Skip to content

A four-step evaluative framework for judging educational practices and beliefs

Research Method · All research methods
Evidence · no claims cited

Description

The editorial describes a shared evaluation process modeled by every article in the special issue. Each article first documents that a practice or belief exists, then sets objective criteria for what would count as good experimental evidence, then weighs the evidence for and against, and finally draws conclusions and recommendations. The editors argue this process "provides a roadmap for evaluating other practices and beliefs in education as well as other fields."

Accounts

  • A four-step evaluative framework for judging educational practices and beliefs: The editorial describes a shared evaluation process modeled by every article in the special issue. Each article first documents that a practice or belief exists, then sets objective criteria for what would count as good experimental evidence, then weighs the evidence for and against, and finally draws conclusions and recommendations. The editors argue this process "provides a roadmap for evaluating other practices and beliefs in education as well as other fields." (Andrew C. Butler et al. (2015))

Claims

-

Key Sources

  • Andrew C. Butler & Shana K. Carpenter. (2015). Separating Myth from Reality in Education: Introduction to the Special Issue. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9344-0
Page metadata
Field Value
type research-method
id a-four-step-evaluative-framework-for-judging-educational-practices-and-beliefs
title A four-step evaluative framework for judging educational practices and beliefs
description The editorial describes a shared evaluation process modeled by every article in the special issue.
status review
generated by process:settle-candidates on 2026-10-21
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.