Effective implementation relies on getting key decisions right, and a large number of these happen at the explore stage. The tool below, taken from the EEF’s Implementation guidance report, helps frame these decisions. In a series of blogs, we’re unpacking each quadrant. In this blog, we’re looking at the upper right box: What does the research evidence suggest and how does it relate to our setting?
What does the research suggest?
We always talk about ‘the research’ as if it is a tangible thing, but what we call ‘the research’ is quite messy. For busy school leaders trying to navigate evidence, it can be hard to acknowledge that the answer to ‘what does the research suggest?’ will always be that it’s complicated. The best way to understand the complexity would be to read all of the research; the next best way is to find trusted sources with a good overview of the area you are looking for. Trusted sources could be academics, organisations or practitioners. They might include:
These trusted sources can guide you through the evidence, and they can curate further research for you to dive deeper. For example, if I wanted to learn more about Dual Coding as a way of enhancing teacher explanations, here’s how I might approach it:
I might seek clear definitions from trusted sources e.g. this from the TES/EEF.
I might then dive deeper Oliver Caviglioli’s Dual Coding with Teachers, which strikes a nice balance between evidence and practical approaches.
And I might read practitioner blogs aligned with the evidence like this brilliant one: Dual Coding in a Nutshell by Ian Taylor.
I’m getting a broad sense of what the ‘research suggests’ about dual coding from this approach. It’s not to say that there isn’t more evidence to explore, but these sources point me towards further reading too.
What works?
This is another really tricky question. As Dylan Wiliam said: “Everything works somewhere; nothing works everywhere.” So lets reframe this question in different ways when looking at evidence:
What are the ‘core components’, the key features that make it work?
Under what conditions does it work best?
For whom does it work best?
Where is there a lack of evidence about what works? (Rather than evidence that it doesn’t work)
What will work in relation to our identified problem? (See next section)
These questions will often get us some ‘best bets’ for the kinds of things that work. In some cases we might find specific research into the thing we are implementing e.g. a literacy programme that has been evaluated by the EEF, but that doesn’t mean it will work in your setting.
How will this address our problem?
Ultimately, we are trying to solve a problem. (If you haven’t read our previous blog in this series on defining the problem, we’d recommend doing so: Implementation Decisions: Problems and Context) Having a problem in mind can help the processes outlined above because we are always considering the research in relation to that.
We should be able to articulate our theory of change. This is the way that we believe our chosen approach will solve our identified problem. After a thorough exploration of the evidence, we should be in a good position to do this. If we can’t do this, then implementation is less likely to work and we will find it much harder to generate acceptability.
Next, we’ll focus on the question: How challenging is the approach to implement?
