: We sought (a) to identify existing research-policy engagement activities, and (b) evidence on impacts of these activities on research and decision making. Methods: We conducted systematic desk-based searches for organisations active in this area (such as funders, practice organisations, and universities) and reviewed websites, strategy documents, published evaluations and relevant research. We used a stakeholder roundtable, and follow-up survey and interviews, with a subset of the sample to check the quality and robustness of our approach. Findings: We identified 1923 initiatives in 513 organisations world-wide. However, we found only 57 organisations had publicly-available evaluations, and only 6% (141/2321) of initiatives were evaluated. Most activities aim to improve research dissemination or create relationships. Existing evaluations offer an often rich and nuanced picture of evidence use in particular settings (such as local government), sectors (such as policing), or by particular providers (such as learned societies), but are extremely scarce. Discussion and conclusions: Funders, research- and decision-making organisations have contributed to a huge expansion in research-policy engagement initiatives. Unfortunately, these initiatives tend not to draw on existing evidence and theory, and are mostly unevaluated. The rudderless mass of activity therefore fails to provide useful lessons for those wishing to improve evidence use, leading to wasted time and resources. Future initiatives should draw on existing evidence about what works, seek to contribute to this evidence base, and respond to a more realistic picture of the decision-making context.

Background: Devolution and integration of health and social care have placed increasing pressure on local statutory services, with a corresponding shift of health and social care to community organisations. The voluntary and charitable sector (VCS) is expected to make the case for increased funding by providing evidence of value and impact. Aims and objectives: This paper explores the challenges of compiling evidence on health outcomes which do not reflect the holistic nature of VCS support. We document how knowledge brokering can be used to enable the VCS to generate evidence. Key conclusions: Knowledge brokering (KB) may be an effective approach for developing community-generated evidence. Brokering is also needed to change perspectives on what counts as good evidence.

Purpose: The purpose of this tutorial is threefold: (a) to bring attention to the role and value of dissemination research in communication sciences and disorders (CSD), (b) to introduce a model that can be used to guide dissemination research, and (c) to demonstrate strategic steps toward generating research questions and planning methods for dissemination research using an example from the authors' work. Method: This tutorial begins with a discussion of the role of dissemination in clinical research, with emphasis on differentiating the unique value of dissemination within the broader context of dissemination and implementation (D&I) research. The tutorial next presents a model of dissemination from the extant literature and describes how this model can be applied in CSD using examples from the authors' respective programs of clinical research. This is followed by an example that illustrates how the model can be used to determine research questions and guide the development of methods. Finally, the tutorial ends by discussing the potential impact of dissemination research for advancing efforts in CSD for closing the research-to-practice gap. Conclusions: Dissemination research is an often overlooked but critical component of D&I efforts. When approached systematically and rigorously, dissemination can make meaningful contributions to clinical research in CSD.

Science includes the fundamental attributes of durability and uncertainty; hence, we teach about the "tentative yet durable" nature of science. Public discourse can be different, where one hears both confidence about "settled science" and doubts about "just theories." The latter observation gives rise to the possibility that emphasis on learning the tentative nature of science offers some people the actionable option of declining to accept canonical science. Our paper reports the findings from initial and replication exploratory studies involving about 500 preservice, elementary/middle school teacher education students at a large Midwestern public university. Using a survey method that included opportunities for student comments, the study tested hypotheses about confidence in the veracity, durability, tentativeness, and trustworthiness of science. We found that most students embrace noncontroversial science as correct, and that almost all embraced the tentative nature of science regardless of what they thought about controversial topics. However, when asked about the trustworthiness of science, many students were not willing to say that they trust scientific knowledge. Even students strongly supportive of science, including controversial science, responded similarly. And why did they say that science is not trustworthy? The explanation echoed by many students was that scientific knowledge is tentative. Our paper concludes with implications for instruction and research. Our findings suggest that it would be prudent for science educators to increase instructional focus on the relationship between data and evidence that leads to the durability of scientific knowledge. Future research needs to thoroughly investigate the public interpretation of what we teach about the nature and characteristics of science, and for the implications it might have on how scientific knowledge is or is not incorporated in the development and implementation of public policy.

