Search results

This chapter introduces the theory–practice divide through surveying highly diverse sources of literature that document its existence and call for ways in which it can be overcome. After that, gaps between theory and practice as they appear in the field of education are foregrounded and presented as a challenge, particularly in the Western teacher education enterprise. The authors contend that the gap between theory and practice can be addressed nationally and internationally through focusing on pedagogies that are locally deliberated and enacted. Such pedagogies would be specifically named by teacher educators; the origins (cultural/practical/theoretical/policy roots) of the pedagogies would be traced; and live, evidence-based exemplars of the pedagogies unfurling in their home settings would be presented from an insider point of view. Through this approach, promising pedagogies with potential portability to other national and international contexts would be made known. In this manner, a dialectical relationship between theory and practice – where each speaks productively to the other – would be established. This relationship, the authors reinforce, would need to be continually negotiated when the enactment of the promising pedagogies is attempted in different settings and/or at different junctures of time.

Australian universities have a rich history for enabling, promoting and evaluating innovation and excellence in learning and teaching. Universities have used this practice to respond to drivers from government and the changing global educational environment, as well as accommodating for the characteristics of Australian universities such as scale, equity of access and the balance of domestic and international students. Often through institutional collaborations, educators have challenged pedagogical practices and introduced and tested innovative ways to enhance student learning, which has contributed to an international reputation for quality learning and teaching. However, the recent removal of specific government funding to support innovation, the increased emphasis on student success and employability outcomes and the threat of performance-based funding means that Australian universities will need to commit to the ongoing development of learning and teaching and demonstrate the potential for learning gain.

The idiom “sacred cow” is problematic due to its inaccuracy and cultural insensitivity. The purpose of this paper is to examine the term’s meaning within the nursing literature, describe connotations in religious contexts, explore subject headings applied to research using the phrase, and discuss alternative terminology.

This paper employs Rodgers’ evolutionary concept analysis methodology to identify the concept “sacred cow” and surrogate terms, collect and analyze sample articles and headings, explore an exemplary case, and look for concept implications.

The term “sacred cow” appears frequently in the healthcare literature, particularly within the nursing literature. Its meaning within this literature pertains primarily to practices not supported by empirical evidence and performed to maintain a status quo. Headings applied to the relevant literature do not describe this concept, and more accurate headings could not be found within widely used controlled vocabularies.

“Sacred cow” is an inaccurate descriptor for practices not supported by evidence as these practices do not usually apply to holiness or cattle. The term’s implied meaning comes only when viewed within a context satirizing beliefs considered as “other.”

This paper appears to be the first to methodically explore the concept of “sacred cow” within the nursing literature. The paper breaks ground in proposing solutions for the lack of applicable controlled vocabulary. By exploring these topics, it is hoped future authors use more accurate, culturally neutral terminology when discussing non-evidence-based practices and indexers increase discoverability by using more descriptive headings.

The emergence of an evidence-based medicine logic represents a major change in the large and complex field of American healthcare. In this analytical case study, the authors show that the intellectual school of evidence-based medicine became an important meso-structure that facilitated the growth of the new logic in American healthcare. The new intellectual school was a community of scholars who generated shared rules and resources through intergenerational mentoring. The school engaged in advocacy to advance new intellectual paradigms for conceptualizing healthcare quality that, when connected with material practices in the field of American healthcare, came to form a new institutional logic.

A topic currently receiving significant academic and practitioner attention is called evidence-based management. The purpose of this paper is to suggest that this approach is sometimes over-sold and may be a fad. Additionally, evidence-based management fails to fully recognize the importance of tacit knowledge, what Kahneman calls system 1. Evidence-based management does provide tools to better use what Kahneman calls system 2, rationality. Decision-makers need to take advantage of both rational and beyond rational processes.

This is an essay, it is not a report of a study. At this point in time, this paper needs thinking, reflection, pondering, more than a data-based study.

