Archibald Thomas
Cornell University, 3M14 Martha Van Rensselaer Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA; Virginia Tech, Agricultural & Extension Education (0343), 276 Litton-Reaves Hall, 175 West Campus Drive, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA.
Eval Program Plann. 2015 Feb;48:137-48. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.08.001. Epub 2014 Aug 17.
Community education and outreach programs should be evidence-based. This dictum seems at once warranted, welcome, and slightly platitudinous. However, the "evidence-based" movement's more narrow definition of evidence--privileging randomized controlled trials as the "gold standard"--has fomented much debate. Such debate, though insightful, often lacks grounding in actual practice. To address that lack, the purpose of the study presented in this paper was to examine what actually happens, in practice, when people support the implementation of evidence-based programs (EBPs) or engage in related efforts to make non-formal education more "evidence-based." Focusing on three cases--two adolescent sexual health projects (one in the United States and one in Kenya) and one more general youth development organization--I used qualitative methods to address the questions: (1) How is evidence-based program and evidence-based practice work actually practiced? (2) What perspectives and assumptions about what non-formal education is are manifested through that work? and (3) What conflicts and tensions emerge through that work related to those perspectives and assumptions? Informed by theoretical perspectives on the intersection of science, expertise, and democracy, I conclude that the current dominant approach to making non-formal education more evidence-based by way of EBPs is seriously flawed.
社区教育和外展项目应以证据为基础。这一格言乍一看似乎有道理、受欢迎,但也有点陈词滥调。然而,“循证”运动对证据的定义更为狭隘——将随机对照试验视为“黄金标准”——引发了诸多争议。此类争论虽颇具见地,但往往缺乏实际操作层面的依据。为弥补这一不足,本文所呈现研究的目的是考察当人们支持循证项目(EBPs)的实施或参与相关努力以使非正规教育更具“循证性”时,实际会发生什么。聚焦于三个案例——两个青少年性健康项目(一个在美国,一个在肯尼亚)以及一个更具综合性的青年发展组织——我运用定性方法来回答以下问题:(1)循证项目及循证实践工作实际是如何开展的?(2)通过该项工作体现出了哪些关于非正规教育本质的观点和假设?(3)与这些观点和假设相关的工作中出现了哪些冲突和紧张关系?基于科学、专业知识与民主交叉领域的理论视角,我得出结论,当前通过循证项目使非正规教育更具循证性的主流方法存在严重缺陷。