{"title":"聋人教育的循证实践:呼唤中心——聋人经历的研究与评价","authors":"S. Cawthon, C. Garberoglio","doi":"10.3102/0091732X20985070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The evidence base for educational interventions for deaf students has been, and continues to be, called into question due to a lack of “gold standard” research available to support it. Yet the paucity of research in deaf education is not only in the volume of research that meets rigorous standards but also in its lack of attention to and inclusion of a deaf-centered perspective on the inferences made about the strength of study findings in the field. This chapter uses a deaf-centered lens to examine what constitutes evidence, how it is gained, and how this information supports academic outcomes for this population. We include examples from the literature to examine implications for research personnel, study design, and accessible dissemination, with specific attention to both study sampling and measurement considerations. Considerations for deaf-centered research criteria include (a) integrating deaf researchers and epistemologies, (b) attending to the characteristics of deaf students, and (c) acknowledgment of root causes and systems factors. The recommendations in this chapter supplement the larger ongoing dialogue regarding the cultural responsiveness and representation of marginalized populations within the education research endeavor.","PeriodicalId":47753,"journal":{"name":"Review of Research in Education","volume":"45 1","pages":"346 - 371"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-Based Practices in Deaf Education: A Call to Center Research and Evaluation on the Experiences of Deaf People\",\"authors\":\"S. Cawthon, C. Garberoglio\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/0091732X20985070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The evidence base for educational interventions for deaf students has been, and continues to be, called into question due to a lack of “gold standard” research available to support it. Yet the paucity of research in deaf education is not only in the volume of research that meets rigorous standards but also in its lack of attention to and inclusion of a deaf-centered perspective on the inferences made about the strength of study findings in the field. This chapter uses a deaf-centered lens to examine what constitutes evidence, how it is gained, and how this information supports academic outcomes for this population. We include examples from the literature to examine implications for research personnel, study design, and accessible dissemination, with specific attention to both study sampling and measurement considerations. Considerations for deaf-centered research criteria include (a) integrating deaf researchers and epistemologies, (b) attending to the characteristics of deaf students, and (c) acknowledgment of root causes and systems factors. The recommendations in this chapter supplement the larger ongoing dialogue regarding the cultural responsiveness and representation of marginalized populations within the education research endeavor.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47753,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Research in Education\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"346 - 371\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Research in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20985070\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20985070","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evidence-Based Practices in Deaf Education: A Call to Center Research and Evaluation on the Experiences of Deaf People
The evidence base for educational interventions for deaf students has been, and continues to be, called into question due to a lack of “gold standard” research available to support it. Yet the paucity of research in deaf education is not only in the volume of research that meets rigorous standards but also in its lack of attention to and inclusion of a deaf-centered perspective on the inferences made about the strength of study findings in the field. This chapter uses a deaf-centered lens to examine what constitutes evidence, how it is gained, and how this information supports academic outcomes for this population. We include examples from the literature to examine implications for research personnel, study design, and accessible dissemination, with specific attention to both study sampling and measurement considerations. Considerations for deaf-centered research criteria include (a) integrating deaf researchers and epistemologies, (b) attending to the characteristics of deaf students, and (c) acknowledgment of root causes and systems factors. The recommendations in this chapter supplement the larger ongoing dialogue regarding the cultural responsiveness and representation of marginalized populations within the education research endeavor.
期刊介绍:
Review of Research in Education (RRE), published annually since 1973 (approximately 416 pp./volume year), provides an overview and descriptive analysis of selected topics of relevant research literature through critical and synthesizing essays. Articles are usually solicited for specific RRE issues. There may also be calls for papers. RRE promotes discussion and controversy about research problems in addition to pulling together and summarizing the work in a field.