Evidence-based

Fighting misinformation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what we still need to learn

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Maithreyi Gopalan and Francesca Lopez

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Countermeasures to misinformation: lessons from the social sciences and applications to education in the United States‘, part of the Evidence & Policy Special Issue: Research (Mis)use and Mis/Disinformation in and around Education.

In today’s polarised political climate, misinformation about education has fueled book bans, educational gag orders and teacher self-censorship – developments that threaten the integrity of our public education system. From debates about critical race theory to evidence-based teaching practices, false or misleading claims spread rapidly, shaping policy decisions at school, district, state and federal levels.

Despite the urgency of this problem, there is remarkably little research on how misinformation spreads in education or how to effectively counter it. In a new study published in Evidence & Policy, we comprehensively review and synthesise evidence from about 400 studies published broadly in the social sciences between 2010 and 2024 to identify what we know (and don’t know) about fighting misinformation in the uniquely decentralised world of US public education.

Research shows that false information spreads faster and more broadly than true information online, making this work especially urgent. While scholars continue to debate how best to define and study misinformation, we adopt a broad, inclusive definition of misinformation encompassing both intentional and unintentional false or misleading information consistent with prevailing expert guidance. We use the term misinformation throughout the review to describe the full spectrum of inaccurate or distorted information, regardless of intent and are particularly focused on uncovering remedies to mitigate ‘systemic misinformation’ that operates through mis-, dis- and mal-information channels.

Continue reading →

Far-right mother organisations and their crusade against public education

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Danfeng Soto-Vigil Koon, Huriya Jabbar, Kiah Combs, Mira McDavitt, Tamra J. Malone and Teresa Leyva

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Mama bears in the belly of the beast: Moms for Liberty disinformation campaigns in California’, part of the Evidence & Policy Special Issue: Research (Mis)use and Mis/Disinformation in and around Education.

Far-right extremism – often characterised by nativism, religious fundamentalism, White supremacy and misogyny – is on the rise worldwide. And education has become a key battleground. The thought of far-right extremism often conjures images of angry young men, but the attack on public education in the United States and associated democratic institutions (such as local and regional elected school boards) has actually been spearheaded by a highly coordinated mothers’ organisation, Moms for Liberty.

Showing up at state houses and school board meetings to oppose sex education, challenge accurate and inclusive teaching of history, ban books, accuse teachers of sexually grooming children and oust educational leaders, Moms for Liberty projects a loud voice intent on reshaping education. Research on their tactics and consequences is growing, but far less attention has been paid to how they build support through disinformation in progressive states like California, where Moms for Liberty leaders describe themselves as vanguards ‘in the belly of the beast’.

Our study situates Moms for Liberty within a longer history of far-right women’s movements in the United States and internationally. We examine their organisational structure, activities, core messages and long-term strategies.

Continue reading →

Evidence & Policy 2025 Carol Weiss Award

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

We are thrilled to announce the prize for the 2025 Carol Weiss Award winning paper published in Evidence & Policy. The Carol Weiss Prize is in honour of Dr Carol Weiss, the first North American Editor of Evidence & Policy, and a pivotal contributor and thinker to our field. The award is given every two years to early career contributors to the journal.

This award cycle, we are delighted to announce that the winners of the 2025 Carol Weiss Prize are Lise Moawad and Dr Sebastian Ludwicki-Ziegler for their Evidence & Policy article, ‘Social studies, technology assessment and the pandemic: a comparative analysis of social studies-based policy advice in PTA institutions in France, Germany and the UK during the COVID-19 crisis’.

Continue reading →

New Evidence & Policy issue – Volume 21: Issue 4

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

The editorial team of Evidence & Policy is pleased to see the publication of our fourth and final issue for 2025, Evidence & Policy Volume 21: Issue 4. This issue has a lot of work focused on how political elites use and are impacted by evidence in the policymaking process. A major thread through this work is that while evidence has an impact, there are important limitations.

The first piece examines programs designed to support scientists and engineers in engaging in public policy, specifically studying the state of Virginia. Through surveys and interviews of program leaders, the study finds evidence of perceived impact, though limits in the ability to implement evidence-based approaches.

The second article also finds impact and its limitation, but this time using policy documents. They find that policy think tanks draw from academic expertise more readily than governments.

Continue reading →

Optimising microsurveys to improve the use of research evidence from websites

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Esmeralda Michel, Megan Mitchell, Nehal Eldeeb and Valerie B. Shapiro

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Promoting the use of research evidence from websites: optimising microsurveys as feedback loops to drive improvement’.

There are many efforts to make research evidence accessible to educators online through toolkits and in other user-friendly formats. Intermediaries – which are organisations that sit between research and practice – can take on the mission of synthesising, translating and sharing research for the public. One such intermediary is the Greater Good in Education (GGIE), an organization that hosts a website of evidence-based practices for educators. Yet a persistent challenge remains among these types of intermediaries: once research evidence is packaged and posted, how do we know the extent to which the evidence is being accessed, appraised and applied in practice? Intermediaries are missing ‘feedback loops’ that could help the intermediaries adapt and improve their efforts to promote the use of research evidence.

