For decades there have been calls by concerned stakeholders to improve the quality of education research, and some progress has been made towards creating a more secure evidence base in some areas. More programmes and approaches that have a reasonable evidence base are now also being used in schools (but not in policy, and not necessarily because they have a reasonable evidence base). However, there has been no equivalent improvement in secure knowledge about how best to get that evidence into use, or even what difference it makes when such evidence is used. This paper looks at what little is already known about the different ways to get research evidence into use in education by summarising the results of a large‐scale review of the literature. A total of 323 of the most relevant studies were looked at across all areas of public policy, and judged for quality and contribution. Very few (33) were of the appropriate design and quality needed to make robust causal claims about evidence‐into‐use, and even fewer of these concerned education. This means that despite over 20 years of modest improvement in research on what works in education policy and practice, the evidence on how best to deploy these findings is still very weak. We consider studies in terms of several issues, including whether they look at changes in user knowledge and behaviour, or student outcomes, and how evidence is best modified before use. Providing access to raw research evidence or even slightly simplified evidence is not generally an effective way of getting it used, even if that evidence is presented to users by knowledge‐brokers, in short courses or similar. What is more likely to work for both policy and practice is the engineering of high quality evidence into a more usable format and presenting it actively or iteratively via a respected and trusted conduit, or through population measures such as legislation. Having the users actually do the research is another promising approach. Expecting each individual study they fund to have an impact is not the way forward, as this may encourage widespread use of ineffective or even harmful interventions. Publicly‐funded users, including policy‐makers, should be required to use evidence‐led programmes from those libraries providing them and which are appropriate and relevant to their aims. Research funders should support these approaches, and help to build up libraries of successfully tested programmes. Researchers need to be scrupulous, looking at their new evidence in the context of what is already known and not looking to obtain ‘impact’ from single studies. More and better research is needed on the best routes for evidence‐into‐use. However, the improvements required of all parties are as much ethical in nature as they are technical or scientific.

中文翻译：

---

在教育中使用证据的最佳方法是什么证据？

几十年来，有关利益相关者一直呼吁提高教育研究的质量，并且在某些领域建立更安全的证据基础方面已经取得了一些进展。现在，在学校中也正在使用更多具有合理证据基础的程序和方法（但在政策中没有，而且不一定是因为它们具有合理证据基础）。但是，关于如何最好地利用该证据，甚至在使用这些证据时会产生什么区别的安全知识方面，都没有得到同等的改进。本文通过总结大规模文献综述的结果，探讨了对于将研究证据用于教育的不同方法知之甚少。在公共政策的所有领域中，一共研究了323项最相关的研究，并被评选为质量和贡献者。只有极少数（33）具有足够的设计和质量，可以对使用的证据作出有力的因果主张，而涉及这些教育的则更少。这意味着，尽管对教育政策和实践的有效研究已有20多年的温和改进，但如何最好地利用这些发现的证据仍然非常薄弱。我们从几个问题来考虑研究，包括他们是否关注用户知识和行为的变化或学生的学习成果，以及在使用前如何最好地修改证据。即使原始证据是由知识经纪人在短期课程或类似课程中向用户提供的，提供原始研究证据或什至是稍微简化的证据的访问通常也不是一种有效的方法。对于政策和实践而言，更有可能起作用的是将高质量证据设计成更可用的格式，并通过受尊重和信任的渠道或通过立法等人口措施来主动或反复地提出它。让用户实际进行研究是另一种有前途的方法。期望他们资助的每项研究都不会产生影响，因为这可能会鼓励广泛使用无效甚至有害的干预措施。应该要求包括政策制定者在内的公共资助用户使用提供这些证据的图书馆提供的证据引导程序，这些程序应与目标相符并与之相关。研究资助者应支持这些方法，并帮助建立成功测试过的程序的库。研究人员必须谨慎行事，在已知情况下寻找他们的新证据，而不是从单一研究中获得“影响”。在最佳的证据使用途径上，需要进行更多更好的研究。但是，各方要求的改进本质上是道德的，无论是技术上还是科学上。