In the current study, we conducted 2 eye-tracking reading experiments to explore whether sentence context can influence neighbor effects in word recognition during Chinese reading. Chinese readers read sentences in which the targets' orthographic neighbors were either plausible or implausible with the pretarget context. The results revealed that the neighbor effect was influenced by context: The context in the biased condition (where only targets but not neighbors can fit in the pretarget context) evoked a significantly weaker inhibitory neighbor effect than in the neutral condition (where both targets and neighbors can fit in the pretarget context). These results indicate that contextual information can be used to modulate neighbor effects during online sentence reading in Chinese.

Making better decisions typically requires obtaining information relevant to that decision. Adolescence is marked by increasing agency in decision-making and an accompanying increase in impulsive decisions, suggesting that one characteristic of adolescent decision-making is a tendency to make less-informed decisions. Adolescents could also be especially averse to the effort associated with acquiring relevant information to make decisions. To investigate this possibility, we recruited adolescents (M[subscript age] = 15.02 years) in upper-secondary schools and young adults (M[subscript age] = 20.53 years) attending university in the Netherlands to complete an effort-based information sampling task, in which participants could sample information until obtaining sufficient evidence to make a decision. Effort costs for sampling were systematically varied. Surprisingly, adolescents sampled more evidence than adults before making decisions when sampling effort costs were low. Further, adolescents obtained stronger evidence prior to their decisions than adults as effort costs increased, exhibiting less aversion to effort costs associated with information sampling. Exploratory computational models supported these findings. Both adolescents and adults used simple heuristics in deciding whether to sample additional information or make a final decision, and adolescents sought a higher evidence threshold before deciding compared with adults. These results suggest that adolescents may require more certainty to make decisions compared with adults and be less averse to effort costs when gathering information to aid decisions.

Cochrane reviews are known to be a high-quality source of evidence synthesis supporting health care decisions. In a recently conducted study, we analyzed the trends in epidemiology and reporting of published systematic reviews over the last 20 years. This sample of 1132 systematic reviews included 84 Cochrane reviews. We have learned several peculiarities of Cochrane reviews that are worth being discussed in more detail due to their practical implications. Methodologists, clinicians and health care professionals should be aware of these limitations: (1) Cochrane reviews are not identified as systematic reviews in title, (2) Cochrane reviews do not always follow PRISMA reporting guidelines, (3) Some updates are only available via the Cochrane Library, and (4) Indexing of Cochrane reviews in PubMed may be suboptimal.

Meta-analysis is a widely used methodology to combine evidence from different sources examining a common research phenomenon, to obtain a quantitative summary of the studied phenomenon. In the medical field, multiple studies investigate the effectiveness of new treatments and meta-analysis is largely performed to generate the summary (average) treatment effect. In the meta-analysis of aggregate continuous outcomes measured in a pretest-posttest design using differences in means as the effect measure, a plethora of methods exist: analysis of final (follow-up) scores, analysis of change scores and analysis of covariance. Specialised and general-purpose statistical software is used to apply the various methods, yet, often the choice among them depends on data availability and statistical affinity. We present a new web-based tool, MA-cont:pre/post effect size, to conduct meta-analysis of continuous data assessed pre- and post-treatment using the aforementioned approaches on aggregate data and a more flexible approach of generating and analysing pseudo individual participant data. The interactive web environment, available by R Shiny, is used to create this free-to-use statistical tool, requiring no programming skills by the users. A basic statistical understanding of the methods running in the background is a prerequisite and we encourage the users to seek advice from technical experts when necessary.

