<論文>米国連邦教育政策におけるエビデンス要求の変遷 --エビデンス要求の厳格化から緩和に向けて--

Abstract

In recent years, the word "evidence" has come to be commonly used in the public debate over education in Japan. In this paper, in relation to the question of what kind of "evidence" should be required, and in what kind of content should "evidence" be praised in the federal education policy of the United States, the cases of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), Comprehensive School Reform (CSR), Investing in Innovation Fund (i3), and Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) were examined, and the transition of the policies were overviewed. NCLB gave the definition of "scientifically based research, " and practices and programs called for scientific support by providing evidence on its effectiveness. CSR tried to embody the concept of its definition, where a lower standard called "strong evidence" was prepared separately from "scientifically based research" from a realistic point of view. Still CSR tried to maintain the hierarchical order of evidence with the randomized controlled trial at the top. This feature is also seen in subsequent policies, and can also be seen in the i3 founded in 2009. However, the Every Student Succeeds Act, established in 2015, granted substantial discretion to state and local education authorities in the context of the use of evidence. Moreover, it is said that only the lowest-rated evidence should be presented for grants other than Title I. Therefore, it can be said that the policy of "evidence" in the federal education policy of the United States has undergone a major change.