IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v48y2015icp137-148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“They Just Know”: The epistemological politics of “evidence-based” non-formal education

Author

Listed:
  • Archibald, Thomas

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Archibald, Thomas, 2015. "“They Just Know”: The epistemological politics of “evidence-based” non-formal education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 137-148.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:48:y:2015:i:c:p:137-148
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.08.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718914000895
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.08.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.
    2. Chen, Huey T., 2010. "The bottom-up approach to integrative validity: A new perspective for program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 205-214, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agans, Jennifer P. & Maley, Mary & Rainone, Nicolette & Cope, Marie & Turner, Andrew & Eckenrode, John & Pillemer, Karl, 2020. "Evaluating the evidence for youth outcomes in 4-H: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Adam Moe Fejerskov, 2017. "Contending Logics of Action in Development Cooperation: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s Work on Gender Equality," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(2), pages 441-456, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Riches, Brian R. & Benavides, Celina M. & Dubon, Valeska X., 2020. "Development of a fostering purpose intervention," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    2. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.
    3. Pearl Anne Ante-Testard & Francois Rerolle & Anna T. Nguyen & Sania Ashraf & Sarker Masud Parvez & Abu Mohammed Naser & Tarik Benmarhnia & Mahbubur Rahman & Stephen P. Luby & Jade Benjamin-Chung & Ben, 2024. "WASH interventions and child diarrhea at the interface of climate and socioeconomic position in Bangladesh," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Chen, Huey T., 2016. "Interfacing theories of program with theories of evaluation for advancing evaluation practice: Reductionism, systems thinking, and pragmatic synthesis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 109-118.
    5. Sarah A. Avellar & Jaime Thomas & Rebecca Kleinman & Emily Sama-Miller & Sara E. Woodruff & Rebecca Coughlin & T’Pring R. Westbrook, 2017. "External Validity: The Next Step for Systematic Reviews?," Evaluation Review, , vol. 41(4), pages 283-325, August.
    6. Horton, Douglas & Rotondo, Emma & Paz Ybarnegaray, Rodrigo & Hareau, Guy & Devaux, André & Thiele, Graham, 2013. "Lapses, infidelities, and creative adaptations: Lessons from evaluation of a participatory market development approach in the Andes," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 28-41.
    7. Ferreira, António & Oliveira, Fernanda Paula & von Schönfeld, Kim Carlotta, 2022. "Planning cities beyond digital colonization? Insights from the periphery," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Cerezo, M. Angeles & Dasi, Carmen & Ruiz, Juan Carlos, 2013. "Supporting parenting of infants: Evaluating outcomes for parents and children in a community-based program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 12-20.
    9. Chen, Huey T. & Yip, Fuyuen & Lavonas, Eric J. & Iqbal, Shahed & Turner, Nannette & Cobb, Bobby & Garbe, Paul, 2014. "Using the exhibited generalization approach to evaluate a carbon monoxide alarm ordinance," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 35-44.
    10. Kim Carlotta von Schönfeld & António Ferreira, 2021. "Urban Planning and European Innovation Policy: Achieving Sustainability, Social Inclusion, and Economic Growth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-35, January.
    11. Schalock, Robert L. & Verdugo, Miguel Angel & Gomez, Laura E., 2011. "Evidence-based practices in the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities: An international consensus approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 273-282, August.
    12. Trochim, William M., 2017. "Hindsight is 20/20: Reflections on the evolution of concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 176-185.
    13. Laura C. Leviton & Mathew D. Trujillo, 2017. "Interaction of Theory and Practice to Assess External Validity," Evaluation Review, , vol. 41(5), pages 436-471, October.
    14. Anzoise, Valentina & Sardo, Stefania, 2016. "Dynamic systems and the role of evaluation: The case of the Green Communities project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 162-172.
    15. Jacob Alex Klerman, 2017. "Editor in Chief’s Comment: External Validity in Systematic Reviews," Evaluation Review, , vol. 41(5), pages 391-402, October.
    16. Downes, Jenni & Gullickson, Amy M., 2022. "What does it mean for an evaluation to be ‘valid’? A critical synthesis of evaluation literature," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    17. Inrig, Stephen J. & Higashi, Robin T. & Tiro, Jasmin A. & Argenbright, Keith E. & Lee, Simon J. Craddock, 2017. "Assessing local capacity to expand rural breast cancer screening and patient navigation: An iterative mixed-method tool," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 113-124.
    18. Gao, Xingyuan & Shen, Jianping & Wu, Huang & Krenn, Huilan Y., 2019. "Evaluating program effects: Conceptualizing and demonstrating a typology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 88-96.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:48:y:2015:i:c:p:137-148. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.