In evidence-based practice, new topics generally only have a few studies available for synthesis. As a result, the evidence of such meta-analyses raised substantial concerns. We investigated the robustness of the evidence from these earliest studies. Real-world data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) were collected. We emulated meta-analyses with the earliest 1 to 10 studies through cumulative meta-analysis from eligible meta-analyses. The magnitude and the direction of meta-analyses with the earliest few studies were compared to the full meta-analyses. From the CDSR, we identified 20,227 meta-analyses of binary outcomes and 7683 meta-analyses of continuous outcomes. Under the tolerable difference of 20% on the magnitude of the effects, the convergence proportion ranged from 24.24% (earliest 1 study) to 77.45% (earliest 10 studies) for meta-analyses of few earliest studies with binary outcomes. For meta-analyses of continuous outcomes, the convergence proportion ranged from 13.86% to 56.52%. In terms of the direction of the effects, even when only three studies were available at the earliest stage, the majority had the same direction as full meta-analyses; Only 19% for binary outcomes and 12% for continuous outcomes changed the direction as further evidence accumulated. Synthesizing evidence from the earliest studies is feasible to support urgent decision-making, and in most cases, the decisions would be reasonable. Considering the potential uncertainties, it is essential to evaluate the confidence of the evidence of these meta-analyses and update the evidence when necessary.

Randomised controlled trials of cancer treatments typically report progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes. Existing methods to synthesise evidence on PFS and OS either rely on the proportional hazards assumption or make parametric assumptions which may not capture the diverse survival curve shapes across studies and treatments. Furthermore, PFS and OS are not independent; OS is the sum of PFS and post-progression survival (PPS). Our aim was to develop a non-parametric approach for jointly synthesising evidence from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves of PFS and OS without assuming proportional hazards. Restricted mean survival times (RMST) are estimated by the area under the survival curves (AUCs) up to a restricted follow-up time. The correlation between AUCs due to the constraint that OS > PFS is estimated using bootstrap re-sampling. Network meta-analysis models are given for RMST for PFS and PPS and ensure that OS = PFS + PPS. Both additive and multiplicative network meta-analysis models are presented to obtain relative treatment effects as either differences or ratios of RMST. The methods are illustrated with a network meta-analysis of treatments for stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer. The approach has implications for health economic models of cancer treatments, which require estimates of the mean time spent in the PFS and PPS health-states. The methods can be applied to a single time-to-event outcome, and so have wide applicability in any field where time-to-event outcomes are reported, the proportional hazards assumption is in doubt, and survival curve shapes differ across studies and interventions.

This study explores one teacher's instructional method for teaching life sciences using argumentation and argumentative writing rather than simple templates for writing claims and evidence. The microethnographic discourse analytic case study reported here included the teacher and 26 "advanced" eighth-grade students in a suburban middle school. Nine consecutive video-recorded lessons and related data were analyzed, focusing on how the teacher and students constructed the theory of evolution during instructional conversations about evidence and reasoning and about the content of students' written arguments on the theory. The teacher created a context in which students developed arguments with teacher support to ensure that they were learning to use argumentation as a heuristic to understand concepts and to engage in argumentative practice central to doing science. The modes of participation of two case study students are contrasted to explore two different trajectories and to examine particular cases of writing a lab report.

Background: There is a plethora of reviews that summarize much of the evidence base in Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). However, there are criticisms around variability of quality and focus of those reviews, meaning there is little strategic overview of the current state of the field. Further, there are rising concerns as to systemic gaps in the evidence base itself. An overview of reviews provides an opportunity for a comprehensive classification and corresponding critique of evidence. Aims: The study sought to examine a-priori concerns regarding: (1) variation in the rigour and quality of the meta-analytic and systematic evidence base; (2) comparatively less conclusive evidence for whole school approaches when compared to class-based curricula; and (3) an assumed universality of effect (i.e., lack of examination of any differential gains for sub-groups). Method and results: A systematic search of the systematic and meta-analytic literature identified a total of 33 reviews examining SEL interventions. Papers were subject to a quality assessment in order to examine methodological rigour and were collated in line with the study's objectives. Conclusions: We maintain the prevailing consensus that SEL programmes have an important role in education. However, variation in evidence quality remains high and there appear ambiguities regarding what constitutes whole school approaches. The review also highlights a novel and concerning lack of data for differentiating any subgroup effects. The review concludes with recommended novel directions for future research, including adoption of more complex trial architecture in evaluation alongside a move towards a wider plurality in methodological approach.

