What Works When Teaching Remotely? A Rapid Evidence Review

If you want to understand the “What Works Clearinghouse” – I mean beyond the claims by ideologues that it represents the gold standard of educational research, read:

1. Can Educational Research Be Both Rigorous and Relevant? – https://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume1/issue4/article13/
2. The research we have is not the research we need – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7382956/

Then you can look at this resource with through that particular lens.

To provide relevant information to educators and administrators in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Institute of Education Sciences conducted a rapid evidence review to report on what works in distance learning programming. The What Works Clearinghouse teams screened available education research to identify the most promising evidence about what works for learning remotely.  Of the 932 studies screened, 266 were retained for full-text screening and thirty-six studies were identified for review. Nine studies with similar design characteristics were meta-analyzed and the results indicated that, on average, students in the distance learning programs improved in the English language arts outcome domain but not in the mathematics domain, compared with students in business-as-usual conditions. View the report at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DistanceLearningStudy The Institute of Education Sciences, a part of the U.S. Department of Education, is the nation’s leading source for rigorous, independent education research, evaluation and statistics.

By visiting Newsflash you may also sign up to receive information from IES and its four Centers NCES, NCER, NCEE, & NCSER to stay abreast of all activities within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES).