Way too rigid on significance levels (ht @jnixy) and primarily focuses on "behavioral" outcomes. This neglects nuance and other important outcomes. But, some criticisms raised in this piece are alarming IMHO.
CrimeSolutions takes a broader approach than what the single study being evaluated says. We should have tempered conclusions regarding a program that is based on a single study.
But, there can probably be a better way to classify some of these promising studies.
I'll leave you with this: Simply because a study is published in a prestigious outlet, doesn't mean it was effective. CrimeSolutions ratings sometimes help set the record straight on published research (at the same time that the process needs revised).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I’ve heard some PhDs complaining about not having a seat at the policy table. I have some thoughts on this issue based on things I’ve learned over the years working with practitioners and policy makers. A THREAD… #AcademicTwitter
I’m not saying I’m the expert on this. There are plenty of people with much more experience who also have written on this issue (in a more articulate manner!). But, FWIW, I thought I’d share my two cents (in no particular order):
1) Do important research that addresses issues that need immediate attention. If people don’t seem to understand the importance of your research it is either because (a) it isn’t important or (b) you’ve failed to communicate its importance. Either way, it's a “you problem.”