In this article, we report on a typology of the demands of statistical and mathematical products (StaMPs) embedded in media items related to the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic. The typology emerged from a content analysis of a large purposive sample of diverse media items selected from digital news sources based in four countries. The findings encompass nine categories of StaMPs: (1) descriptive quantitative information; (2) models, predictions, causality and risk; (3) representations and displays; (4) data quality and strength of evidence; (5) demographics and comparative thinking; (6) heterogeneity and contextual factors; (7) literacy and language demands; (8) multiple information sources; and (9) critical demands. We illustrate these categories via selected media items, substantiate them through relevant research literature, and point to categories that encompass new or enhanced types of demands. Our findings offer insights into the rich set of capabilities that citizens (including both young people and adults) must possess in order to engage these mass media demands, critically analyze statistical and mathematical information in the media, evaluate the meaning and credibility of news reports, understand public policies, and make evidenced-informed judgments. Our conclusions point to the need to revise current curricular frameworks and conceptual models (e.g., regarding statistical and probability literacy, adult numeracy), to better incorporate notions such as blended knowledge, vagueness, risk, strength of evidence, and criticality. Furthermore, more attention is needed to the literacy and language demands of media items involving statistical and mathematical information. Implications for further research and educational practice are discussed.

Visual comparison is a key process in everyday learning and reasoning. Recent research has discovered the spatial alignment principle, based on the broader framework of structure-mapping theory in comparison. According to the spatial alignment principle, visual comparison is more efficient when the figures being compared are arranged in "direct placement"--that is, juxtaposed with parallel structural axes. In this placement, (1) the intended relational correspondences are readily apparent, and (2) the influence of potential competing correspondences is minimized. There is evidence for the spatial alignment principle in adults' visual comparison (Matlen et al., 2020). Here, we test whether it holds for children. Six- and eight-year-old children performed a same-different task over visual pairs. The results indicated that direct placement led to faster and more accurate comparison, both for concrete same-different matches (matches of both objects and relations) and for purely relational matches--evidence that the same structural alignment process holds for visual comparison in 6- and 8-year-olds as in adults. These findings have implications for learning and education.

Background: In the US, and conspicuously via social media, we are witnessing an acceleration of what we term historical knowledge mobilisation: increasingly and in various ways, evidence derived from academic historical research is being shared with broader publics. Moreover, evidence-based and false or misleading historical claims are being advanced with an eye toward influencing key decisions and/or impelling social change. Aims and objectives: This exploratory study draws upon Ward's (2017: 477) 'framework for knowledge mobilisers' to facilitate an analysis of what and whose historical knowledge is being shared, and how and why this is happening. It aims to provide information and guidance to support scholars of knowledge mobilisation or evidence use, as well as active historical knowledge mobilisers. Methods: This study sought to identify patterns vis-à-vis historical knowledge mobilisation by applying qualitative media analysis to a set of cases. We attended to content, style, and process of historical knowledge mobilisation. Findings: Three main themes help to explain the historical knowledge mobilisation: (a) correcting or countering a master narrative; (b) real-time correction of historical claims; and (c) contextualising complicated political moments. We also described new ways to disseminate/exchange this knowledge which altogether function to expand access to historical knowledge, but also to competing historical claims. Discussion and conclusions: The trends revealed provide insights into how historical knowledge is being used to justify political aims, and how some academics are using non-traditional means to counter false and misleading claims. Further infrastructural and empirical development is needed to support these efforts.

Background: Education decision makers are increasingly expected to use evidence to inform their actions. However, the majority of educational interventions have not yet been studied and it is challenging to produce high quality research evidence quickly enough to influence policy questions. Aims and objectives: We set out to gather evidence on the efficacy of reading resources implemented at 23 struggling elementary schools in a large, urban district in the US. The schools were at risk of closure by the state. Methods: For each reading resource, we searched for existing effectiveness studies and collected professional judgements by surveying practitioners. We also used an expert survey to collect judgements from three reading experts. We compared the ratings among experts and between practitioners and experts. We also compared practitioner and expert judgements to evidence summaries from research repositories. Findings: We found evidence summaries in research repositories for only five of 23 reading resources used in the 23 schools. Experts showed poor to good agreement on ten questions about each resource. Agreement between practitioners and experts was low with practitioners generally rating resources more positively than reading experts. Discussion and conclusions: Practitioners may be overly optimistic about the efficacy of educational materials while experts have difficulty assessing how well the materials serve an unfamiliar population. In the absence of rigorous evaluations of locally-implemented programmes, district decision makers can review the consistency of evidence collected from practitioners and experts, along with external research evidence, to inform actions towards supporting and guiding struggling schools.