In a recent study published in Evidence & Policy, researchers Eldeeb, Ren, and Shapiro explored whether microsurveys could help fill this gap. Microsurveys are short surveys embedded directly on a webpage, triggered by specified interactions with the website. They can capture real-time feedback from users, providing actionable insights into whether research evidence is likely to be applied in practice.

Continue reading →

Recognising the expertise of people with disability

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Shane Clifton

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Disability lived experience and expertise: recognising the expert contributions of people with disability’.

The disability rights movement was founded on the principle of ‘Nothing About Us Without Us’. This idea highlights the importance of including people with disability in decisions that affect them and recognises their expertise in shaping their own lives. While people with disability have too often been subject to controlling and dehumanising systems, as we explore in our recent study, there is now a growing understanding that disabled people should play key roles in designing, producing and leading disability healthcare, policy and research. The knowledge they bring is often called ‘lived experience’.

Continue reading →

Beyond barriers: new insights from the ESRC Policy Fellowships

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Matthew Flinders and Jessica Benson-Egglenton

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Understanding the dynamics of research–policy fellowships: an evaluative analysis of barriers and blockages’.

Supporting embedded academics requires understanding role types, managing ‘bandwidth,’ and setting clear expectations.

In recent years the dominant notion of ‘research excellence’ has expanded to include a joint emphasis on both knowledge creation and knowledge utilisation. Research funding is now targeted as addressing specific societal challenges. Forms of co-production and co-design have been promoted as a way of bringing potential research-users into project design and delivery. Thus, a vast and complex landscape of boundary-spanning initiatives and investments has been established to facilitate the use of research by policy-makers.

The challenge, however, is that policy-making is a messy and sometimes irrational process. Brian Hogwood and Lewis Gunn famously exposed this simple fact in their book Policy Analysis for the Realworld (1985), and recent work from the Institute for Government underlines the continuing validity of ‘the real-world messiness’ argument.

Continue reading →

New Evidence & Policy issue – Volume 21: Issue 3

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

The editorial team of Evidence & Policy are excited to share this special collection of articles focused on the intersections between health, evidence use, and the application of research within evolving and complex public health policy contexts.

Articles in this issue explore and critically examine innovative models and frameworks (i.e., Functional Dialogue, Policy Advisory Boards) for leveraging research to inform policy in times of public health crisis (specifically, the COVID-19 pandemic). They also focus on improving medical practice (i.e., Knowledge Brokering, Contemporary Implementation of Traditional knowledge and Evidence (CITE) Framework, Integrated Systems of Care), as well as efforts to expand and broaden health care coverage and directly influence policy addressing structural determinants of health (Participatory Deliberative Processes).

Continue reading →

Designing the CITE framework: integrating traditional knowledge in contemporary health

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Amie Steel and Hope Foley

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Designing the Contemporary Implementation of Traditional knowledge and Evidence (CITE) framework to guide the application of traditional knowledge in contemporary health contexts: a Delphi study’.

The Contemporary Implementation of Traditional Knowledge and Evidence (CITE) framework is a groundbreaking guide designed to integrate traditional medicine (TM) with modern healthcare systems. Developed through expert consensus, with the results published in Evidence & Policy, this framework provides essential principles and criteria for evaluating and applying traditional knowledge in clinical practice, research, education and policy. As global health initiatives and institutions increasingly recognise the value of Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Healthcare (TCIH), the CITE Framework offers a timely, practical solution for ensuring the quality, safety, and efficacy of these practices in contemporary health contexts.

Continue reading →

Are evidence-based policy and democratic equality reconcilable?

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Tine Hindkjaer Madsen

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Reconciling science and democracy: evidence-based policy as seen from the perspective of a role-based democratic theory’.

For policy to be effective, it must be informed by reliable evidence, proponents of evidence-based policy argue. While this may be true, the evidence-based policy ideal nevertheless also conflicts with the requirements of democracy. This is because political equality is an essential element of democracy and evidence-based policy confers superior political influence on those who supply the evidence relative to ordinary citizens.

In my paper recently published in Evidence & Policy, I reflect on whether the evidence-based policy ideal is reconcilable with democratic equality after all. I first argue that evidence-based policy in fact also advances the value of political equality, because political equality requires that citizens be the choosers of political aims and utilising appropriate, high-quality evidence is the most reliable method of identifying how to achieve citizens’ aims. That is of course not to say that utilising appropriate, high-quality evidence will always lead to true beliefs about how to achieve a political aim, but it is the body of information we have that is most likely to be true and therefore utilising appropriate, high-quality evidence makes it more likely that citizens’ aims be realised. 

Continue reading →