Overcoming the Divide Between Evidence-Based Education and Its Critics - An Alternative Conceptualization of the Relationship Between Academic Knowledge and Educational Practice

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Putri

This paper addresses the divide in education between supporters and critics of evidence-based education. It analyzes the sources of the disagreement and argues they stem from a shared conceptualization of knowledge and practice called technical rationality. The work rejects technical rationality as fallacious and proposes an alternative centered on people’s understanding of practice situations. This reframing aims to overcome the divide and enable progress toward science-based education.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages20

Reading Time50 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

The Current Stream of Evidence-Based Education: A Dead End

Genesis of the evidence-based stream

Technical rationality and the critique

Overcoming the Divide Between Evidence-Based Education and Its Critics: An Alternative Conceptualization of the Relationship Between Academic Knowledge and Educational Practice Marc Clarà Universitat de Lleida Abstract This paper addresses the current divide in the field of education between proponents and critics of evidence-based education. It examines the nature of this divide and argues that it is caused by a particular way of conceptualizing the relationship between academic knowledge and practice, called technical rationality, that is shared by both sides. The paper argues that technical rationality is fallacious and highlights an alternative approach grounded in the centrality of people’s understanding of situations of practice. It further argues that this alternative conceptualization of the relationship between knowledge and practice makes it possible to overcome the divide and foster advancement toward a science-based education. Introduction The pursuit of science-based education stands at a crossroads. Today, the field of education is divided between two streams. The first, known as evidence-based education, broadly identifies educational science with experimental research on educational interventions. Along these lines, in some contexts, it is exerting political influence on research-funding schemes and education laws (a good example is the Every Student Succeeds Act in the USA) . These efforts, in turn, are fueling vigorous resistance in a second stream, which, in response, all but denies the possibility of any science-based education. This schism is highly detrimental to the field and poses a serious threat to the possibility of an education grounded in scientific research. Were the first stream to succeed, the field would become extremely reductionist, returning toa situation similar to that which triggered the paradigm war half a century ago (FernandezNavas & Postigo-Fuentes, 2023; Hammersley, 1997) . On the other hand, were the second stream to emerge victorious, it would mean the abandonment of the plans for science-based education, perhaps for decades. This theoretical paper is based on two premises: first, that the field must advance toward an education grounded in sound scientific research, i.e., that education must become a scientific activity; and, second, that the current logic of confrontation in the field has no positive outcome to offer, whether for the field itself or for the plans for a science-based education. This paper will argue that the confrontation between the two streams originates from a common assumption shared by both: a misleading conceptualization of the relationship between knowledge and practice known as technical rationality. I will argue that abandoning technical rationality eliminates the sources of incompatibility between the two approaches and opens the way for fruitful collaboration toward a science-based education. In the first section, the genesis and development of the first stream are summarized. The second section introduces the main critiques posed by the second stream and shows how both streams share a technical rationality for understanding the relationship between knowledge and practice. In the third section, an alternative way to understand this relationship, one which has been developed over the last 40 years from different fields of inquiry and is supported by a large body of evidence, is presented. Finally, the paper proposes several key principles to chart a new course toward science-based education. The Current Stream of Evidence-Based Education: A Dead End The roots of the contemporary stream of evidence-based education are usually traced to a highly influential lecture given by David H. Hargreaves at the Teacher Training Agency (UK) in 1996 (Dekker & Meeter, 2022; Fernández-Navas & Postigo-Fuentes, 2023) . In his talk, Hargreaves argued that the scientific knowledge base available for teaching is deficient. He claimed that this knowledge

FAQs

What divide does the paper analyze in evidence-based education?

It examines the ongoing disagreement between proponents and critics of evidence-based education, and how this schism affects the field’s direction.

What does the paper identify as the cause of the disagreement?

It argues both sides share a misleading conceptualization of knowledge and practice called technical rationality, which produces incompatibility.

What alternative approach does the paper propose to overcome the divide?

It proposes reframing the relationship between knowledge and practice around the centrality of people’s understanding of situations of practice, enabling collaboration toward science-based education.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Putri