Advocates promote evidence-based management in part to help avoid fads, yet evidence-based management itself has many of the characteristics of a fad. Evidence-based management is based on an objective rational view of the world and suggests highly rational methods of decision-making. However, a rational fact-based might not give sufficient credit to instinct and feelings. Decision-makers should take into account facts, evidence, when making decisions, but not ignore intuition, hunches and feelings. This study is learning that decisions use a galaxy of approaches, with both cognitive and affective flexibility.

As with any opinion-based paper, this lacks empirical support. Proponents ask us to believe in evidence-based management. Neither we, the authors of this paper, nor the proponents of evidence-based management can empirically support the ideas offered. An additional limitation is that the paper is written in one language, English. Translation into another language might yield different meanings.

There are advantages for scholars and practitioners to look at the best available evidence. There can be disadvantages in overlooking non-quantifiable factors.

Those who use evidence-based management should also take into account feelings, ethics, aesthetics, creativity, for the betterment of society. To solve wicked problems one needs more than facts and rational analysis.

The overwhelming majority of those writing about evidence-based management are supporters. This study offers a different view. This paper brings new ideas and new thinking to both the extensive fad literature and the huge evidence-based management literature. Evidence-based management is discussed widely. Google Scholar lists more than two million papers in 2019, 2020 and 2021 on evidence-based management. Readers of this journal should critically evaluate this popular set of ideas.

The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to commissioning and service structures enabling implementation of evidence-based cost-effective care as illustrated by the “1419” young people’s service treating mild to moderate severity mental health difficulties in teenagers old 14 to 19 years. The authors describe relevant local contextual factors: “relational commissioning”, demand capacity planning and a receptive and safe clinical context.

The authors used a participant observer qualitative research design to describe commissioning and service design. Treatment outcomes were analysed using a quantitative design and found significant improvement in service user mental health and daily function. These results will be reported elsewhere.

The dynamics and structures described here enabled clear shared goals between service user, service purchaser, service provider and service partners. The goals and design of the service were not static and were subject to ongoing development using routine outcome measures and conversations between referrers, commissioners, service users and within the team about what was and was not working.

The methods are limited by the lack of a prospective systematic evaluation of the implementation process and by the time limitations of the service.

Implementation of whole system change such as that envisioned by Children and Young People’s Improving Access to Psychological Therapies requires consideration of local context and process of implementation. The authors suggest key factors: consideration of “relational commissioning” with purchasers, providers and service users designing services together; case-level collaboration between services and partner agencies; smaller child and adolescent mental health teams eliminating competing task demands, permitting speed of action, providing psychological safety for staff, promoting shared goals and innovation; rigorous demand/capacity planning to inform funding.

The failings of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) are detailed in the Department of Health report “Future in mind: promoting, protecting and improving our children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing” (2015). The aims of the report are contingent on the ability of local health providers to implement its recommendations. The authors provide a theoretical approach to enable this implementation.

To date there are no published papers addressing the key characteristics enabling implementation of evidence-based practice within CAMHS. The unique experience in forming the“1419” service has important implications nationally and brings together evidence of an effective service within a theoretical underpinned context.

This chapter reviews the intervention research literature – particularly interventions deemed evidence-based – for students with intellectual disability across academic and life-skills instruction. Although the focus of this chapter is the spectrum of students covered under the term “intellectual disability,” the majority of research on evidence-based interventions for students with intellectual disability focus on students with more moderate and severe intellectual disability, rather than students with mild intellectual disability. The majority of the interventions determined to be evidence-based within the literature for students with intellectual disability – across both academic and life skills – tend to be those that fall within the purview of systematic instruction.

This article reports on the first health technology appraisal conducted jointly between the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE). The appraisal systematically reviewed evidence for the clinical effectiveness of parent‐training/education programmes in the management of children with conduct disorders. This appraisal is highly topical in the light of cross‐cutting policy agendas concerned with increasing parenting capacity. It is also methodologically innovative in its approach to synthesising the meta‐analysis of trial evidence on outcomes of programmes with qualitative evidence on process and implementation. The appraisal found parent‐training/education programmes to be effective in the management of children with conduct disorders, and it identifies the generic characteristics of effective programmes. It is concluded that this approach offers an exemplar for the development of systematic reviewing of complex psychosocial interventions that are relevant to integrated children's services.