There is evidence that universal school-based mindfulness training (SBMT) can have positive effects for young people. However, it is unknown who benefits most from such training, how training exerts effects, and how implementation impacts effects. This study aimed to provide an overview of the evidence on the mediators, moderators, and implementation factors of SBMT, and propose a conceptual model that can be used both to summarize the evidence and provide a framework for future research. A scoping review was performed, and six databases and grey literature were searched. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select relevant material. Quantitative and qualitative information was extracted from eligible articles and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search produced 5479 articles, of which 31 were eligible and included in the review. Eleven studies assessed moderators of SBMT on pupil outcomes, with mixed findings for all variables tested. Five studies examined the mediating effect of specific variables on pupil outcomes, with evidence that increases in mindfulness skills and decreases in cognitive reactivity and self-criticism post-intervention are related to better pupil outcomes at follow-up. Twenty-five studies assessed implementation factors. We discuss key methodological shortcomings of included studies and integrate our findings with existing implementation frameworks to propose a conceptual model. Widespread interest in universal SBMT has led to increased research over recent years, exploring who SBMT works for and how it might work, but the current evidence is limited. We make recommendations for future research and provide a conceptual model to guide theory-led developments. [This article was co-authored by the MYRIAD Team.]

The present work examines the role of reflection in supporting the development of argument skill. Participants who engaged in argumentation practice with additional reflective activities outperformed a control group who only engaged in the argumentation practice. The experimental group showed greater gains in developing argument skill -- particularly in employing evidence to weaken an opposing position. Experimental condition participants also exhibited greater gains in content knowledge on the intervention topic compared to the control condition participants. Microgenetic analysis of dialogs during the interventions revealed a different pattern of progress across the two conditions. Experimental condition participants exhibited gradual and overall greater improvements at both strategic and meta levels -- meta-strategic and epistemic -- compared to control condition participants. Findings support the hypothesis that engagement in reflection during dialogic argumentation supports the development of metacognition, both as competence and disposition, which in turn supports performance at the strategic level. Educational implications are discussed, stressing the beneficial role of engagement in reflective activities for promoting argument skill, above and beyond practice.

The development of students' argumentation competence is one of the major aims of science education and everyday problems, such as decisions on the consumption of tap water or bottled water, which may be suitable contexts to encourage it. Citizens consider of interest certain controversies associated with the bottled water consumption as an alternative to tap water, which has a significant effect on several aspects of their daily lives. Deciding whether or not to drink bottled water can be used as an interesting context for science teaching activities. To make appropriate decisions on this issue, students must know how to argue with scientific rigour. This paper presents an assessment of the degree of performance of 14/15-year-old students in scientific argumentation within this context. A specific rubric has been designed for each of the assessment activities used, and the Rasch model has been applied to analyse the degree of difficulty that each of the essential elements of an argument (evidence, justification, and conclusion) has for the students. Thus, evidence is generally shown to be the most difficult element of the argument for students followed by justifications and finally conclusions. The analysis procedure used can help to establish a sequence of argumentation activities within a particular context. Finally, the results obtained can be used in teaching to prepare the appropriate assistance according to the argumentation activity at hand.

The increasing inclusion of students with disabilities in regular classes still leads to debate and many advocate for full inclusion of all students. Arguments for full inclusion are generally rights-based, but proponents also claim research supports the effectiveness of full inclusion over specialist provision for all students with disabilities. In this article, we analyse and critique the use of the research literature in an Australian advocacy paper as an example of the broad claims made concerning full inclusion. We examine the extent to which the sources used provide conclusive evidence about the merits of full inclusion. We find the advocacy paper relies heavily on opinion and non-peer-reviewed literature, with little use of quantitative research that compares outcomes for students in different settings. We suggest that policymakers should treat the conclusions drawn in this paper cautiously and give due consideration to the literature that is not supportive of full inclusion.